Recommendations for electronic crossover.

..

jpahere
Recommendations for electronic crossover.

Don’t go digital to me it only led to sterility no matter what I tried. And I lost the sound of my favorite dac for whatever rubbish dac is in the digital dsp/xovers ones.

If you want the best analog domain xover that’s discrete and that doesn’t use opamps, get a Nelson Pass designed First Watt B4, probably have to find a used one

Or what I would do with those speakers is to go horizontal Bi-amping with the apms you have as the B&W internal xovers are of very high quality and well sorted.
Or with something like a nice Pass Labs Class-A XA30.5 (amp1) on the mids and highs and a cheap Class-D (amp2) on the bass

https://www.av2day.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/biamp1.jpg
Just put a $49 Schiit Sys passive on the input of louder amp to even out the gains, and drive all that from your preamp.

Cheers George

11Audio.com aka OCD hifi guy on you tube is in the process of having Marchand design one for him. Should be available soon, if not already

Old thread - oh well, as poster @jaystereo said.

@georgehifi --

Don’t go digital to me it only led to sterility no matter what I tried. And I lost the sound of my favorite dac for whatever rubbish dac is in the digital dsp/xovers ones.

Not my experience. Recently went all-active with my existing Xilica digital cross-over, and it’s a bliss. Indeed, once clear what can be done with a quality digital cross-over (and the Xilica is that), even very early in the tuning process, there’s the strong sensation of not wanting to go back to a passive filter - like, ever.

There are caveats, however; an amp channel is needed for every driver or drivers that are coupled in parallel, and in my case a 110dB sensitivity horn/driver combo can lead to a degree of background noise depending on the amp/filter used. Moreover, unless the filtering has been preset by the manufacturer (like Sanders Sound Systems) one will have to do this him- or herself, and to do this accurately measurements will have to be made, though only as a guideline; remember to let your ears be the final judge with every step taken, because measurements need to be interpreted in light of their specific implementation, and often what is measured isn’t the direct link to its audible "equivalent," so to speak. Although, audiophiles invest their time in many a thing when it comes to their stereo set-up, and I don’t see an active approach being an insurmountable task with care and attention to detail.

Doing the filtering ahead of the amplification on the signal-side, and hereby letting each amp channel see its respective driver(s) directly without the interference of passive components, can have obvious advantages. To my ears passive filters invariably infuse some degree of softness or smear, whereas with a quality active configuration transient cleanness, clarity, resolution and dynamic prowess is enhanced. Actually I also find the overall presentation with active to be easier and smoother on the ear. Done right going active is the real and preferable deal, I’d say.

Or what I would do with those speakers is to go horizontal Bi-amping with the apms you have as the B&W internal xovers are of very high quality and well sorted.
Or with something like a nice Pass Labs Class-A XA30.5 (amp1) on the mids and highs and a cheap Class-D (amp2) on the bass

I’ve tried bi-amping both horizontally and vertically, yet every time I’ve preferred bridged mode configuration with two identical amps, where possible (and where not I usually preferred vertical bi-amp config.). To each their own, but bridging is seriously underrated in hifi.

Not my experience. Recently went all-active with my existing Xilica digital cross-over, and it’s a bliss.

Each to his own, on that.

To each their own, but bridging is seriously underrated in hifi

That’s because all you get is more wattage, everything else takes a hit, especially current drive into lower impedance’s and stability, distortions. It almost makes what was a good amp into a PA amp.