Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: 4-Way Active Crossover Options

  1. #16
    Senior Member 1audiohack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas Nevada
    Posts
    2,691
    If youíre up to a swim in the deep end of the pool you can buy a used BSS160 well within your budget.

    Imagineering really applies when youíre deep into these things with programmable logic objects and all the other tools available as drag, drop and virtual wiring.

    There is a real learning curve as with anything this open and powerful.

    Barry.
    If we knew what the hell we were doing, we wouldn't call it research would we.

  2. #17
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,100
    Your direction or progression depends on "what" or the "reasons" for thinking about going active.

    Are you just playing around for fun or looking to improve it.

    If you are playing around then by all means go full active with anything you like because unless you have a bunch of expertise in the programming and a DSP system and experience in the theory and practical aspect of measurements its a very long road to audio nirvana and a short road to hell.

    If you want a better sound go passive with the 2123H - Horn - 2405 using the 3155 equivalent crossover charge coupled you will be out of the blocks closer to a JBL designed and voiced system straight off.

    Simply bi-amp the woofers to the 2123H with an analogue Bryston 10B or something of similar quality. Use the Mac on the mid, horn and slot and you are done. Game over.

    DSP time alignment will only give you a time aligned response at one 3D point in the room.

    Yes that's fact. Ask Wilson loudspeaker owners who have paid a fortune for a time aligned SOA loudspeaker.
    One JBL engineer told be me the DSP crossovers used by JBL are rubbish in the context of SOA digital system required for a hi end home system. Yes that's what he said.

    So go figure.

  3. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Posts
    182
    I started this thread over a year ago when I built these speakers. Using a three way and a two way active crossover in series is working fine, but Iím always looking to change things. I might try making a passive crossover later in the year when Winter arrives, however I donít have the time now.

    I was under the impression that an active crossover sounds better?

  4. #19
    Senior Member Champster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    255
    Have you considered using a DSP based crossover? Iíve used miniDSP products in the past with great success? DSP is the ultimate tool to voice your system according to your liking.

  5. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by Champster View Post
    Have you considered using a DSP based crossover? Iíve used miniDSP products in the past with great success? DSP is the ultimate tool to voice your system according to your liking.
    The problem with DSP is the DACs. A Dac has a major influence on the sound.
    My ideal system would be DSP outputting in 4 channels digital to four dacs using Stereo Coffee Lightspeed attenuators for master and channel volume controls.
    Having Limited funds I find A Marchand XM44 and a Lampizator DAC with a Stereo Coffee Lightspeed attenuator as the master volume control gives me what I want. No Eq. I had the system tested and it threw up some problems I adjusted some speaker parameters to fix them eliminating Eq.
    I just keep it simple.

  6. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by Champster View Post
    Have you considered using a DSP based crossover? Iíve used miniDSP products in the past with great success? DSP is the ultimate tool to voice your system according to your liking.
    I was under the impression that a DBX Driverack PA2 was a DSP?

  7. #22
    Senior Member 1audiohack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas Nevada
    Posts
    2,691
    Quote Originally Posted by robertg View Post
    I was under the impression that a DBX Driverack PA2 was a DSP?
    It certainly is.

    Barry.
    If we knew what the hell we were doing, we wouldn't call it research would we.

  8. #23
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,100
    Quote Originally Posted by robertg View Post
    I started this thread over a year ago when I built these speakers. Using a three way and a two way active crossover in series is working fine, but Iím always looking to change things. I might try making a passive crossover later in the year when Winter arrives, however I donít have the time now.

    I was under the impression that an active crossover sounds better?
    You have to appreciate we get a number of members post threads like this.

    The difficulty is without context of an actual conversation with you or a visit to fully understand your situation any response can only be general. Every diy Audio person is after a better sound but what is better? I donít under what better is without clearly defining what aspects of the sound you like and dislike at home? What anyone hears from their audio system is an illusion of the recorded event. Your likes, dislikes and sensitivities about the illusion you hear from your system are unique to you.

    As an example say l visit your home. You sit me down to hear your system and ask me what do l think about the sound? I will only be able to relate that sound to my illusion. I might own the similar system or something very different but my likes, dislikes and sensitives are going to be different to yours. So you are going to get a variety of different responses.

