 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
As I continue to gather info for my home speaker project, I've discovered the most complicated task will be designing the right crossover.
Are there any disadvantages to using an active crossover? I have 3 power amps and one integrated as follows:Carver TFM-6C 65 WPC
Yamaha H3000 350 WPC
Yamaha H7000 750 WPC
Technics SU8044 45 WPC (integrated)Could I use an active crossover, the Carver for the tweeters,
the H3000 for the mid, and the H7000 for the 12" woofers? Another question: If I incorporate 4 drivers with 3 amps, could I use a simple internal crossover to split the bass to two bands?Here are my drivers (including ones I wont use incase anyone has better suggestions):
Vifa 3/4" mylar dome tweeters
Polydax 1" silk dome tweeters
Polydax 5.25" cone midrange drivers
JBL "polyplas" 6.5" mid bass drivers
Goldwood 12" cast frame bass driversI Plan to use the silk domes, and 12's, but would like to consider using both the Polydax mids and the JBL mid bass. Is that too much?
Follow Ups:
Just as in the replies to the first post about this:
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/tweaks/messages/75838.html
a four way is not necessarily going to sound better than a properly implemented 3-way.MORE DRIVERS DO NOT MAKE FOR BETTER SOUND!
That said, active crossovers need to be talored to the drivers just as do the passive crosovers. Using steep crossover slopes, you can "get-away" with less of a specifically tailored frequency response and try flopping the driver polarity between the vzarious units until it sounds best to you. It will not result in guarenteed audio nirvana.
See:
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/general/messages/114688.html
for more coments on active crossovers.
Jon Risch
I'm not by any stretch a crossover guru, but if you have the amps and don't mind a lot of extra complexity, then active crossovers should work very well. You get better damping on the drivers because of direct amplifier connections, the frequency bands are amplified after the crossover, not before as in passive units, no insertion loss or other nasties from series inductors, and and less crosstalk between drivers. Three-way crossovers may be a little more difficult to find over two-way, but I'd bet a company like Marchand Electronics could fix you up.
I saw one on Ebay a little while ago which was 3 way stereo (don't recall the brand) and "looked" to be pretty good quality, but I'm obviously going to do some research before I get one.Do you think I could incorporate both the mid and the mid bass with one amp in this arrangement? Or would tweeter and mid be bettter on one amp and drive the mid bass and bass with their own amps?
Do you mean vertical or horizontal bi-amping? I don't know that there's an advantage either way, but mine is horizontal, meaning I have one amp for the sub-woofer and the other for the satellites. If you plan on tri-amping then I'd go with one amp for each stereo band (woof/mid/tweet).
Yes, three amps, (one for the tweets, one for mids and one for woofs) That's three drivers and three amps. If I wanted to incorporate a 4th driver, which amp should drive two drivers instead of one?
I would think choice one (below) would be best. Would I just be screwing everything up by doing this?CHOICE ONE:
amp 1 tweeter
amp 2 midrange
amp 3 mid-bass/bassCHOICE TWO:
amp 1 tweeter/midrange
amp 2 mid-bass
amp 3 bassCHOICE THREE:
amp 1 tweeter
amp 2 midrange/mid-bass
amp 3 bass
In order to use another driver in the equation, then you either need a four-way active crossover, or you could do a passive crossover between the mid and the tweeter in choice #2, thereby eliminating the need for a 4th amp.
