mjjensen
Dec 9 2003, 10:23 AM
Hi,
I need help deciding on these splits and a suitable amp to run either active or passive. I dont know which combo will be more suitable.
The following components are options:
Dynaudio 240GT Esotar (if it fits!)
Dynaudio 240GT with MW130
Arc Audio 4150-CLXR (4x85, 2x320)
Arc Audio 2500-CLXR (2x270)
I'm leaning towards the 240GT Esotar with the 4 channel running fully active, but the Esotar sees an 8ohm load.
Q1. Will running active provide enough power? Especially concerned about the tweeters.
Q2. Would 320RMS bridged be a little too much even with the gains set to minimum?
Q3. What x-over slopes and points would work well if active route was taken?
Q4. How about switching the 4 channel for the big 2 channel (2x270)?
Thanks people.
Michael.
shiny_car
Dec 9 2003, 01:52 PM
QUOTE
Q1. Will running active provide enough power? Especially concerned about the tweeters.
the higher impedence may be compensated by the driver's efficieny, so it's not a big deal.
remember though, that manufacturers like dynaudio are no duds. they will have the expertise and R&D to design a passive xover to suit their speakers.
therefore, you will probably have no SQ benefit by running a matched setup like this actively. and you may in fact have a worse result.
so given the tweeters 8ohm impedence, they will have a passive xover that takes this into account, as well as suitable xover points that blend the splits seamlessly.
QUOTE
Q2. Would 320RMS bridged be a little too much even with the gains set to minimum?
you should have no probs being able to tune the gains so as not to overpower your splits. in doing so, you will 'cap' the amp's power output to within safe operating limits for the splits (eg: 200WRMS).
QUOTE
Q3. What x-over slopes and points would work well if active route was taken?
in the end, you'd probably simulate what the passive xover does. i'm not sure what dyn have done, but probably around 1~2kHz.
QUOTE
Q4. How about switching the 4 channel for the big 2 channel (2x270)?
if you go the 'passive' route, then i'd suggest going with a powerful 2-channel rather than bridging a 4-channel amp. it will keep all channels operating at 4ohm, which will probably be well within their comfort zone for (a theoretical) better SQ.
going the passive route may also save you a fair amount of money, especially if it avoids having to purchase/install an external active xover.
i normally only recommend going fully active if you are mixing and matching drivers from completely different sets/brands.
as for amps, i am not familiar with arc audio, other than their good reputation.
what i do know that works nicely with dyn speakers, is audison amps. i've heard many systems matching dyn's with audison amps (incl my own), and i have always found the results engaging, dynamic, and obviously very musical.
good luck
Damo95
Dec 9 2003, 03:41 PM
QUOTE
Originally posted by shiny_car:
what i do know that works nicely with dyn speakers, is audison amps. i've heard many systems matching dyn's with audison amps (incl my own), and i have always found the results engaging, dynamic, and obviously very musical.
That i can agree on.. Im currently running my Dyn 240GT passively off an LRx2.500..
soon, i will be running the front stage fully active using the LRx2.500 and a LRx2.150..
mind you, i have the alpine PXA-H700 processor sitting at home to run it all.. cant wait myself..
good luck with it all mate..
dazdillinger
Dec 10 2003, 12:37 AM
well the crossover you get with the 240gt esotar system is an audiophile crossover and like sum1 mentioned above using the passive crossove would be good as dynaudio would have done heaps of research and testing on this etc etc
i currently have a 240gt esotar system powered by a pg zx600ti which is rated at about 160 wrms at 4 ohm. personally i would actually like a bit more power than this.. my midbass could be better but i have a feeling this is due to installation issues.
with the amount of money ur spending and the brands ur currently looking at... i dont think you can realli go wrong, id look for a 2 chan amp that does about 200wrms, keep the passive crossover, and pray that u have a lot of room in the kick panels =P
good luck!
Damo95
Dec 10 2003, 10:17 AM
QUOTE
Originally posted by dazdillinger:
id look for a 2 chan amp that does about 200wrms
If your saying that as a reference point, i would look at getting an Audison LRx2.500..
this puts out 2x200wrms @ 4ohm..
i am currently running my Dyn's off one of these..
DD Phil
Dec 10 2003, 11:11 AM
The main advantage you'd have by going active is accurate tweeter level control.
I'd go at least 200W for the mids, but you'll only need 50-100W for the tweeter.
All said and done, a 4x70W amp active vs the same amp bridged to give 2x200W+ passively won't have the same output or dynamics as the passive set up.
It depends what you're trying to achieve, a system you listen to in your garage at low level, or a system that makes you drive faster down a mountain road....
Phil
Damo95
Dec 10 2003, 03:28 PM
QUOTE
Originally posted by Incar Phil:
The main advantage you'd have by going active is accurate tweeter level control.
I'd go at least 200W for the mids, but you'll only need 50-100W for the tweeter.
Thats exactly what im doing when i go active..
LRx 2.500 (2x200wrms) - Dyn mids
LRx 2.150 (2x80wrms) - Dyn tweeters
and i'll be running the show with an alpine PXA-H700, which is sittin in my boot atm..
shiny_car
Dec 10 2003, 09:34 PM
QUOTE
Originally posted by Incar Phil:
The main advantage you'd have by going active is accurate tweeter level control.
yeah, that's a good point. sometimes tweeter 'attenuation' inbuilt into some passive xovers is too crude (eg: -6dB/0/+6dB) for best results.
mjjensen
Dec 11 2003, 01:42 PM
Thanks for all the helpful posts people...just what i was after.
Shiny: You basically backed up each one of my suspicions regarding getting enough output to the Dyn's...I think I'll switch to the passive route using the 2x270RMS sucker.
I also had the belief that the dyn x-overs were up to the task, and wouldn't crap out uner that load.
Michael.
Mickee
Dec 14 2003, 09:58 PM
ATM I'm running a pair of 240GT's passively from a bridged cadence A4 (That's 2x300wrms) and the splits handle it just fine, my gains are set reasonably low just to be safe.
I did experiment with running the 240GT's actively from the same amp (That's 4x75wrms) and I just couldn't get the results I wanted. I felt I needed more power to the mids and I couldn't get a satisfactory response near the x-over point, even though the Cadence amp has excellent built in crossovers.
So I would definitely suggest you stick with a passive setup, and the big 2channel amp will be fine for them.
And for those that are curious, in the 240GT Esotar system, dynaudio uses a x-over point of 2300Hz, with a 6dB rolloff for the mids and 12dB rolloff for the tweets. I think this results in an 18dB acoustic roll-off for both the mids and tweets (just by looking at their FR curves).
Michael
mjjensen
Dec 16 2003, 08:55 PM
thanks for that mickee - almost exact same situation as me.
michael.
John L
Dec 17 2003, 05:12 PM
Hehe - did everyone hear that Damo95 is going to be running a PXA-H700??
If I had this fantastic problem to have - I'd look for the biggest power 2 channel amp and run it passive. I've never really seen a compelling case for running a system active - especially with the extra cash involved.
ARC Audio has a fantastic reputation and a lot of US SQ competitiors run the ARC / Dyn combination with great results - so I really think you can't go wrong with the big 2 channel ARC with the Dyn Setup you mention.
Cyberpunky - of "Cyberpunky's Corner" - the new section on CAA runs Dyn 3 ways with stacks of power and a big power PG amp with great SQ comp results - and I can vouch for how good it sounds!
Damo95
Dec 17 2003, 06:00 PM
QUOTE
Originally posted by Stoked:
Hehe - did everyone hear that Damo95 is going to be running a PXA-H700??
If I had this fantastic problem to have - I'd look for the biggest power 2 channel amp and run it passive. I've never really seen a compelling case for running a system active - especially with the extra cash involved.
I guess not John..
the LRx 2.500 is doing a fine job of running my 240GT passive.. but once that processor goes in, the LRx2.500 will be running mids only (@2x200wrms) while an LRx2.150 is gonna be running the tweeters (@2x80wrms)..
yes, but with the money i was gonna spend on a screen and going A/V, it was better spent, IMO, on the sound of the audio.. and something that you can use every day..
John L
Dec 18 2003, 09:53 AM
And yep Damo it will be interesting to see the improvement after the change - might change my mind about active - might not
Good luck with the upgrade though
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.