In Reply to: Re: SS Vs.Tube Xover posted by andyr on November 27, 2006 at 02:21:50:
I am using the Maggies 2 way active and I use a sub too. Instead of junking the XM-9 and XM-26 and replacing them with an XM-44, I am following the advice of Phil Marchand and feeding the low pass output of the XM-26 into the XM-9 to split between the Maggie bass panel (hi pass out of XM-9) and sub (low pass out of XM-9).
I am tinkering with the notion of doing 3 way active as you suggest but right now there are too many things going on in my life to take on modifying the panels! It seems like I just got them back from Magnepan after refurbing!!
You are right, the XM-9 supports only symmetric slopes whereas the 26, 126 and 44 can support either assymmetric or symmetric.
I use the reissue Mac MC-275IV for the mid and ribbons and a larger Mac solid state amp for the bass panel. Sounds pretty good.
I have the age old problem of "fiddling" with the subs, their placement, crossover frequency, and such. Right now I have gone back to using the subs to augment the Maggies (no high pass) with a 50 Hz crossover, 24 dB/octave L-R, low pass only. There seems to be no end to the number of combinations one can try, it keeps me off the streets......!!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - SS Vs.Tube Xover - rufusen 15:44:28 11/26/06 (8)
- Re: SS Vs.Tube Xover - email@example.com 16:46:40 11/26/06 (7)
- Re: SS Vs.Tube Xover - rufusen 11:40:23 11/27/06 (1)
- Re: SS Vs.Tube Xover - firstname.lastname@example.org 23:51:49 11/27/06 (0)
- Re: SS Vs.Tube Xover - andyr 02:21:50 11/27/06 (4)
You can not post to an archived thread.