And with a fully active speaker, you could update the crossovers, just like you update the firmware in the DirectStream DAC. If the AN series is supposed to be the best speaker you know how to make, and you admit that fully active is better, what are you waiting for? Do it! (Perhaps for the AN-2 and AN-1)
I made a conscious decision to go active a couple of years ago. An important consideration was ease of use. Not only the amp but the fact is in the speaker so all I need is a phone, tablet or computer to initiate music. There seems to have been a determination in some quarters to deter buyers from going down this route purely because of the lost sales of other boxes and cables.
Active tends to mean class d. Which rules out decent analog. Lack of flexibility is a problem also. Try to hook up more than your low fidelity fone. Basically you are limited to your cheap Chinese speaker, your class d amp which digitizes everything that goes thru it, and limited adjusting of the sound. Great for casual listening. Sucks for serious musical enjoyment.
I hear a noticeable increase in sound quality when using an active crossover compared to a passive setup using the same set of speakers. I rank this as the one thing that can improve a system the most. For speaker builders it's a method to able to listen to a driver at different frequencies to pick the best sounding crossover frequency for that particular driver. Doing that by tweaking a passive crossover takes a lot of time, with an electronic crossover, you can turn a dial and instantly hear how a change in frequency sounds immediately. I am definitely in the "active" camp on this topic.
I agree! Everything is a matter of choice, resources, and patience to execute. As has been pointed out, there are many good passive systems out there . . . but if a lot of the distortion is with the crossover by nature of the beast, it would be common sense to come to the conclusion that by eliminating the problem inherent in the passive parts, the sound would be purer and much less distorted. After all, not everyone can afford the highest-priced parts and pay upwards of a thousand dollars on some of the large capacitors that would be needed in these complex designs. In a perfect world, each component would provide the best possible sound, but this is not and never will be a perfect world. -- John 3:16
"The only excuse for passive crossovers is their low cost. Their behavior changes with the signal level dependent dynamics of the drivers. They block the power amplifier from taking maximum control over the voice coil motion. They are a waste of time, if accuracy of reproduction is the goal." - Siegfried Linkwitz
Absolutely! I run a multi-amp, multi-way set up, and the effortlessness and resolution are simply beyond comparison.Once I fired it up for the first time, many years ago, I got hooked within 5 minutes...
I grant you that amps, depending on which are chosen, can be quite expensive; however, have you checked out the cost of passive crossover parts lately? I'm not talking about cheap parts if you are after a quality passive design -- not to mention the testing equipment needed to precisely produce a good one . . . that is . . . unless you have the resources to buy lots of crossover parts in order to do the tuning of the crossover by ear. The difficulty of doing either is basically how well-versed one is on the crossover theory and has the applicable knowledge to execute such a feat either passively or actively.
@@russmaleartist Software really helps with this. You measure your components in your box and import the files to software to model crossovers. The math can be incredibly complex. Software can get you extremely close to your goals and safe a ton of time.
The superiority of an active crossover and active equalization with multiple amplifiers is so great that you could duplicate the sound of any speaker system you could buy if you can get the drivers at a small fraction of the cost. What's more if you are a DIYer or even a professional speaker designer you can try out a very large number of combinations quickly and easily even if you intend to build a passive equivalent. That's how KLH Model 6 was voiced. One huge advantage of this method over passive is that as the speaker voice coil gets hotter the impedance changes and with it so does the behavior of the filter. With an active crossover it doesn't matter. You will still need a series capacitor to protect midrange and tweeters from a low frequency thump regardless of the cause. Such a thump could destroy the most expensive tweeter in a fraction of a second.
@The Chilean Audiophile If anything goes wrong with your amplifier, it can pass DC to your tweeter coil. Then it becomes a heater for a short time. From what I can tell, JBL factory replacement diaphragm/coils for 075 were about $90 before they became unavailable. A faulty connection can also send a "pop" to the tweeter, which can cause the coil to open. Those are nice tweeters! I'm hoping to get a pair of 2405s.
There a huge difference between an actice speaker and an active crossover. An active crossover can be located in the amplifier for example Linn. Therefore the speaker is just a cabinet with drivers and no crossover. An active speaker has and built in ( usually class D) amplifier such as desktop PC speakers and is plugged into a power supply.
Karel Smouter For sure!! With an active crossover you can still have separate amplifiers and loudspeakers (with connectors for each driver). It gives even more possibilities to mix and match: loudspeakers, amplifiers, DACs, EQ/DSP hardware, filter algorithms, filter settings. I think that is the way to do it, and that is the way I did it.
I think the reason is that, ideally, the manufacturer would like to have designed and/or selected or the components of the active chain, so putting them all in the box makes it easier! Of course they could just suggest which components to use and leave it up to the user. Personally, I have a mix-and-match active system.
Big fan of Active crossovers with dedicated amps per driver with independent E/Q's & time alignment for room correction...YES PLEASE! I do see where you are coming from though Paul, and no doubt the best speakers in the world are currently Passive...mad respect for doing it the hard way! Being that you are an amp company and soon to be a speaker company too...it actually makes sense to go full active DSP in the future, consumers can set up with a quick mic auto tune for the room, and then on a smart phone run some preset programs for warm and musical, flat and analytical or full custom...even per song auto tag prompting custom programming? I would love to see an AI controller that can recognize songs and auto E/Q them as preferred to ones tastes.
I remember seeing some higher end speaker systems that had strapable input terminals. The user could separate the woofer from the mid/tweeter and bi-amp. An active crossover would be inserted before the two amps needed for the bi-amping thus directing the proper frequencies to the drivers. But, I think the speaker still is using internal passive crossovers if not mistaken. I believe having a separate amp for woofer, mid, and highs would achieve the best cleanest sound because each amp is working with a limited range of frequencies, thus maybe reducing intermod distortion. If I had some expendable income, I'd build a tri-amped stereo system using no passive crossovers, but an electronic filtering unit myself.
Exactly this could be an extension topic to subwoofer. And, active xover gives the user, who shall be well versed at this, full control of sound within the capabilities of the amps, the speakers and every ancillary in the system.
I have one of those big, loud, bassy systems which is 3 way actively crossed over and has 5 amplifiers (1 on mid-high, 2 on midbass, and 2 on sub bass :-P
I firmly believe the only reason active setups are rare through dealers etc is because they are more complicated. They make upgrading, and hence more sales, harder. Therefore hifi dealers and hifi manufacturers don’t see the benefit for themselves. It has nothing to do with sound quality optimisation. Passives are inherently inferior.
Bruno Putzeys -- the genius designer behind the Hypex Class D technology that has pretty much made conventional audio power amps obsolete -- has come to the conclusion that the only way to advance the state of the hi-fi art is to integrate power amps and speakers, the best modern amps now being about as distortion-free and load-tolerant as they need to be in the context of human hearing and engineered "synergy" between amps and loudspeakers being the next logical technical frontier to be explored.
Been tri-amped since 1982 and never listened back. Later this year, I should have new 4-way crossovers that use 4096+ pole FIR filters. The intent is to reduce phase effects. If it doesn't sound better, I'll fall back to my analog filters.
Α good solution would be to have a "crossover bypass" switch for the mid and highs, so people can use their own active crossovers and separate power amps for these two ways. (With a big warning sticker on it, just to avoid the possibility that someone who does not know what they're doing flips the switch, and then connects the full-range output of an amp to the...defenseless tweeter input!)
im not a fan of powered speakers, but i think most people will enjoy active crossover we can use between preamps and power amps. dual stereo power amps will provide four separate channels to a set of 2 way bookshelf speaker for example, an active crossover would work great with that, then you get all the benefits of hooking up an amps straight to the drivers. then you only need one piece of gear that is the active crossover, you buy that once then download the crossover as you change speakers. speakers can then be made with only box and drivers. win win situation here, you get to keep all the separates and none of the problem with the plate amps. amp matching to drivers is only drawback.
Years ago i had pairs of Sonus Faber Electra Amators and Minina Amators , both of which used a simple resistor(?) between the tweeter (best soft dome in the world) and woofer, first order cross, and that setup played out nearly like an ACTIVE setup, with exxellent control over inte drivers with a strong power amplifier, and thus correspondingly great dynamic ouput! Don't know why more speaker designers don't use this approach. DEFINITELY more dynamic life than a typical passive 2 way competitor.
The reason why people and factories have not used so much active crossover is that you have to use an equalizer in addition. DSP box. which in many cases is more expensive than what a passive crossover is. Passive crossover does not provide noise that an active crossover can provide. A passive crossover can provide just as good sound as active crossover can provide if it is made correctly. A place you should use active crossover is on the sub bass since passive crossover at such low crossover frequencies creates unwanted things
Actually it is not the electrolytics that cause ringing. It is a high Q (read >0.707) LC filters that cause ringing. Electrolytics are unwished for different reasons though.
I am a big fan of three way active systems, but I suspect you would not be able to sell any of them given their complexity, hence the market is just not there. But if anyone could build such a system, you could, given your company's experience with building amplifiers.
Powered speakers are a great example of factory speakers as low grade consumer market products. A true active speaker system uses all external components including quality amplifiers, each selected for the driver it will power, and each with a sufficient power supply. You simply cannot stuff all that inside a speaker box.
@@SpeakerBuilder Like the Noble One bookshelf speakers at $AU26,999 ($US18,940)? Might be "low grade consumer market product" where you live, but not in these parts. I'm seriously thinking about purchasing a pair of these: vaf.com.au/collections/signature-speakers/products/signature-i-93mkii-active
Classic consumer grade product stuff, designed for folks who have no idea how speaker systems work. No way you stuff adequate power supplies for the various amplifiers inside those boxes. Are they truly three way active, or active/passive? Who knows. And for all that money, I hope the buyer has a dedicated listening room where absorbtive and defractive panels can be utilized. Otherwise one has wasted tens of thousands on a system that cannot be set up for proper balanced response. Then there is the issue of not being able to locate the bass drivers separately from the mids and tweeters. You would really need to add sub woofers to this system for this reason, as well as because the bass drivers are much too small for adequate low end response. Then there is the problem of poor bass alignment (likely seals, or small vented, poor either way). Then there is the problem of parallel wall speaker boxes with very short distances between side walls. I could go on and on.
