Tim, thank you, I have a general understanding of the differences. We can and perhaps should expand the thread to cover active crossover too, and various implementations. Why not? I think, it will be interesting to many readers. One thing appears to be very clear - external crossover, either passive or active, has only advantages. I always suspected that. |
At the risk of annoying purists.... I'm running a Behringer active xover, but I play about with diy speakers and odd 'hybrid' mixes...albeit not in the 'audiophile sphere' of units available and/or favored. It does allow a wide range of types, slopes, and points that, with active eq and a calibrated mic on an RTA allows me to amuse myself. And bi- or tri-amping is another factor in the mix as well. But one's amusement can be another's horror, so to each his/her own.... Ultimately, let your ears be your guide and let the rest follow....;) |
And let's not forget open baffle designs which practically demand active crossovers. You can read lots about those on Linkwitz' site. Erik |
Although I have read the thread here re crossovers, I am still bemused by my own situation. I bought for my third system 2 Audiovector (Mi5s I think) speakers that the seller said were not jumpable but needed a 6 channel amp. The Mi5s have 3 sets of inputs and I have since bought more Mi5s of "similar 3 input sets" to have a consistent surround set up. The more recent purchased speakers I saw had been jumped by the previous owners, so now I wonder about the first set I bought. With the first set the seller included an external crossover box and suggested I bought a Rotel 1066 which he said would be very suitable. I bought a 1066 as they are not expensive and so I now am confused as to how to progress. The external crossover situation seems daft as I would surely need 6 speaker cables for the 2 speakers - best presumably all the same - and that would just look silly going into the rear of the speakers. I do have many speaker cables which I would be pleased to find a use for! |
