Ashly XR1001 Active Crossover

[boputnam]

On advice of my FOH engineer, of Technical Support Consultants, Albuquerque, NM, I grabbed two of these for a trail. One in the pro gear, road rack; the other here at home with the 4345's.

The XR1001 is a 24dB/octave crossover, with adjustable crossover point. And, as GordonW was posting today, this has an adjustable "response", allowing for modifying the curve in the area of f0, while maintaining the 24dB slopes.

Results were most impressive. In the pro road gear, my EV Eliminator mains have not before sounded so clear, and so effortless. Punchier bass, and very clear highs. There, I'm using a 75Hz crossover point, with -3dB response and +3dB for the LF (subs).

At home with the 4345's, Ian and I went through A/B rounds against the 5234A. At the end, we both preferred the Ashly XR1001. The bass was more distinct, and had very good punch. There was notably much better definition right around the crossover point (290Hz). The HF was the biggest surprise, being more "open", and the horns were much less "beamy" (although they were not bad with the 5234A - but were certainly better with the XR1001). The soundstage was noticeably deeper. Overall, a wonderful, wonderful sound.

Mr. Widget got a run at the XR1001 too - with his new Clones. He too is quite impressed, and has now gone and got one. I'll let him add his commentary, but with his wooden horns the soundstage was pretty phenomenal. Really, really nice.

So, for now I've retired the 5234A, and we're running with the XR1001. If you get a chance, I'd suggest you "give it a go..." (Ian parlance... ).

http://www.ashly.com/xr-series.htm

[Mr. Widget]

Bo was generous enough to let me give one of his XR1001s a whirl while I was setting up my speakers in their new (and still quite unfinished) enclosures. Unfortunately I have been dealing with a bit of a head cold and my hearing is just now coming back. I was quite impressed with it from my direct comparisons with two active crossovers that I had that were available. The crossovers that I compared it to were an old Audioarts unit and a Rane AC22. I need to configure the cables and then I will compare it to a Crown VFX-2A I also have.

Basically I didn't get the feeling that the sound was being unduly processed. The Ranes that I have always sound a bit hard and constricting. The Audioarts sounds a bit veiled and dull. I have a couple of other crossovers that I really like , but they aren't as flexible as the Ashly or any of these other three either.

Widget

[Chas]

Bo and Widget (or anyone who has some comments), I am contemplating getting a pair of XR-1001's to use as mono 3 ways.

Do you guys still feel the same about them?

One of my Behringers went into 120 Hz apoplectic shock (filter cap expired) after three weeks in service.


I am nervous about still using them on my beloved JBL's......

[Mr. Widget]

Still thumbs up!

Widget

[scott fitlin]

Originally posted by Mr. Widget
Bo was generous enough to let me give one of his XR1001s a whirl while I was setting up my speakers in their new (and still quite unfinished) enclosures. Unfortunately I have been dealing with a bit of a head cold and my hearing is just now coming back. I was quite impressed with it from my direct comparisons with two active crossovers that I had that were available. The crossovers that I compared it to were an old Audioarts unit and a Rane AC22. I need to configure the cables and then I will compare it to a Crown VFX-2A I also have.

Basically I didn't get the feeling that the sound was being unduly processed. The Ranes that I have always sound a bit hard and constricting. The Audioarts sounds a bit veiled and dull. I have a couple of other crossovers that I really like , but they aren't as flexible as the Ashly or any of these other three either.

Widget

I wish i were near you, this way we could compare it to the urei 525 that I like! This, the 525, and Crown MX-4,s are my favorites for full range use!

I also like the VFX-2A for driving sub and tweeter amps. I am going to put one back into my system that has been modified for me, this one has front panel output level attenuators, why Crown never did this I will never know!

As for the AudioArts unit, I believe that those used Allen-Bradley carbon composition pots, and carbon wears, and after much use, even if they arent scratchy, get noticeably dull sounding! If you could source NEW Clarostat Conductive Plastic pots for that AudioArts xover, Id bet the cost of parts and install, that it would improve the sound of your unit quite considerably!

I agree with your statement about the Rane xovers! Always sounded like it restricted and compressed the music, to me!

[boputnam]

Hey, Scotty...

Glad you revisited this Thread. I've only gotten more and more fond of this unit. One of the greatest attributes is the "Response" curve adjustment . The ability to shape the curve(s) in the area of the crossover (without altering the overall slopes) is very powerful for fine tuning between cabinets and for the ambient acoustics. Here's a close-up of the panel, and a description of the Response adjustment (from the catalogue):

[scott fitlin]

Although its an older X77E, but it also has the damping adjustment!

Maybe I go get me one of these newer ones, and try it out!

[scott fitlin]

Im gonna have to let somebody try the modified urei 525, and see what they think!

[Mike Caldwell]

Hello
Another very good crossover to try is a TDM.
They are available in two stereo and three way stereo.
I use many of them in my PA systems and they sound great.
You can find them on e-bay from time to time.

If your thinking of going the digital route I feel you need to drop
serious $$$$$$$ to get a good sounding processor something
like a XTA , higher end BSS or a Lake. All of the DSP's give you
a lot parameters to control but not all of them sound that
natural when listening to them.

Mike Caldwell

[scott fitlin]

I love my urei 525! and with a few minor mods its a sweet beast!

[boputnam]

Originally posted by Mike Caldwell
If your thinking of going the digital route I feel you need to drop serious $$$$$$$ to get a good sounding processor something like a XTA , higher end BSS or a Lake. All of the DSP's give you a lot parameters to control but not all of them sound that natural when listening to them.

Mike, that is a critically important point.

Low-cost digital gear gives low-quality sound. IMO, if you can't afford top-line digital, stay top-quality analogue. I've noticed on some friends rigs that using digital processors like the (shall I mention it here...? ), the sound coherancy (or quality) seems to degrade as gain is increased.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Bo,

Thats a good point. Generally these digital boxes are more a convenience for the Pro user in terms of set up time and precision control.

The more processing you engage, the more 0's & 1 get crunched and the quality starts to drop. You also have the quantitisation and noise floor problems. Not enough signal and you loose details and distortion goes up, too much and digital clipping is horrible. Analogue is almost the opposite and in this respect as far as Hifi goes it wins out, the higher the resolution the more HiFi you have, particularly low level details. On the other hand for pro PA, precision control and military fire power are all the go and digital is good for that.

I heard the Ashely at Bo's and its very good value for money and tunable, the JBL is still a well designed unit but is out classed by new componentry in the Ashely.

For those who are interested I will be trialing the active crossover project shortly and as we speak I am preparing two identifical units for my 4345's Down Under and Bo's in CA. The plan is to evaluate the units and see "if" the discrete design and all the TLC put into them is subjectively worth the effort.

The thing is Old Tin Ear has a habbit of decanting the local grape into rather large wine glasses and perching himself on a bar stool when he's doing serious listening. I am not sure I will be able to mimick his act!!....LOL.

Ian

[scott fitlin]

Originally posted by boputnam
Mike, that is a critically important point.

Low-cost digital gear gives low-quality sound. IMO, if you can't afford top-line digital, stay top-quality analogue. I've noticed on some friends rigs that using digital processors like the (shall I mention it here...? ), the sound coherancy (or quality) seems to degrade as gain is increased.

I had the BSS FDS-388 and I couldnt stand it! Midrange had a very bright sound, and there was always this white noise type of thing going on in the background! Heard it in other 388,s too!

Went to audition the BSS 366 Compact T with 24/96 digital audio! Better than the 388, but still not as good as top quality analog!

I also went to audition the XTA DSP processors which are even more expensive than the outrageously expensive BSS units, and many feel sound considerably better than the BSS units! It does sound somewhat cleaner than the BSS, but still, you know your listening to DSP processing! Again, something in the midrange bothers me!

Now, when I listened, and used these units, I engaged them strictly as crossovers, not using the additional features all of these units have! And they still arent as good as a really good analog crossover, no way!

Last week a friend brought over an EQ that features all discrete Class A circuitry and I couldnt believe just how good this thing sounded! Really good! Midrange was natural, and had a very vivid sound, yet somehow kind of creamy sounding! Clear as daylight, yet never sibilant, or edgy sounding!

So, at this point in time, I think Discrete circuitry is a home run.

[boputnam]

Originally posted by scott fitlin
Last week a friend brought over an EQ that features all discrete Class A circuitry man I couldnt believe just how good this thing sounded!

What brand and model was it, Scott?

[scott fitlin]

Originally posted by boputnam
What brand and model was it, Scott?

Well, it isnt an EQ in the sense you might be thinking! The companies name is DUO Audio, and its Daves new company, and he is a forum member as well. DancingDave!

The DUO 3 band Isolator is an EQ type device primarily for DJ use, with 12db of boost and infinite cut. The filters are seperated into 3 bands, low, Full range, and highs.

I have always stood away from using DJ type effect boxes in my system because they are usually low grade junk! Brands like Vestax come to mind here!

So, Dave is making High quality products for the Club/DJ market. He had it down here last week, and I couldnt believe just how good this thing sounded! Highs were smooth, open and airy, the mids were clear and very dimensional sounding, but without harshness, or edgy sound, really smooth, yet it pushed notes into the room, but without getting bright or fatiguing! It made the bass sound bigger, not boomy or pumped up, just bigger!

We listened to many records and some CD,s and its good! I played one record that has a guitar in the break, and it just made the strings sound really creamy, you could hear the pluck, but not bright, and yet extremely clear! The notes kind of hung in the air in front of you! This is the best way I can describe it!

After 2 hours he had to leave, and I have been missing the thing since! Before he left, he opened it up for me to see the inside. Nice board, nicely assembled, well thought out layout, great pots, big healthy power supply. No IC,s all discrete FET,s, resistors are high quality metal film types, good caps selected for how they sounded in this particular piece! And he made a point of telling me the circuitry is Class A! I have heard Class A components before so I knew what I was listening to, but it even made the CD,s sound good. I dont like CD sound, but this made them sound alot better to me! records were great!

Thre was just some kind of purity to the midrange. It didnt have the typical Solid State sound if you know what I mean!