@@SpeakerBuilder "for folks who have no idea how speaker systems work..." Apart from individual owners, VAF loudspeakers have been used by The Conservatory of Music (Elder Hall), Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Microsoft, School of Audio Engineering, Telstra, Kojo Productions, Parliament House Canberra, the worlds largest electro-acoustic system at the time at Adelaide Festival Centre and many other significant projects and clients. Why, oh why didn't they ask the world's leading expert on such things, Speaker Builder, first? "I could go on and on." People with tickets on themselves usually do...
There's absolutely no reason to design a passive crossover, the cost and complexity of a properly designed one will be too high, and it would still be full of compromises. An active, Linkwitz-Riley electronic crossover can be built with cheap op-amps, resistors and capacitors, does not require complex calculations and can be adapted to fit any configuration.
actually there's a few reasons to choose passive crossover over active. 1. the total cost of the system. an actively crossed over system needs additional amplifiers which contributes to the cost of the system. surely manufacturers will almost always choose the most cost-effective way to make money. that's why there are very few actively crossed over systems on the market (except computer speaker sets, those are plentiful). 2. ease of use. a big factor to consider when you're a manufacturer. when people consider buying something, they (generally) want it to be easy to use. and passive crossover is just for that. one pair of cables per speaker and a volume control... easy. if anyone can use it, then anyone can possibly be a customer. 3. simplicity (in terms of DIY) when you don't care much about the quality and just want something for casual listening at low volumes, passive crossover is not much of a bad idea. but at the end of the day, it's mostly about manufacturers trying to make as much money as possible. quality is just not their concern, money is.
@Budget Audiophile A passive crossover is more than resistors and capacitors; there are (usually) inductors as well. Only resistors can be made variable in real-world passive crossovers. Varying inductance and capacitance requires a lot of swapping and that is time-consuming. As well, passive crossovers waste amplifier power converting signal to heat. They reduce the amount of control the amplifier can exert over the driver. Something a passive crossover cannot do is alter the time alignment between drivers. Lastly, drivers' physical characteristics change over time. An active crossover can be easily adjusted to cope with this; passive not so much. My now deceased best friend had a pair of KEF Concertos. He purchased a Radford crossover for them and that made a marked difference to the quality of the sound. If we'd had active crossovers back then like we have today, it would have been a simple matter of adjustment in software rather than a far from trivial expense. Today you can still purchase KEF Concertos 2nd hand, but good luck purchasing a replacement crossover if they still have the original KEF crossover design. IOW the issues are not all that "simple".
I have a 4 chhanel DIY monoblock and full active 3 way with Behringer Active Loudspesker management system. What a superb sounding system. Now next project 8 chhanel Monoblock and 5.1 and 4 way stereo. I had heard the Kii three loved but has less power my system beats that and with way much power. Full project done in 4K $. More configurable open power headroom way more than Kii. I come from India
I have two hi-end hifi dealer friends that have lent me stacks of amps and passive speakers over the years which enabled me to cherry pick to put a fine system together. However, a few months back I tried a pair of active ATC SCM50 speakers. I sold all my gear and bought them and have never looked back. It has been a fun journey getting here trying all sorts of gear so the only negative I can provide against actives is the lack of choice in driving equipment. However, if you just want the best sound, just add a preamp and your done.
A good passive crossover in a speaker is a crossover and an equalizer in one but only that it is passive and is made of coil capacitor and resistor. An active crossover is usually without equalizer and then you do not lower frequencies that are too much in a speaker that you do with a good passive crossover.
I wonder how the AN-3's would sound if you decided to make the mid/tweeter active, and the mid-bass/woofer left up to the customer for amplification?? Just a thought.....LOL!
Blade Style Amps....Mix & Match.....Modular. PS Audio is taking the "Apple Approach" where you're STUCK with what you buy!!!....want more storage for your Apple iPhone??? SORRY!!!...You're SOL!!!...gotta buy a more expensive iPhone!!!....can't put a MicroSD card in it to UPGRADE!!!
I think active speakers are the best thing to happen to the PA industry and I get there are differences in the 2 but the idea is that the amp matches the speaker, and I bet if you did that it would be a big hit. Especially for just getting into it.
Every coil and capacitors and long cables stores energy. The more you have and and larger on this the more muddy sound you get and lesser damping factor. You will not have better sound than speaker units directly connected to the amps. Some say but the amps in active speakers are in a lesser quality than external amplifiers. Well they DONT have to be, since there no passive filters draining the powers and transparency.
Paul, I realize that the AN series of speakers are complex and take time and engineering to produce...but the Sprout speakers are fairly conventional in design, can you pop those puppies out first? Give the world a taste of this new PSA dimension?
Build The mid and top with an external passive crossover On all speakers make a Active Cross Over For those with the money Or Those that Might up grade later Easy and something else to sell Active always sounds special to Me
Hey Paul. Have you considered the possibility of making a fully active speaker where the target market prefers active designs? Studio monitors. Is the market too small for you to consider manufacure?. As far as I can tell the home studio market is exploding. Event ATC Adam & many others still despite current circumstance seem to be doing ok Just thinking aloud for a way for you to explore the intellectual and practical optimum for speaker design and make a profit in doing so. I think audiophiles need to educate themselves Or have your cake and eat it too.
It's nice to preserve the market for your big-power amps as long as possible. However using a PS 300 watt/channel amp to drive a midrange and tweeter is unnecessary. So 300 watt requirements are probably reduced to about 50 watts or so in a home. Bi-amping and tri-amping (and multi-amping) within the speaker is the eventual solution. So much more can be done, so much more accurately with signal-level audio rather than speaker-level, it's obvious. Servoing the subwoofer and woofer is existing art. Adding feedback loops to the midrange and tweeter amp/drivers is established art. Precise matching of speaker phase angles to match other system drivers is virtually impractical with high level passive elements, but straightforward with signal-level active circuitry.The outcome eventually will be fully powered speakers with an in-built driver amp for each section. And, probably, a new class of pre and control amps to feed them. Voila! A new market for PS. Balanced connections to the speaker signal inputs will become practice. I don't know many audiophiles, save the manufacturers, who will want to buy and own two 300 watt or so amplifiers to drive a powered or mostly-powered speaker. But I understand that, when you are in the amplifier business, it's unwise to eliminate the need for separate amps. During the transition, I would really like PS to develop a solid-state preamp/controller that SOUNDS like a tube amp, without all the heat, voltage, tube change, hiss, and microphonics of real tubes. Get busy!
This technology is already available. I just had a Legacy Audio Aeris speaker system installed, custom configured for full active operation. This has two 325 watt Legacy Audio mono block power amps and two 500 watt mono block power amps in the speaker cabinet itself. The Legacy Audio Wavelet includes DAC, room-correction, active cross-overs. There are 3 balanced XLR cables from the Wavelet to each speaker. What's funny is that the Wavelet doesn't really have a DAC to process the incoming signal from the digital source in the usual sense. Since all the processing (room correction and active crossover) happens in the digital domain, the digital input (via SPDIF) goes straight into the room correction system. There are essentially 4 DACs in the system, all outputs from the active cross-overs. For the Aeris in full active mode, only 3 of the DACs are used. The Legacy Audio Valors already come in full active configuration, and they use all 4 DACs. I have a record player which is sending in analog. In this case, there is a ADC to get the signal into the digital domain for processing. However, this was a custom system. The speaker designer told me that I was the first to get amps within the Aeris. There was another system he put together which was configured for multiple external amps to power the speakers. I was quite happy with the way the Legacy Audio mono blocks sounded as an external amp, and so it made sense to move them into the speaker cabinet itself.
I've just finished watching your vid on the BBC dip. Here's what I was wondering: do mid-range speakers help in keeping tweeters and woofers farther from extreme frequencies or does introducing another crossover lead to more problems in the making?
Still the Question Remains....Why not make a Blade Amplifier System, much like a Blade Server that you can slot specific amps in with programmable crossover modules???....Only Makes Sense!!!
Why does an active speaker have to use specific amps? This is answered as if there are only two clear-cut choices -- when it is not. The speaker could have the speakers wired to the back . . . each with their own terminals. The electronic crossover that provides the separation between the drivers is put in its own box; hence, the amps can still be a matter of personal choice. The way this is presented is that the manufacture's only choice is to have the amps built-into the speaker . . . sorry, not so! In fact, I'll go you one better. I bought an electronic crossover, and I already have my subs actively powered and controlled . . . with the main speakers being still passive, but controlled by the electronic crossover BEFORE the amps; however, owing to the design and ease of working with the crossovers -- I am converting the speakers also to active with a total of four (4) amps . . . my choice.
What I heard from him is that a well implemented fully active speaker is the top of the heap. If that's true does that make most of us fools for doing it the other way? Do we just want to accumulate gear. I have to admit when I hear some full active speakers they sound great. Kii comes to mind.
The future of wireless speakers will make fully active speakers with active crossovers become more common. At least that is what I believe. But you can have a passive crossover in an active speaker though.
@@oysteinsoreide4323 The last bit is where you're technically wrong. There is a clear distinction between the terms 'active speakers' and 'powered speakers'. What you described is actually a powered speaker, _not_ an active one (this is formal language btw).
@@Beos_Valrah people are using the terms interchangably. But I look at speakers that have only active crossovers and one power amp per driver to be fully active.
