ok, simple question.. is an active setup (when referring to the use of a set of 2 way splits) almost always going to be better than just amplifying a good high end set of splits??

the reason i ask is that i got my hands on a Jaycar electronic 6channel EQ/Xover network tonight

i currently have a set of low end clarion splits, and i strongly believe that setting this up with the eq will be better than the current way they are set up, but say i go shopping for more gear after... is a really good set of splits likely to have a better quality sound if i buy a complete set with the xover, or if i continue to run it active and jsut purchase a mid and tweeter? the main problem i can see with using this is that the frequencies arent variable, they are fixed (see pic), and i dont know if the midrange output is full range or bandpassed, and if its bandpassed, i dont know if its bandpassed between the frequencies that i have the subs and tweets set on, or if its a FIXED bandpass between say 70 and 3000hz...

i wish i had specs on the xover.. it looks kinda old (Pic here)and the modle no on it doesnt seem to exist... but any info from that pic will be appreciated... i mainly wanan know what teh slope is on the xovers and what input voltage it'll take and what the output voltage is...

so anyway, is active always going to be better or is this one of those annoying SQ questions that will stop me from sleeping at night?

thanks

nick

the simple answer - no it depends on the setup, and just how skilled you are in tunign a crossover. if teh splits are good quality, the engineers have put MONTHS into getting them right, so its unlikely you can better them. on the other hand, if the splits x-over is poor, or, your speaker arrangement places the speakers far apart or in weird positions, active may do better.

one of the main benefits of going active is the ability to adjust the crossover frequency (and maybe even slope with some better active crossovers) to tune it best for your car's environment. Without that, your very limited, and in most cases I would think that a high end pair of component speakers will sound much better.

going active can also get a bit more output from your speakers as passive crossovers are often not as efficient. This I am yet to test out...

some people will say that the designers spent so much time to get the passive crossover right, it would make it sound worse if 'we' tuned it ourselves with active crossovers. That, I would take it on a case by case basis...its too sensitive a question to say yes or no to...

As long as you know the crossover point, slope and that the passive network does not have any other sort of circuitry in it like impedence correction or anything like that then it should be possible to get exactly the same if not better performance out of an active system. Going active also allows you to easily adjust the levels of the midrange and tweeters independantly, while this can be done with a passive crossover too, its not simply a case of turning a gain up or down. So all in all provided that the active crossover that you are using is of good quality, ie adjustable frequency and slopes then you should be able to extract as good or better performance out of an active system simply due to the fact that it is far more easy to tune.

Just my 2c

...wow that has to be my longest post ever.

Well, louder isn't mean clearer or or more natural isn't it

one problem with the passive crossovers is, a speakers impedance isnt constant, it changes with frequency, and as impedence is one of the factors in selecting cross over point, with different frequencies the cross over point can vary, although this is only slight variation purists wont put up with it.

though on the other hand a good passive crossover can deliver excellent performance, at a cheaper price, plus the addition of not having to use 2 channels per side, eg 1 amp for tweet, 1 for midbass, like in active.

Zobel networks are the bees knees in passive crossovers, what they are are an impedance matching circuit, so no matter the freq the speaker is playing it always has the same impedance loading on the amp.

The coils and capacitors in a passive network can cause some phase shift in the signal, but unless your ears are perfect and no ones are. or the speakers are quite some distance apart, you should not be able to hear this at all.

high-end splits tend to come with high-end passive xovers. they are often bi-tri-wirable too. this means you can use separate channels (ie: 4 channels to drive a 2-way set) but retain the passive xover.

i agree, with those who've said you would have to assess it on a case by case basis. some splits will have better xovers than others.

for cheaper splits (like your clarion's), active would probably be better. and active is usually easiest if you mix and match brands/drivers.

i would have stayed with my a/d/s x-over is i didnt stert using supremo tweeter.

i listened to then running active, bi-wired and uni-wired(normal) and they sounded at their best bi-wired, the engineers put in so much effort to getting them perfect and the components they use are second to none.

so if you get a set of hi end splits, experiment, its the only way to find out what sounds best, but in my experimention
1.bi-wired
2.active
3.normal

For those interested in a tech analysis of active v. passive xovers, this is a good read.

http://www.audiocontrol.com/techpapers/tec...echpaper104.pdf

since you have both the passive and active xover, chuck them in and play around, it's the only way to find out.

i found going active worked in my favour but i run different brand tweets to my mids.

i have heard alot of ppl who have tryed running dyns active have had no luck.

thansk for the response everyone..

i dont acutally have a passive xover network for the splits, i have an inline cap for the tweeter, and the whole time i've had these splits i can tell that teh mid has been dying for a high pass.. but i've been runnign them off the hu so it wasnt an option

but yes, now i have the flexability to play around, and if i decide to buy a complete set of splits and run them, i havent lost anything, and if i decided to mix and match, then i havnet lost anything...

heres to getting g33ky

thanks

nick

active is the best by far.....but it takes ages to setup correctly and costs way too much to do

if money and time are against you just run the passives and a big 2 channel amp

however i still do perfer the choice of different slopes...this is not available with a standard active filter. i can not name too many 4 or 6channel active analogue filters that have different slope selection...this is where the digital cross-overs are so good like the pioneer odr, p9 sony xes and 4000x (still 1/3oct position steps suck)

i still find it stupid that these digital x-overs are so limied to 12 24 ect when they can do any sort of x-over slope within reason and with a big enough rom they can map all the impulse curves required. 1/3 octive steps is also stupid...why ....big rom then can have 1Hz steps....wow that would be awesome :-)

then again if i was stuck with static slopes id choose all 24db/oct and then it would have to be an analogue type.

in the home and car enviroment i still believe that an active setup is the most exciting and fun thing you can buy. BUT BUT BUT the time required to make the active setup "come alive" can be too much. The active setup is what would be recommened for a dedicated hobbiest

well really my original question was revolving around the jaycar xovernetowrk i picked up and whether it would be put to goo d use, i wasnt really asking whether i should fork out for a balls to the wall active setup...

ok

to answer the original question

use the jaycar stuff in 2way mode...high pass all your coaxials, braxials triaxials and splits

low pass your subs

dont use that crossover for a 3way active setup

done should work well

CUSTOM PASSIVE ALL THE WAY... no matter wat type of splits and set up... get the custom passive... its all good... u won't regret

jas i was always intending to do active 2 way and sub, had no intention of active 3 way off this thing...

what i was askign though, is that if i go shopping for new components, shoudl i look into a full split set or just a tweeter and mid and keep using this xover...

it seems now that i should look into a ful slipt set cause that way, even if it is crap, i can still use the xover i have now.

custom passive.. mmmmm... i've looked down that route before.. never tried it but i have all the maths worked out to do it shoudl i ever be tempted enough

there are just too many variables to use solid state componennts for...

unless you opt of different brands/series of woofer and tweet, you're probably best off buying the complete set. it may not cost much more at all and will be far easier to sell if you decide to in the future.

you're probably aware that high-end splits tend to have very high-end passive xovers that are usually difficult to improve upon despite going 'active'. which in the end often makes it a waste of time and effort to attempt it. :wink:

if you've got the xover, then hang onto it, and experiment with it. and some day you'll hopefully use it to great effect with some top quality drivers.

i dont think i'd waste top quality drivers on this thing... i have no specs on it and it has fixed xover points.. but it coudl be handy for the meantime where i am plannign to mix tweets and mids of different manufacturers

Yes, Active is always better.

Neither is magically going to be better. It depends on the application - one may be a better design compromise than the other. There are plenty of applications where passive crossovers will not introduce any significant problems and will be much cheaper than an active solution.

As we all know, the impedance curve of speakers is not flat - passive crossovers use impedance equalization networks (zobel networks) as well as response shaping networks (and L-pads to make up for sensitivity differences). If you are going active, it is recommended that you use an EQ..

The major advantage of active designs is it does not suffer from nonlinearities that can occur - The impedance curve of the speakers will change as they get to their linear xmax limit, their impedance will also rise due to the voice coil heating up. Passive crossover components themselves also have nonlinearities - power handling can be an issue.
But a big problem with passive crossovers is at low frequencies - at low frequencies, the components required will be very large (expensive) and will have high resistance (also, there is often a large amount of impedance rise at these frequencies) - greatly effecting the damping factor and thus does not give a smooth frequency response - obviously you will get a loss in volume due to the resistance. The same problem occurs if you want to have very steep crossover slopes (although this is rare in hi-fi applications).

This is why practically everyone at this forum uses both passive (for splits) and active (between subwoofer and midbass) setup for their subwoofer.

my preferance is active but I am an experianced installer with the right equipnment to set up active properly (cro and rta for starters),your old jaycar crossover might be ok for basic 2 way high pass low pass but that is all ,if you want to go active use good components.I would'nt recommend active for the novice coz it is real easy to get wrong and damage speakers espically tweeters buy putting too much power in at the wrong frequency.

Good advice right here ^^^