newbie multi-amp crossover question

Hi, pretty new to this multi-amp and active crossover topic, but here are two questions.....

I'm looking to assemble a basic Vott A7 system and use small triode amps to do a very minimalist but bi-amped system. The project would be to use crossovers between the preamp and poweramp.. (or possibly even just between source and poweramp, pending having volume control at source or at crossover). With the intention of keeping the load on the amps minimized, nothing in between output transformer and speaker driver.

I see at the Marchand site they offer active/ adjustable crossovers, tube or solidstate, for just this purpose. But I also see that they build line-level passive crossovers (that would go in the same place in the system, before the power amps)-- that are custom configured and non-adjustable, for a builder who is certain what turnovers and rolloffs would be correct for his speaker drivers. They assert that the S/N level for the passive-line xovers is noticeably lower and cleaner than that of the adjustable ones. (Which seems logical. No active processing/ attenuators, just filtration.)

• Am I reading that right, is that passive-line xover the best of all possible worlds then, if you know what your numbers ought to be for your system ...?
• Is this a common strategy, the use of pre-set xovers working in-line for standard drivers like the altecs, or does everyone use active/ adjustable xover devices ..?

Trying to be as streamlined and purist as possible, looking to eliminate any complexity in the signal path that doesn't need to be there. Seems like the less processing that goes on upstream of the power amps, the cleaner the signal, the better resolution you'd get.

Thanks for any of your thoughts or responses. Here's the marchand page w/line-passive types of crossover: http://www.marchandelec.com/xm46.html

JD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JD.

Trying to be as streamlined and purist as possible, looking to eliminate any complexity in the signal path that doesn't need to be there. Seems like the less processing that goes on upstream of the power amps, the cleaner the signal, the better resolution you'd get.

Thanks for any of your thoughts or responses.

---

I've been intrigued by the Marchand crossovers for a while but, since purchasing my bi-amped 4345 system I've been using the Ashly XR1001 based on reading about the experience of others on this site. I'd love to try the Marchand at some time but I really have no complaint with the Ashly (I have two) after eight-years of use in my system. I also have found the customer service at Ashly to be among the best I've encountered in the modern electronic industry.

At roughly one-tenth the cost of the Marchand, my Ashly has served me well enough to just not worry about how much better it could be. Should the opportunity arise to sub-in a Marchand, I'd love to give it a try and report on what I hear.

May be useful
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...rossovers.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tony Sullivan

May be useful
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...rossovers.html

---

Thanks very much, exactly the topic. But unresolved, it looks like... (also looks like the discussion there is often beyond me, but I can look things up and keep moving along...)

Also-- PLLXO ..! Who knew. Presume that's passive line-level cross over.
All very interesting stuff..

I think for now I'll plan on something active, to get the lay of the land, and then dealbreakers-permitting, keep thinking passive-line for the final.

Thanks again, J.