This is more a matter of perception than any "objective reality". Consider the following: Rotel A12 integrated amp, RB1552 power amp, Dayton DSP-408 and VAF DC7 Mk 3 speakers versus Rotel RA 1572 integrated amp and KEF Q950 speakers. Both systems cost ~$AU5,000 ($US3,500) here in Australia. Both should sound quite similar with the active system having a slight edge due to the DSP allowing room correction. Setting up the active system could be seen as a chore, or one of the enjoyable aspects of being an audiophile depending on one's attitude towards such things. I'm quite certain that I could live with either and that both systems represent excellent value for money. For most musical content neither system demands a sub-woofer.
i just call them powered speakers if they have all drivers powered by plate amps, then some has individual amps allowing for active crossovers. ind if this is going to be the future, then make them silent, no hiss problem like we got now, and finally we can have sealed boxes since we can easily add eq. and DO NOT add wireless crap in it, i am not paying extra for that. then comes auto on off problem just remove it, ir works only for 1% of people, rest of us have to fix it and it can be difficult if there is not switch to do it.
yes it is different because it has two different names and that means different things, the are similarities. i have not used the word active speaker much, don't make much sense since what is active(active mean on)? powered speaker clearly has meaning and you know it means it has power inside.
@@sudd3660 a powered speaker is when the amplification is internal (inside the speaker box). For example many subs would be considered "powered" but that doesn't mean they are active. A typical powered sub woofer normally have a passive crossover network sitting between the plate amp bolted to the back of the sub and the driver, but active is when the passive components of the crossover are replaced by electronic components to do perform a similar task (not the same but similar). In an active speaker each driver has it's own amplification circuit, whereas a typical passive speaker will only have one amplification channel per speaker. Also in an active system the active crossover sits in front of the amplifier, whereas a passive system the crossover sits between the amplifier and the drivers. The greatest benefit of an active system is that you can change the crossover points via software without pulling the speaker apart. The downside is they are very expensive, my active xover system cost about $6,500, although you can buy much cheaper ones.
@@sudd3660 yes and no... there kind of is a benefit to powered speakers, by putting the amp into the speaker you can amplify the woofer separately, which allows you to power the woofer with a more powerful amp for bass, that then allows the main channel amp to work across a narrower band which may lead to less distortion. However you could just as easily do the exact same thing externally. Active takes it one step further by individually amplifying ever driver in the speaker. Only real difference is an active crossover is far superior to a passive crossover, and it sits in front of the amp not behind it.
An active crossover is not an amplifier there two separate things is connected between the head unit and the amplifier You can buy an active crossover unit in a separate box uses a standard amplifier a DSP ASP is an active crossover but got nothing to do with amplification. Not sure where you're coming from. Have I missed something. Plus you don't need to have a capacitor in series for roloff you can still have low pass high pass filter in parallel and resistors. Try this Paul make you inductors out of silver wire especially if there in series you won't suffer any losses
It's either after power amplification or before. Whether you are using it digitally or after preamp or like those active speakers doesn't really matter.
An active filter has a signal amplifer in it, by definition. And since you are working with low power signals you will need to amplify each filtered section with a power amplifier. Yes you can buy a seperate active crossover box (though it is better to design it yourself if you're this far into it anyway) and use different amplifiers. Though you would still need to amplify each filtered section seperately. An analog signal processor is just a different name for a combination audio effects (usually filters). In speakers this generally means a couple of active filters. Digital signal processing is a bit more advanced, but the idea stays the same. You need to keep every section seperated, but now you are in the digital domain. To keep things seperated you also need seperate DAC's. As for the silver inductors, there more reasons than just ESR to use a capacitor instead of an inductor. Inductors tend to be large, expensive, they create magnetic fields, can have significant nonlinear behaviour.
@@johnyang799 yes but that's not what Paul was talking about he was talking about individual amplifiers being tuned for each driver what isn't an active crossover as such
jokrmidnite, one of my first pair of true HiFi speakers were Infinity 1001A’s. They were a two way design with two simple cone tweeters, one in the front baffle board and the other was out of phase on the rear surface and a 10” treated (tar?) cone woofer / mid bass driver. The enclosure was a largish bookshelf size wood veneered box in a transmission line configuration to band pass the lowest frequencies. There were no discrete crossover components of any kind. The tweeters were designed to roll off down to the woofer and the woofer’s upper frequencies rolled off into the two tweeters. Looking back, I regret selling those pretty amazing sounding and easy to drive speakers.
Well, to do it all according to measurements would also be a wrong approach in my opinion. In the end is still has to sound good! Although measurements do give a really good starting point, I'll admit that!
@@hidjedewitje yeah? and how long do you think it will keep sounding good? this is one of the reasons most audiophiles keep walking in circles, they trust their perception more than measurements. they think designing a speaker is an art (no, it's not, it's science) sounding fantastic at first glance then get tired of it over time then need an upgrade and the cycle repeats... figures.
@@ped-away-g1396 Don't get me wrong. I think loudspeaker design should involve lot's of science, but there is also a bit of pseudo science. Because there are always problems in engineering. It's the engineers job to make a good compromise. With passive loudspeakers you can't get perfect phase and frequency response due to the behaviour of caps and inductors. How does science make a compromise within these two things? Sure you can go digital and get perfect phase and frequency response, but then you will get ringing (especially off axis), how does science decide what solution is the best? I understand your point. Though, there's a lot of bullshit reasoning within audio that could easily be solved with science, but there's also points that are a matter of preference. The reason I call it a pseudo science is that it's isn't truly 100% factual, but it's not an art either. For instance, odd harmonics sound a lot more damaging that the 2nd harmonic. Why? because 2nd harmonics are musically related and odd harmonics aren't. Though is the origin of musical notes science based? I don't know, I never went that deep.
Seems to me the question was about active vs passive and not about amps. To even think of matching an amp to s driver is not even s good idea. All your doing is building filters in the amp.
I sure would like to know what the "exception" is, because any time you put a coil of wire between an amp and a speaker, you're killing/choking the efficient transfer of energy. Look at car audio...been using active crossovers since the 80's....smaller amps for tweeters and mids, larger amps for subs with stiffening caps for amps in the FARAD range!!!...go figure...you'd think PS Audio would #GETACLUE !!!
Talk talk talk is all we get.You want all this stuff to happen but talk talk talk. Sounds like you bit off more than you and the company can chew. Understand your a small company, but talk talk talk.
here's how to get Paul to talk about ur topic......th-cam.com/users/redirect?v=K6K7Sj-PE6I&redir_token=vSg8cGAX_ssJAKJmi4n-fL-4hiR8MTU1NzM0MzcwMkAxNTU3MjU3MzAy&event=video_description&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.psaudio.com%2Fask-paul%2F. Not from You Tube comments. Cheers.
And with a fully active speaker, you could update the crossovers, just like you update the firmware in the DirectStream DAC. If the AN series is supposed to be the best speaker you know how to make, and you admit that fully active is better, what are you waiting for? Do it! (Perhaps for the AN-2 and AN-1)
I made a conscious decision to go active a couple of years ago. An important consideration was ease of use. Not only the amp but the fact is in the speaker so all I need is a phone, tablet or computer to initiate music. There seems to have been a determination in some quarters to deter buyers from going down this route purely because of the lost sales of other boxes and cables.
Active tends to mean class d. Which rules out decent analog. Lack of flexibility is a problem also. Try to hook up more than your low fidelity fone. Basically you are limited to your cheap Chinese speaker, your class d amp which digitizes everything that goes thru it, and limited adjusting of the sound. Great for casual listening. Sucks for serious musical enjoyment.
I hear a noticeable increase in sound quality when using an active crossover compared to a passive setup using the same set of speakers. I rank this as the one thing that can improve a system the most. For speaker builders it's a method to able to listen to a driver at different frequencies to pick the best sounding crossover frequency for that particular driver. Doing that by tweaking a passive crossover takes a lot of time, with an electronic crossover, you can turn a dial and instantly hear how a change in frequency sounds immediately. I am definitely in the "active" camp on this topic.
I agree! Everything is a matter of choice, resources, and patience to execute. As has been pointed out, there are many good passive systems out there . . . but if a lot of the distortion is with the crossover by nature of the beast, it would be common sense to come to the conclusion that by eliminating the problem inherent in the passive parts, the sound would be purer and much less distorted. After all, not everyone can afford the highest-priced parts and pay upwards of a thousand dollars on some of the large capacitors that would be needed in these complex designs. In a perfect world, each component would provide the best possible sound, but this is not and never will be a perfect world. -- John 3:16
"The only excuse for passive crossovers is their low cost. Their behavior changes with the signal level dependent dynamics of the drivers. They block the power amplifier from taking maximum control over the voice coil motion. They are a waste of time, if accuracy of reproduction is the goal." - Siegfried Linkwitz
Absolutely! I run a multi-amp, multi-way set up, and the effortlessness and resolution are simply beyond comparison.Once I fired it up for the first time, many years ago, I got hooked within 5 minutes...
I grant you that amps, depending on which are chosen, can be quite expensive; however, have you checked out the cost of passive crossover parts lately? I'm not talking about cheap parts if you are after a quality passive design -- not to mention the testing equipment needed to precisely produce a good one . . . that is . . . unless you have the resources to buy lots of crossover parts in order to do the tuning of the crossover by ear. The difficulty of doing either is basically how well-versed one is on the crossover theory and has the applicable knowledge to execute such a feat either passively or actively.
@@russmaleartist Software really helps with this. You measure your components in your box and import the files to software to model crossovers. The math can be incredibly complex. Software can get you extremely close to your goals and safe a ton of time.
With Passive Inductors, you can have saturation issues especially iron or laminated cores, and also back EMF issues.
The superiority of an active crossover and active equalization with multiple amplifiers is so great that you could duplicate the sound of any speaker system you could buy if you can get the drivers at a small fraction of the cost. What's more if you are a DIYer or even a professional speaker designer you can try out a very large number of combinations quickly and easily even if you intend to build a passive equivalent. That's how KLH Model 6 was voiced.
One huge advantage of this method over passive is that as the speaker voice coil gets hotter the impedance changes and with it so does the behavior of the filter. With an active crossover it doesn't matter.
You will still need a series capacitor to protect midrange and tweeters from a low frequency thump regardless of the cause. Such a thump could destroy the most expensive tweeter in a fraction of a second.
I use non-polar electrolytic caps to protect my tweeters. I've been looking into some of the speaker protection circuits that are now available.
@The Chilean Audiophile If anything goes wrong with your amplifier, it can pass DC to your tweeter coil. Then it becomes a heater for a short time. From what I can tell, JBL factory replacement diaphragm/coils for 075 were about $90 before they became unavailable. A faulty connection can also send a "pop" to the tweeter, which can cause the coil to open. Those are nice tweeters! I'm hoping to get a pair of 2405s.
Active > Passive !!!
Building a 8 x LM3886 amp active system right now.
I hope I have enough energy to complete this project.
Very high slew rate op amps rated at 50 volts per microsecond or better tend to sound like well designed / built vacuum tube preamplifier.
Active speakers are getting more popular. A lot of people don’t want, or have space for, the big rack of gear. I have Meridian’s and love them.
There a huge difference between an actice speaker and an active crossover. An active crossover can be located in the amplifier for example Linn. Therefore the speaker is just a cabinet with drivers and no crossover. An active speaker has and built in ( usually class D) amplifier such as desktop PC speakers and is plugged into a power supply.
Yeah that’s not what this video is about Rick. This is about crossovers
Somehow I get the feeling that active crossovers are being mixed up with active speakers, both in the video and in the comments?!
Karel Smouter For sure!!
With an active crossover you can still have separate amplifiers and loudspeakers (with connectors for each driver). It gives even more possibilities to mix and match: loudspeakers, amplifiers, DACs, EQ/DSP hardware, filter algorithms, filter settings. I think that is the way to do it, and that is the way I did it.
I think the reason is that, ideally, the manufacturer would like to have designed and/or selected or the components of the active chain, so putting them all in the box makes it easier! Of course they could just suggest which components to use and leave it up to the user. Personally, I have a mix-and-match active system.
Active. The end.
Big fan of Active crossovers with dedicated amps per driver with independent E/Q's & time alignment for room correction...YES PLEASE!
I do see where you are coming from though Paul, and no doubt the best speakers in the world are currently Passive...mad respect for doing it the hard way!
Being that you are an amp company and soon to be a speaker company too...it actually makes sense to go full active DSP in the future, consumers can set up with a quick mic auto tune for the room, and then on a smart phone run some preset programs for warm and musical, flat and analytical or full custom...even per song auto tag prompting custom programming?
I would love to see an AI controller that can recognize songs and auto E/Q them as preferred to ones tastes.
I remember seeing some higher end speaker systems that had strapable input terminals. The user could separate the woofer from the mid/tweeter and bi-amp. An active crossover would be inserted before the two amps needed for the bi-amping thus directing the proper frequencies to the drivers. But, I think the speaker still is using internal passive crossovers if not mistaken. I believe having a separate amp for woofer, mid, and highs would achieve the best cleanest sound because each amp is working with a limited range of frequencies, thus maybe reducing intermod distortion. If I had some expendable income, I'd build a tri-amped stereo system using no passive crossovers, but an electronic filtering unit myself.
www.musiciansfriend.com/search?N=500034&Ntt=crossover&sB=r&typeAheadRedirect=true&typeAheadSuggestion=true
www.parts-express.com/cat/active-crossovers/581
Exactly this could be an extension topic to subwoofer. And, active xover gives the user, who shall be well versed at this, full control of sound within the capabilities of the amps, the speakers and every ancillary in the system.
I have one of those big, loud, bassy systems which is 3 way actively crossed over and has 5 amplifiers (1 on mid-high, 2 on midbass, and 2 on sub bass :-P
I firmly believe the only reason active setups are rare through dealers etc is because they are more complicated. They make upgrading, and hence more sales, harder. Therefore hifi dealers and hifi manufacturers don’t see the benefit for themselves. It has nothing to do with sound quality optimisation. Passives are inherently inferior.
Bruno Putzeys -- the genius designer behind the Hypex Class D technology that has pretty much made conventional audio power amps obsolete -- has come to the conclusion that the only way to advance the state of the hi-fi art is to integrate power amps and speakers, the best modern amps now being about as distortion-free and load-tolerant as they need to be in the context of human hearing and engineered "synergy" between amps and loudspeakers being the next logical technical frontier to be explored.
Been tri-amped since 1982 and never listened back. Later this year, I should have new 4-way crossovers that use 4096+ pole FIR filters. The intent is to reduce phase effects. If it doesn't sound better, I'll fall back to my analog filters.
