Bi-amp Crossover Question

[greg928gts]

Yeah, I wonder how the SET's are going to react to passive biamping. I plan to use the ALK or Bob Crites crossovers for the mid/tweet and I also plan to use a simple active filter for the bass bins.

Here's what I have for the formula for figuring the resistor size in my JFL's:

F = 1/ (2*pi*R*C)

F = the desired cutoff frequency

Pi = 3.1416

R = value of the resistor (in ohm)

C = value of the capacitor (in Farad)

I tried a RANE crossover and it was horrible sounding. Reminded me of the days when I used to EQ the hell out of everything and thought that it sounded great. I remember hearing about those funny people who wanted less and less componentry in the signal path. Now I've become one.

Greg

[mafuta]

Aah,so it's too late.You alredy contracted the dreaded Superior Horn Syndrome.Like SARS SHS seems to have originated in the east.Japan specifically.It is also incurable.Fortunately,like most very serious diseases ,it's course is very predictable.

The next step is that you'll disappear.If you are lucky ,ít'll be the mild form and you'll simply spend all you're time listening to music.If it is the bad form you're building that thing in the wall.

Come to think of it:Where is q man? Changing the front wall?No,hang on, wasn"t there a photograph of three K horns in built inn corners? Oh ,he must be digging up the floor for a huge subterranean horn sub then!

[mafuta]

SETs do not mind passive crossovers.For once I'll stop talking nonsense and (sort of) quote Phil Marchand in a discussion about his XM 46 crossover I use.This is a totally passive device.

The real factor is not the power amps but the preamp:It needs to have an output impedance of less than 500 Ohms.That rules out passive preamps and most tube preamps that do not use a cathode follower line stage(most tubed pre's do however use this type of circuitry).Insertion loss of a passive filter incurs very little loss of gain-only around 1dB.The power amp characteristics matter hardly at all.I run 3 very different SETs with not a murmur from any of them.

BTW I totally agree on active crossovers .I have used 3 expensive ones and they all detracted too much

Regards

[Deang]

The complexity would just have me sitting around second guessing my decisions while I'm listening. It would drive me nuts. I guess I just don't trust myself that much yet. What I do see myself doing however is following one of Dennis' (DJK) recommendations -- chopping down my K-401's, getting some 2328 adapters on them -- and running a pair of CM-200's. I like my networks and my amps, and so this seems like the next logical step to me.

[sunnysal]

I would like to use a passive crossover instead of the active BUT...

1. I want STEEP crossovers, ideally above the 48db/octave normally found in passives from marchand, etc.

2. I want to play with the delay between drivers to try to minimize the existing differences found in klipschorns.

3. I want to elminate my preamp from my system, I like the idea of high quality digital EQ as a bonus.

4. I would like to take advantage of the new digital room and driver correction now offered by Tact, DEQX and others

so I am looking at DEQX at around $3,000 which gives me all of the above and DBX Driverack 260 at $800 which gives me everyting but room and driver correction....

if either suck I can dump them on audiogon or ebay and buy a marchand XM16LS-3AA.

regards, tony

btw don´t knock basment horn subs...I think q-man is pouring concrete as we speak, lol

[mafuta]

Absolutely

If one does not rely on analog as primary source digital crossovers with all the flexibility , capability for delay

(just think about it!)and steep slopes with no ringing must be heaven.Unfortunately those black wobbly pieces of plastic keep me chasing rainbows.

Regards