Hey guys.

I have been an avid reader of this site for a while. Only being young (17) i haven't really had time to experiement with audio and because im still learn.

Coming off of this thread Active/Semi Active - What is it?

With a very detailed explanation from Shiny (thanks again ), it helped me learn what it actually it and how to run it.

Now, earlier today i was at Autobahn Tamworth, where they were having a Midnight Madness sale, and as they do, they have reps there, I was going about my business just having a quick look over the Apline range, when a rep came over asked if i had any questions, so i put the question to him,

Why would it better to run active/semi active/passive?

He went onto say that he can understand why people do it, to get into the actual tuning side of your audio. Having more control etc etc. Which is fair enough.
But, he also said, personally, i'm not to sure why some people do it, which i gave him a weird look back about.

Companies spend mostly likely thousands, if not hundreds of thousands on producing the x-overs, making them better, to deliver the best sound possible. So why would you want to change what the company has done? Just to get a mild improvement? Or in some cases, make things worse because they don't know how to do it properly.

So guys, why do you do it?

- Enables you total control over your system?
- Enables more power to your fron stage?
- Anything else? (which im sure there will be)

I've always thought anyone who says that, doesn't understand the basics. A GOOD crossover includes more in its design then simply the properties of a driver. Thats easy. A good crossover also includes compensation for some of the environment.

No matter how expensive a crossover is, it isnt worth that sort of money if it doesn't compensate for the install/environment. So I ask you. Do these companies know how your drivers will be installed?

In my opinion, the quality of the sound output overall is 1/3 equipment, 1/3 installation and 1/3 tuning. Fancy crossover's only get you 1/3 of the way there, no matter how extraordinary they are. Custom passives can take that next step, if they are tuned correctly, because they compensate for the environment.

A lot of people go active/semi-active because of the costs involved in trying to tune a passive crossover to the environment/install. We are talking tens of thousands of dollars here. Other reasons include some people simply believing active crossovers are simply better.

There are many advantages/disadvantages to both active and passive systems. And they are discussed in length in many threads both on these boards and elsewhere.

One question for you though. An active system can do everything a passive can do, and some things they cant. So why passive?

I used to run a custom passive, but have recently changed to active because I wanted that little bit more control, and wasnt willing to pay for it every time I changed something.

every install and every car is diffrent, so no crossover will be best suited to your install, hence why x-overs have diffrent slopes and db levels you can swap between to run what suit your install the best.

Enables you total control over your system - Individual TA for each driver, set the slopes and gains for each driver or pair of drivers (so if u find tweeters are to bright you can turn the midbass up or tweeters down ect.)
passive x-overs chew up power so if u have an amp producing 200wrms the passive may suck 50wrms out of that (due to resistance, heat ect.) so the drivers are only seeing 150wrms, where running active u can give the whole 200wrms to one driver.

but yes as you said, running active can sound wrose then running passive if u dont set it up right.

As you said in your first paragraph, most people say that because they don't understand the basics. Which in my case, is true, im still only learning about it.

I understand and agree with you by what you said about the companies won't know what our environemtn will be like. So i understand that the companies themself would make and tune the x-overs in their state of the art facilities in their 1st class enclosures, therefore before being nearly the optimal environment. Where as the 'average' person definately wouldn't.

As for the question towards me, why passive? I don't know. Im currently running it because at the time i installed it, i didn't know any better/anything at all.

i think total contol comes at a premium in the way of processors with large amounts of crossover points and slope types.I dont think a hu with crossver setting of 5000hz,4000hz,3150hz,2500hz,2000hz,1600hz have as much of as fine tune-ability as u could really use.Maybe your 2way tweets could suit best at 2200hz.

They weren't questions directly to you, more to get you to think a little about the costs/benefits

People run passive all the time, for many reasons. Others run active, for other reasons. Simply put, in a car environment, active is better for beginner enthusiasts, to learn about the changes/effects that can be made, and the benefits of such.

For people who just want bang-for-buck, and arent overly fussed, passive is definitely the ticket.

I highly doubt too, that you'll find ANY company spending mega-bucks on their passive systems. The most expensive I can think of is the Focal Beryllium unit, and I reckon (quite confidently too ) that an enthusiast can build that for a fraction of the price (as focal themselves do all the time).

Mega-bucks only comes into it for home systems. There you'll find passives getting close to the price of cars.......

one distinct advantage of passives is that the speakers behave differently on hot/cold days, and when they are running for a while they warm up. this causes changes in the properties of the speakers. a well designed passive crossover will partly compensate for these changes, which an active system will not. bi-amp passive (or semiactive) is a good way to go because you still have some control over the crossover and time-alignment, but the changes in the speaker are still compensated. A fully custom passive crossover will give you the best of both worlds, but still would be run semiactive to get the benefits.

How much percentage difference would you expect, since most voice coils would be in the 100 plus degree mark?

How much would you have to allow in your passive crossover for temperature drift of the electronic components versus a different ambient temperature? Remember a passive crossover is going to drift, regardless of the weather.

I am unsure of how many people I have had to advice to move the passive crossover because of noise induction, but it would not be small. The only reason to run a passive crossover is because you do not have the wherewithal to do the job actively. That is it in a nutshell. If you have the equipment and nous, an active crossover can equal anything a passive can do , except induct noise, drift with temperature, and waste half your power to heat. (3 dB loss)

A passive cannot do, time alignment, full brickwall crossover (FIR), correct for phase etc. IE it is a linear system, that cannot make non linear adjustments.

And for you "purists", a crossover is simply a dedicated filter. No more no less. An equaliser is a filter, and in fact you could use it as a crossover. (Butterworth)

So if your using an equaliser your already running active.

Truth bites.

would you effectively putting more power to your drivers with active aswell? (Dont mind me, im a newb, and needs to learn)

Yep If using a passive crossover with two speakers running off it being driven by one amp channel those speakers are recieving less power. If that makes sense.

Not necessarily. If both speakers are of the same sensitivity, you dont need to bleed any power of one end to compensate for the other (main reason heat is lost in passives). Usually done when you have a tweeter (say, 92dB 1w/1m) and a midbass (89dB 1w/1m). You'll obviously need to shed 3dB (50% of the power at the xover point) to have an equal output.

Thats way to technical for this simple mind matt Would there be many situations where a tweeter and midbass are of the same sensitivity or would this be for a custom passive and you would match speakers for this?

i been running active in my last 3 cars, prefer it cause i can tune it to withing an inch of its life

the first car didnt sound too good though, needs alot of knowlage a listning to get it right

LOL. I cant believe no one has not mentioned the best part about running active. YOU CAN BUY ANY DAMN DRIVERS YOU WANT WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT BUYING/MAKING NEW CROSSOVERS!

i got supremo's... it was 1500 for the cross overs or 600 for a butler tube driver, pretty simple really haha

i run active because i can. i bought a HU that could do it and had a 4channel amp... this amp used to run splits passive plus a sub but i since upgraded to an independent amp for the sub this left me 2 free channels and a capable HU. so, why? because i had the opportunity to.

i also like the POWAH. i went from 2x95 for the splits plus 1x about 260wrms to 4x95 for the splits and 1x1250for the sub woofer. but my sub cant handle it nor can my speakers for that matter but its there. just in case.



edit: its not just crossover freqs/slopes that can be adjusted. i like it because i can adjust my tweeters/mids/subs relative volume to each other in fine increments(especially tweeter level). getting the perfect blend. TA on individual drivers is also neat. being my mids are in the doors and tweets on the dash. if ur lucky too some HU's/processors have individual EQ's for each channel/driver

the tunability is what i like about it.

what he said

On the topic of running active, does anyone know of any standalone linkwitz-riley electronic crossover units (suitable for car audio and with variable frequency filters) commercially available for purchase? Or do I have to buy a geek to build me a couple?

Audiocontrol units are.

Most (or all) 12dB/oct crossovers are linkwitz-riley filters.

Yeah but I was only asking about electronic crossovers (not passive ones), and almost more importantly ones that have variable lp/hp frequency controls. Still, thanks Pulse, and thanks abmo.

Audiocontrol ARE electronic, and DO have variable LP/HP

Yeah I know that audiocontrol are what I am after, but I was referring to Simon's post, not Dean's. I can see that I REALLY didn't make that clear.

everyone is missing the point. THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES...PERIOD
Active Vs Passive...winner is ??? yet to be determined!!!!!!!

all audio systems involve some compromise which is why we all strive for perfection, and never quite get there, its about what compromise is MOST acceptable to you. There is no right or wrong, just what we are happy with...anyone who makes blanket statements about this stuff is a fool, at least qualify your remarks

AMBOLECH your condescending remarks and blanket statements prove your ignorance. I ran passive on my first system because back in the day active wasn't even an option, thats how far I go back. My second system was passive too, coz of limited funds. I then had several evoloutions of systems that all ran active. I now run passive. You can't be serious that *quote* "The only reason to run a passive crossover is because you do not have the wherewithal to do the job actively. That is it in a nutshell. If you have the equipment and nous, an active crossover can equal anything a passive can do...." excuse me but thats just the biggest load of BS

IMO all you TA junkies didnt pay attention enough when learning your craft, and now look for technology to fix your stuff ups like its a magic bullet, because you don't get the basics right
.
Where were you at nationals ??? hmmm...maybe I just got lucky with my no nous passive system and my driveway install.

truth bites ???
You can't handle the truth lmao

try learning how to install properly fool, and your craft, and maybe you wont need your time alignment, full brickwall crossover (FIR), or to correct for phase etc.
peace out
Cyberpunky

Cyperpunky
You have yet to answer the question what active cannot equal a in passive crossover. You are the ignorant and condensing person.

I used passive before active was around..
I have been using passive one more day than you, so that now makes me the expert?

Save me from your condescending BS.

Cyberpunky, whilst I tend to respect your posts, I think you're taking a swing at Abmolech for all the wrong reasons.

He is this hobby's (and this century's) Galileo. He is challenging the current understanding and perception, in order to facilitate improvement on the status quo. Everything he has said is correct, and validated through scientific principles.

Active can do everything Passive can do, this is a fact. Active can also do more, also a fact. From simple passives through to complex custom units (both of which I've run), and over from simple active units through to complex external processors (again, both of which I've run) and it cannot be denied. Active isnt better or worse (because to state that requires a list of corresponding requirements) but active can (and does) achieve everything a passive does.

Simple fact of things. Dont take Deans responses too personally, because he's challenging the status quo, and as such, needs to come across with zest (which can be percieved as arrogance).

active cannot adapt to changes in the electrical properties of the driver as temperature and flux changes.

a well-designed passive does this almost by magic.

Cyberpunky is right, passive may or may not be superior, but it is different, and passive requires a lot more understanding to do it right than what active does.

I wish my car sounded as good as Cyberpunky's car. He wishes he had my imaging and staging - it's a trade-off.

ambo if you know anything then you must agree for every norm there are exceptions ? is there anything in life that is absolute ?

I am not making blanket statements, you are. Hitler was the same.

You stated that because I used passive I didn't have the wherewithal to use active(that is is condescending bulls$hit) and not true. I have forgotten more than you know and have done more than you, and don't talk theory but do. I don't have to prove anything, and can be condisending if I want because I am talking from experience not theory. Build your dual mono car form hell with your TA and
superior BS and meet me at nationals.

actually you are right, I should bow down before superior home audio guy because ??? I give up...


man you are so close to being right but you really need to remove your head from your butt and join the real world, and then rejoin this conversation. The ironic thing is that your pr4escious superior Home audio world shunned active (except for subs) many years ago, so your saying they are worng but better than us because your the bridge between active wisdom and high fi arrogance

make up your mind

The Matt...he is your galileo ??? seriously...this centuries hero...sure the century has just begun but you should really aim higher dude

Do you have any idea how far beyond the norm and how brilliant galileo was ??? you really think ambolech is in the same class???

The matt you have just seriously disrespected one of the great minds of human existance. google him, learn his brilliance and then explain why him and ambo belong in same sentence let alone same class. I know its cool to say to your mate, he is a dead set legend but fact is legends deserve their status and your dead set legend mate won't go down is the history of man. you are over exaggerating the significance of ambolech. I can't beleive I just gave credence to the concept that ambo is even remotely a galileo
I just committed a crime against history <<<looks for razor blade *sighs*

Wow, I thought only SPLer's got into arguments like this

Seriously though, I think we need to take a step back and just breathe a bit. It seems that some are getting worked up, if you disagree with something, instead of bickering "i'm right, you're wrong" "no I'm right, you're wrong" etc, stop the personal slinging match and give statements. "I disagree because...". Saying one person knows more then another is just crap, we don't care who knows the most, but why not show what you are saying. Sure it's great that there's differing ideas, but arguing and personal bickering isn't really what this site is about, if you want to argue there's always PM's.

We're really all in the same boat, we want to get our stereo's (home, car, outside, in the air, whatever) sounding as good as we can to ourselves (and judges too). Arguing between each other doesn't help this, moreso it hinders it.

Edit - On topic, I run active because one of my crossovers was dying.

*steps away from my crummy stock semi active setup and pull out the pop corn*

Absolutely
Death and taxes for starters.



Wow, better to be compared to Hitler than Galileo I guess?
Did Galileo make any "blanket" statements?




Wow you know more then me.
Congratulations, I bow to your obvious superior intellect as evidenced by the above remarks.

I am stating you require nous and the hardware to use active.
These are the PRIME reasons why most people don't use passive.
In your case your experience is your prime reason for using passive.
I believe that speaks volumes on how valuable your experience really is.




Do what you feel you must, just don't let logical thought processes interfere.




I am not sure why your so hung up on home audio, it certainly has its fair share of voodoo.
Your experience is clouding your vision. The reason I stated to try speakers in a room, was so they could get some idea how much the room effects audio.

My testing is done with an enclosure in the ground, using the earth as an infinite baffle. The object of the lesson is to try to minimise the acoustic effect on the speaker. I obviously do not expect people to go to this level of extreme, and that is why I suggest using an ordinary room for a contrast.

Please explain what an active crossover cannot do (drift etc aside) that a passive crossover can do.

I run active on my mid bass (front doors) and I use the supplied passive cross-over on my mids and highs (kicks).

I do have enough channels to run full active if I wish but I found using the passive cross-over on the mids and highs sounded better.

I do that too! I'd prefer a Xover with overlaod protection between the beefy amp and the tiny tweet...

Geez Bruce, I met you at finals and thought you were a great guy, but you've come on here in the last day or two like an angry teenager about to do a Columbine.

I know Abmolech's writing style can be different and unusual, but I honestly don't see where he is making attacks on anyone's system because they run passive for example, I personally get that he's trying to challenge people's thought process and get them thinking.

You seem to be the one making the assumptions and painting Abmolech with a brush, without actually knowing what his previous experience's may be or what he's done in the past, maybe you do know?

Anyway I think we all need to just calm down a bit and actually treat each other like adults.

can't catch me, I'm the gingerbread man.

abmolech likes active because he can tweak and tune to his heart's delight.

Cyberpunky likes passive because because (to him) it sounds better.

~thematt~ thinks the sun shines out of abmolech's butt.

Personally I think you are all way off-topic. Please play nicely, or let's all get together to discuss this over a coffee and a toasted sandwich.

mmmmmm, toasted sandwich.

anyway - keep on topic guys.

lol

Great to see some passion back into this hobby!!

Haha best thread i have read in ages. *awaits the bloodshed*
its not about the passiveness or the activeness its about the sound. Who cares how you make it sound 'nice'. ???????

...WHO?

whinging bitches

i honestly CBF'ed getting into this argument, but all i know is my car sounded f***ing good.
i dont need to sit and go though all the technical aspects of it blah blah blah, cause like bruce, i built my car, and put it out there for all to listen.

And bruce, ill meet you at the finals hahaha

Maybe more on topic than it seems:

Is making a car's audio system sound good an art, or a science? I'm not sure we all have the same answer...

(Note, I did not say, "is making a car's aduio accurate or different an art or science?" That would be too easy )

OK I guess all of you who think ambo IS galileo(sp) and will think that what was said above is just a fair call then...thats your opinion

for me...a guy who just happened to win the nationals at pro level using passive, well to be honest, I found it hidiously offensive and condiscending. It basically said I didnt know $hit. OK sure I beat the best in country but because I used passive Im an idiot...now why would I come to that conclusion and why shouldn't I find ambo's remarks offensive ?


is it because he stated as fact anyone who uses passive doesnt have the wherewithal ?...etc or because its an absolute fact active is better??? even thou no one who used it could beat me?? or is it because he states these absolutes and has only disdain for car audio because whatever we do, a simple home system is better in his opinion ??? you do know he has stated this as fact ?


maybe its all of the above.

I won fair and square and to be called someone who doesnt have the wherewithal to get it right and go active when I have lived active and yet still moved on and known 110% why I'm not using passive, by a guy who thinks a car can never get close to a *cheap* home system ??? then maybe you can, for a second, understand why I have arced up. your call ?

sorry but I find that offensive.
walk a foot in my shoes and then disagree.....anyone ?

I could explain why I do what I do but if everyone here just wants to buy into blanket statements and not consider that maybe I had some science behind my alleged madness, then thats your call. I mean all I did was beat the best in the whole nation using an alleged inferior system, and by the logic above its because I have no nous. are you here to hero worship and bandwagonesque or to learn ??? your call...sorry my nutshell doesnt buy into mainstream concepts...maybe thats why I won ??? just an idea ppl ?

Cyberpunky

I deleted abmolech's reply because it was foolish, and rudely made assertions which were not based in fact.

Thanks
Bye

Frankly, I would say you shouldn't have.

We're all grown ups here. I think that over censorship is a bad thing.

You're not here to prevent him from looking foolish.

Phil

To answer the previous ON TOPIC question, with my own opinion....

Reproduction is a science. Creation of music is an art.

We here deal with Reproduction (science) and let the muscians perform the art.

At least, thats why I'm here.

I'm not taking anyone's side on this...

But it didn't - abmolech's statement was generic and across-the-board and not aimed at you specifically, unless i've missed something? As such it should be taken for what it is - a somewhat ignorant opinion (my view is that most generic statements have an element of ignorance). I think you've taken this one personally, unnecessarily.

You've made the choice to take offense - it is your choice but the side effect is that you've been called out on it.

No-one can do that. Going on what you've said, all props to you for taking a different approach and being successful.

Let's not confuse opinion with facts here.

I'm not taking anyone's side on this...

once i get my system installed, Im going to try active with the h701

if im not successful I will have to go back to bridged passive or even bi amp which might be better for me.


also OT: Abmolech is gone I think for good now...
I dont think peoples opinions should be moderated as well... as I find his posts very informative just like Pulse-R, The Matt, DD Phil, Muzzy etc and others...
even if it was directed at others (which i dont think so), He has done his fair share with contributing to these forums, and moderating these current replies of his isnt exactly fair for him...
its most likely to late as i dont think he will be posting again on these boards...

Ambo was stating opinion as fact. He was generalising, being bombastic, and insulting to anyone who's reality didnt agree with his *facts*.

The idea is discussion, not to ram your opinions down others throats, espeshicially if those opinions are illinformed, ignorant, and contrary to the facts.

this is an age old question and there is no answer. its like asking which is better ford Vs holden or red Vs Blue

I have worked in both car audio and home audio for many years, and really have a disdain for anyone who puts down car audio, due to the perception home audio is superior. This is just not the case, and infact because car audio is harder and has more challenges than plonking 2 speakers in a room with a chair, then I find car audio ppl are often more knowlegable and far less eletist(sp) than the average home audio snob

IMO although I have used active for many years, I find that using active, TA, and eq, etc, is mostly done because ppl are trying to correct problems, that good installation can avoid being created in the first place. A good quality passive system thats properly installed can match and even surpass an active system, and vice versa. The question to me is really why would you use active and over complicate things when passive can have some inherent benefits, like being phase correct over crossover points, or having correct slopes to provide smoother transitions between drivers.

Sure these issues can be dealt with actively but they can also be made far worse as well. The problem with infinate adjustment is you end up constantly adjusting, often chasing something that may not actually be there in the first place

just an opinion
peace
Cyberpunky

passive is better .
And i didnt even study!

Thing is I still think you've misunderstood him, from what I understand of his car and system, he's done more practical trials and tried many more things to see what will and won't work, then what a lot of us combined will ever try or understand. He isn't some Home Audio snob, he isn't some all science but never tried it guy. And he has more then once stated that to make a car sound good is alot more difficult and takes alot more knowledge, and this is exactly what he tries to get people to understand, that we should be trying to fix the envirnment we put these drivers of ours in, before chasing stupid things like the difference a piece of wire may or may not make.

Whether you always agree with what he says or the way he says it, I don't think abmo personally meant to offend anyone, whether you took it like that is your emotional connection, I'm sure many other people who read it probably didn't even pay any attention to it.

The simple fact out of all this is, that this Forum probably lost one of it's more knowledgeable (even if his opinions are different to most) members. Members like this are few and far between and yes Bruce you are one of these few members. And the result of this stupid argument because people IMO got there knickers in a knot is that we lost a valuable member.

It's the Internet it's not personal, were you personally named in any of his original comments? No, but when people turn around and personally point you out, (like what happened to him) and then Personally attack you that is when you get pissed and leave.

Luke