    Btw what analogue crossover are you using? The DBX?

    If your are adventurous you might try and borrow from an audio buddy a large Jbl 2397 Smith horn or Tad style horn and place it on top using the 2446 drivers. Why? Because typically this is what people do with these large systems.

    I know one guy who did this for a while and then changed to a large multi way horn system.

  9. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie View Post
    Btw what analogue crossover are you using? The DBX?
    After the DBX Driverack I am using an analogue ART CX310 to split the 2226 and 2123 at 300 hz or so. I had a DBX 223 also but one channel didn't work. The ART was really cheap.

    I tried a pair of 2350 horns with 2440 drivers for a week of so, and now I'm using a pair of 2345 horns with 2470 drivers. Each one sounds slightly different, however I can't say which I like better. They both don't really cut it in the looks department. Hopefully I will find a pair of 2397 horns to try.

  10. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Jšttendal (Giant Valley), Sweden
    Posts
    736
    You could stay fully analog.
    • The DBX 234 is a very good filter, but not so exact regarding frequencies. You will need a 223 to get 4 way.
    • The BSS FDS 360 has a good reputation. You need 2.
    • Klark Teknik DN 800.


    The BSS and Klark needs soldering to change frequencies.

    You will also need an EQ. Primarily to get baffle step sorted, but it is also handy if the drivers or boxes are not linear. Good EQs:
    • DBX
    • Klark Teknik
    • BSS


    MŚrten

  11. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Jšttendal (Giant Valley), Sweden
    Posts
    736
    I liked the 2309 horn with lens 2310.

    Make shure the horns doesn't ring. Very simple to test by knocking them. The ringing will affect the sound a lot.

    /M

  12. #27
    Senior Member macaroonie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    near Glasgow Scotland
    Posts
    1,989

    late to this party

    The 2446 diaphragm being Ti generally could use a little magic dust , some of the chaps here may still have some. Works a charm.
    Ian you got any , or Rich ?

  13. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Posts
    182
    I changed out my speakers but they are still a 4-way, the upper mid is now a 2440 with a 2311 horn, and the bottom is a single 2245.The cabinets are 4345 clones.

    I tried a Crown XLS2502 on the bottom end, it has a built in crossover so I just used it with the DBX Driverack. My preamp has two outputs, so one went to the Driverack, and the other went to the Crown. It worked well, but I couldn't stand looking at the Crown, so dam homely looking. I still think a good amp should weigh at least 60 lb also. I'm back now with the bottom end of the Driverack split up with a DBX 223XL. I'll probably leave it like that for a while.

    I also tried a Fostex H425 horn and a D252 1" driver in place of the 2440.2311 combo. I thought it sounded slightly better. When I finish restoring the horn I will try it again.

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Lewiston, NY 14092
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by robertg View Post
    Ö. It worked well, but I couldn't stand looking at the Crown, so dam homely looking. I still think a good amp should weigh at least 60 lb also.
    It's the old school way of thinking here. I'm not running my stuff in the living room so my thoughts are probably different.
    I got a couple of the newer crown XTI and CDI amps. The programming is easy and there's a lot of stuff built in. They don't weigh much and they put out a lot of power. I don't know the technical side fully, or at what price that power comes?
    I'll find out just how much they draw. I love the built in stuff so far. I have to be honest that it scared me at first to trust it fully. I always used separate stuff for all this control.
    I still have a set of LN Crown Micro tech 1200s here and will keep them for back up and/or monitor use. Seems like a XTI or CDI 1000 does just as much if not more at a fraction (1/2?) of the weight. I also got a QSI amp before realizing that there's no real DSP control inside on that model. It is also light weight and puts out more than the smaller Crown's do.
    Again probably of no concern for sound systems that don't move.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. jBL-UREI 811C crossover options?
    By dubkarma in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-15-2017, 09:49 AM
  2. Crossover options
    By migman in forum Electronic Crossovers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-28-2013, 09:19 AM
  3. 4722-HF (2432H) to 2226H crossover point/slope (active crossover)
    By Jonas_h in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-25-2012, 12:17 AM
  4. Passive Crossover Options
    By upstreme1 in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-01-2009, 03:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •