Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

21 - 24 of 24 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,257 Posts

This generally demands a custom made crossover since simply manipulation of slope/level/frequency is, more often than not, only part of the functions required.

Kal
What else would a crossover have to do besides those three things?

That is certainly one valid point. However, my point was that this requires knowledge and skill since there is no off-the-shelf crossover that will do these things out of the box. Either one must design it or program it. This, alone, makes active biamping, though desirable and advantageous, out of the reach of the vast majority of audiophiles.

Kal
This is a fairly common refrain when this topic comes up, but I often wonder just how much of it is verifiable - and indeed, actually verified - and how much is merely repeating what someone who was supposedly knowledgeable on the subject had to say? Someone who probably was a passive crossover designer to begin with? And probably did not even peruse active options for whatever speaker he was designing?

Regards,
Wayne
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts
What else would a crossover have to do besides those three things?
Asked and answered. Many crossovers attempt to correct amplitude and impedance anomalies within (and/or outside) the passband. The complexity of the crossovers in better speakers is a reflection of these efforts.

This is a fairly common refrain when this topic comes up, but I often wonder just how much of it is verifiable - and indeed, actually verified - and how much is merely repeating what someone who was supposedly knowledgeable on the subject had to say? Someone who probably was a passive crossover designer to begin with? And probably did not even peruse active options for whatever speaker he was designing?
Three issues here. First, I have done passive crossover design for many speakers in the past (more than 20 years ago) and can say that more than a simple single-frequency filter was required to get them to measure and sound best. I have spoken to some, more current and commercial designers who have found the same.

Second, active options are great but not for commercial designs where the major part of the market has rejected active speakers, admittedly, out of general ignorance. This means that the designers for this market do not bother to develop active options.

Third, the rise of computer modeling and DSP filters has made the job of making a custom crossover much better and easier. Still, this means that the user/designer has to customize the filters to the particular speaker/box configuration in use. This demands the knowledge and ability to measure and model.

I never rejected active crossovers for speakers. I am, in fact, in favor of them. Perhaps the folks in this forum are more capable of this than are most of those who ask about biamping. If so, have at it.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,257 Posts

Asked and answered. Many crossovers attempt to correct amplitude and impedance anomalies within (and/or outside) the passband. The complexity of the crossovers in better speakers is a reflection of these efforts.
”Amplitude anomalies” being inherent SPL differences between the drivers – i.e., level-matching? “Impedance anomalies” being, ensuring the system’s impedance is a nominal 4 or 8 (or whatever) ohms?

Regards,
Wayne
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,911 Posts

”Amplitude anomalies” being inherent SPL differences between the drivers – i.e., level-matching? “Impedance anomalies” being, ensuring the system’s impedance is a nominal 4 or 8 (or whatever) ohms?
Nope. In both cases, I am referring to the variations of the individual mounted driver, not the differences between drivers.

Kal
 
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
Top