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 drivers
Just as in the replies to the first post about this:
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.
for more coments on active crossovers.
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 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?
amp 1 tweeter
amp 2 midrange
amp 3 mid-bass/bass
amp 1 tweeter/midrange
amp 2 mid-bass
amp 3 bass
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.
While searching for crossovers to use in a speaker project for my computer, I came across this diy active crossover that can be set up as a two way or 3-way crossover. Perhaps this might be something to play with in his project. It's certainly not a Marchand or Bryston crossover, but with decent op-apms it might be fun to play with. For a simpler two-way version see also project 81 on the same web page.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: