Are first order crossovers best?

Blindjim,

here you go again! As Dodgealum pointed out there was a thread started by Rbischoff on 9/14/02 on this matter & there are some 160+ posts on the matter incl many informative ones by Roy Johnson, who is the owner & designer of Green Mountain Audio. Here is a link to that thread:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1032037028

it'll be worth your while to read it all of it. There is some great info in there.

Then member Gmood1 started a thread on the same matter on 8/5/03. Here is a link to that one:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1060123575

it'll be worthwhile to read this one too.

And finally, here is the link to the thread Dodgealum started on 4/11/05:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1113252618

i know that it must feel that I'm the historian on this matter!! :-) not so! I'm very interested in this particular matter hence read these threads w/ much interest.

Here is also a very good write-up by Elliot Sound Products (Rod Elliot):
http://sound.westhost.com/ptd.htm

worth reading! this explains Eldartford's comment about 1st order having phase shift but its remaining constant over freq.

a little search of the archives you have yielded this, my fellow A'gon member!

Brian, on the surface a 1st order crossover would seem to be simpler, having less parts in the signal path.

I wasn't saying a first order is "simipler" (to design), actually just the opposite; while it has less parts it can be harder to get right. Unless by "simpler" you mean the finished design is simpler than a more complex higher order.

I can't argue with the rest of what you said...not that I am arguing anything, I don't know enough to do so! :)

Let me close with this, in theroy, the less a signal has to "go through" the better, yes? (I am not saying all first order designs are guaranteed to be better.)

I didn't want to bias any opinions, color any insights or cause any undue discourse by throwing in the names of those cable manufacturers that made mention of their applications with different speakers crossovers... though they brought it up, not me. they are prominent and popular wire makers, for sure. I own some of their products myself, and am most pleased with the preformance, which is what ushered me to go back and check them out once more.

Everybody is trying to make the best item they can. Of that I'm positive... some fall short... some don't have resources enough to attain the goal... and with such a plethora of designs and configurations of designs, my attendance to "Simpler is better", in this regard may well not hold true, or be entirely accurate, I suspect. I also clearly see the logic in the "Hear for yourself" notion... and were I able to jump in the car my weekends would be filled with that activity. Trust me, they certainly would. Such is not the case. 'All roads lead to Roma', or so I've heard. fine. I just don't want to take the 'scenic' route... or as little as possible. yes, until the speakers are sitting in the living room, no one really knows.... dealers ain't big on the idea of lending out speakers too much around here... unless you lay out the full bill... and I ain't by nature or economics able to fade that action... especially in the 4K to 8K retail range... so even in face to speaker comparisons, it's doubtful anyone can truly say that'll work fine in my room....without hauling all their gear in to try things out... and even then perhaps. So some research in advance to cull the herd, seems wise enough a notion to me.

Let's say all the drivers are of equal value in a certain enclosure... the heart of the system then would have to be the crossover, I would think. Like the transmission and brakes in a car. Great motors need those two items to get ya where you want to go. the more closely matched and better they perform, those latter devices are meshed, the better the efficiency and hence performance of the overall system. I would think.

Given all the insights, and debate, if nothing is clearly determined, it remains beneficial and noteable in and of itself, to find out that certain crossover designs are better suited (or not), to particular driver configurations, and evne that notion seems without great substance in determineing a choice solely on that one crossover over another, provides more naturalness and fluidity in development of the signal. for audible re-creation. One factor I overlooked in my haste was to add for three, or four way enclosures. As they are the focus for me. I’d really like to have a pair of speakers that do not need subsonic aid… but so far, the few I’ve found to do that deed are either cost prohibitive, or are lacking elsewhere in sonic reproduction… mind you, I don’t need perfect… just balanced would suffice… with any prominence or lean, being set toward the mid and/or lower ranges, though balance is the goal. Which is in keeping with my sonic preferences.

Of all the imformative venues I’ve experienced, this one remains an insightful, and dependable one as I’ve encountered on my little audio-addict sojourn. And why I prevail upon the experiences of those with far more than I.

thanks immensely.

Brianmgrarcom...Take a look at the schematics for first and fourth order X/O, and think again about which is more difficult and expensive to design and build. However, your comment about having fewer components in the signal path is very valid. IMHO this, rather than phase issues, is the chief advantage of the first order X/O.

I have a hunch that manufacturers who use first order crossovers, often for very good technical reasons, feel vulnerable to accusations that they are looking to save cost, and respond with marketing hype and the suggestion that their crossover design involves some mysterious art.

Crossovers are a necessary evil. Even the so-called "full range" drivers have crossovers...mechanical crossover that causes only a small section of the cone (sometimes a separate section called a "wizzer") to vibrate at HF. The only truly crossover-free driver is an electrostatic.

Thanks Eldartford, I hope I made it clear enough in my post that I am not making comments of any great authority of my own, just some things I was told and/or picked up. I was simply told that it is harder to do a first order cross over correctly than higher order, if that isn't the case I am fine with that, but it would beg the question, why don't more manufacturers do first order cross overs. (Another "thought", is it possible that schematics for a high order cross over looks more complex, but it is actually harder to get the same result with less parts, therefore in the end the one looks simpiler but the road to the result was just the opposite?)