I have a triamped system (khorns and 18" velodyne hgs sub) currently. I use modified dynaco's for the squawkers a dh 220 for the bass bins and a south west 215 A for the tweeters. My preamp is a bez. I use 2 behringer 4 way mono crossovers set to stock crossover points. Supposedly these crossover have nice slopes and modern filters. So what am I missing with an active crossover vs. a passive crossover?

what are you missing ....???   ..lotsa lost Watts....

and, perhaps some delay or phase inversion that was designed in the passive

intentionally, or, not intentionally......

Lost watts should not be a problem, they are plenty loud even in a large room. What are the symptoms of phase inversion?

Hello,

I am currently using an active 2way xover(Rane)

My reasons for this are my current system conf. and the associated power losses with passives.

My system is configured as follows:
I am running a La Scala 2 way utilizing an Altec 511b/902 driver combo for the highs ie.above 500hz,this is powered by  Decware SE84CS SET  monoblocks with @4 watts output.I wanted to have the most available power for this horn/driver.The amp is conected directly to the horn.Signals are divided before the amp with the Rane that has a Linkwitz/Riley 24db slope that ensures inphase outputs to the associated drivers.

Here is a great article that gives you the pros and cons of using an active vs. passive xover.

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

Its a long read but will give you lots of info to make a sound choice!

Greg

Dax617 wrote:

Lost watts should not be a problem, they are plenty loud even in a large room. What are the symptoms of phase inversion?

noooo.... you were loosing tons of watt's in the passive ...

the reason for phase inversion may be indicated by the unequal positions of the motors

I've always enjoyed active crossover bi/tri-amping. And have had several systems like that. I think the potential is better than passives, but oh my word, it is a lot of gear, and a lot of fussing, and some actives don't sound very good with tube gear.

I've resisted the "active" temptation with the Belles, and opted for the "best" of the passive route with Dean's rigs. And, thus far am pleased with having just two simple mono blocks, a preamp and sources. The sound really is quite nice, and well, maybe I'm just getting too old to fart around with 6 (hernia creating) power amplifiers!
md

mdeneen wrote:

I've always enjoyed active crossover bi/tri-amping. And have had several systems like that. I think the potential is better than passives, but oh my word, it is a lot of gear, and a lot of fussing, and some actives don't sound very good with tube gear. I've resisted the "active" temptation with the Belles, and opted for the "best" of the passive route with Dean's rigs. And, thus far am pleased with having just two simple mono blocks, a preamp and sources. The sound really is quite nice, and well, maybe I'm just getting too old to fart around with 6 (hernia creating) power amplifiers! md

I have to agree with all the fussing,I have had my setup for about a week and still trying to dial it all in.I'm close but not there yet,I am having fun but feel like I am chasing my tail sometimes.But overall I think my configuration is better than before....I'm learning to turn down the gain to the low drivers,that bass plays havoc with the mids if it's out of proportion at all.

Greg

mdeneen
I'm with you on the convience and simplicity factor, I am relatively new to the game and enjoy tinkering with my set up which will evolve as money and time permit. I did reference the article  in this post and it seems passive crossovers are a deer shot vs. the smart bomb. If this were true  passive cross overs present a unique challenge to people who are interested in making them. It seems crossover design is the sport of kings on this forum ( no offense Craig, I am a customer). On a different note the article did mention the benfits of a phase correct elec xover. Do you thinks the Behringer cx3400 3way 4 way acconts for this?

I find too that I cannot drive the bass bin, responsible for 60-440 Hz with additional input through the crossovers with out getting into trouble(too boomy). I can however attenuate the sqwaker and tweeter 6 db which is helpful @ higher volume. I still think it needs more, but until I get amps with individual gain control the only option would be an l pad.

Luckly I have gain controls on both of my bass amps as well as the Rane 2way and have alot of control...I hate attenuating anything and prefer to do it to the bass,the mids/highs get a straight thru signal,dont want to mess with that range of freq.So far its pretty good.

Greg

I would like to add that if I chose the passive route I would definately check some people out on this forum as they are well versed in getting the best out of a passive unit paired with Klipsch speakers.

I might still go that route...never know but gotta play with what I have for now.

Greg

To teh qujestions about teh Behringer crossover, Ashley makes a really nice three way active corssover (non-digital) for about $450.  looks like a nice unit.

I am going out this week to pick up some XLR cable ends so that I can make up some cables to try out my Yamaha crossover.  it has been sitting since I bought it. 

Chris

There are no doubt some nice passive crossovers out there, but once you find a nice active one you will never go back. I like to step it up another notch too and go with a digital system controller- where you can achieve time-alignment and much steeper slopes. I've had the best results with the dbx driverack units, but they're expensive. Supposedly the Behringer DEQX (I think that's the model) is supposed to be the best bang for the buck.

As far as setting any of these units up....you really are better off if you have some kind of measuring equipment available - that way you don't have to trust your ears. Crossovers essentially work like EQ's so you have to be very careful when tuning by ear so that you don't try to compensate for flaws in the recordings. When going by ear, I burn a CD with all sorts of different music that I'm familiar with and then make one change at a time, switching between all the tracks to find a happy medium before I move to the next change. The key is to NOT sit on the same piece of music, otherwise the next piece of music is guaranteed to sound off.

" Supposedly the Behringer DEQX (I think that's the model) is supposed to be the best bang for the buck."

DCX2496, the DEQX is a totally different product by another company. I use the DC2496 (actually three of them) in my system.

"....you really are better off if you have some kind of measuring equipment available -"

Much better off. Esp. if you then take advantage of the parametric EQ that is also available in some of the units.

Shawn

Checked out the Behringer dcx2496 and talked to tech support appears to be a nice unit with lots of functionality, kinda where I'm headed. $250 not bad. The dc2496 however, Shawn you must be really serious about audio. Thanks for the tips.