Α good solution would be to have a "crossover bypass" switch for the mid and highs, so people can use their own active crossovers and separate power amps for these two ways. (With a big warning sticker on it, just to avoid the possibility that someone who does not know what they're doing flips the switch, and then connects the full-range output of an amp to the...defenseless tweeter input!)
im not a fan of powered speakers, but i think most people will enjoy active crossover we can use between preamps and power amps. dual stereo power amps will provide four separate channels to a set of 2 way bookshelf speaker for example, an active crossover would work great with that, then you get all the benefits of hooking up an amps straight to the drivers.
then you only need one piece of gear that is the active crossover, you buy that once then download the crossover as you change speakers. speakers can then be made with only box and drivers. win win situation here, you get to keep all the separates and none of the problem with the plate amps.
amp matching to drivers is only drawback.
Years ago i had pairs of Sonus Faber Electra Amators and Minina Amators , both of which used a simple resistor(?) between the tweeter (best soft dome in the world) and woofer, first order cross, and that setup played out nearly like an ACTIVE setup, with exxellent control over inte drivers with a strong power amplifier, and thus correspondingly great dynamic ouput! Don't know why more speaker designers don't use this approach. DEFINITELY more dynamic life than a typical passive 2 way competitor.
The reason why people and factories have not used so much active crossover is that you have to use an equalizer in addition. DSP box. which in many cases is more expensive than what a passive crossover is.
Passive crossover does not provide noise that an active crossover can provide.
A passive crossover can provide just as good sound as active crossover can provide if it is made correctly.
A place you should use active crossover is on the sub bass since passive crossover at such low crossover frequencies creates unwanted things
Active can be made VERY specific!!!....passive electrolytics can sometimes cause "ringing" in tweeters!!!
Actually it is not the electrolytics that cause ringing. It is a high Q (read >0.707) LC filters that cause ringing.
Electrolytics are unwished for different reasons though.
I am a big fan of three way active systems, but I suspect you would not be able to sell any of them given their complexity, hence the market is just not there. But if anyone could build such a system, you could, given your company's experience with building amplifiers.
well there's the Elac Navis . 3 way, and powered.
Powered speakers are a great example of factory speakers as low grade consumer market products. A true active speaker system uses all external components including quality amplifiers, each selected for the driver it will power, and each with a sufficient power supply. You simply cannot stuff all that inside a speaker box.
@@SpeakerBuilder Like the Noble One bookshelf speakers at $AU26,999 ($US18,940)? Might be "low grade consumer market product" where you live, but not in these parts.
I'm seriously thinking about purchasing a pair of these:
vaf.com.au/collections/signature-speakers/products/signature-i-93mkii-active
Classic consumer grade product stuff, designed for folks who have no idea how speaker systems work. No way you stuff adequate power supplies for the various amplifiers inside those boxes. Are they truly three way active, or active/passive? Who knows. And for all that money, I hope the buyer has a dedicated listening room where absorbtive and defractive panels can be utilized. Otherwise one has wasted tens of thousands on a system that cannot be set up for proper balanced response. Then there is the issue of not being able to locate the bass drivers separately from the mids and tweeters. You would really need to add sub woofers to this system for this reason, as well as because the bass drivers are much too small for adequate low end response. Then there is the problem of poor bass alignment (likely seals, or small vented, poor either way). Then there is the problem of parallel wall speaker boxes with very short distances between side walls. I could go on and on.
@@SpeakerBuilder "for folks who have no idea how speaker systems work..."
Apart from individual owners, VAF loudspeakers have been used by The Conservatory of Music (Elder Hall), Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Microsoft, School of Audio Engineering, Telstra, Kojo Productions, Parliament House Canberra, the worlds largest electro-acoustic system at the time at Adelaide Festival Centre and many other significant projects and clients. Why, oh why didn't they ask the world's leading expert on such things, Speaker Builder, first?
"I could go on and on."
People with tickets on themselves usually do...
There's absolutely no reason to design a passive crossover, the cost and complexity of a properly designed one will be too high, and it would still be full of compromises. An active, Linkwitz-Riley electronic crossover can be built with cheap op-amps, resistors and capacitors, does not require complex calculations and can be adapted to fit any configuration.
actually there's a few reasons to choose passive crossover over active.
1. the total cost of the system. an actively crossed over system needs additional amplifiers which contributes to the cost of the system. surely manufacturers will almost always choose the most cost-effective way to make money. that's why there are very few actively crossed over systems on the market (except computer speaker sets, those are plentiful).
2. ease of use. a big factor to consider when you're a manufacturer. when people consider buying something, they (generally) want it to be easy to use. and passive crossover is just for that. one pair of cables per speaker and a volume control... easy. if anyone can use it, then anyone can possibly be a customer.
3. simplicity (in terms of DIY) when you don't care much about the quality and just want something for casual listening at low volumes, passive crossover is not much of a bad idea.
but at the end of the day, it's mostly about manufacturers trying to make as much money as possible. quality is just not their concern, money is.
@Budget Audiophile A passive crossover is more than resistors and capacitors; there are (usually) inductors as well. Only resistors can be made variable in real-world passive crossovers. Varying inductance and capacitance requires a lot of swapping and that is time-consuming. As well, passive crossovers waste amplifier power converting signal to heat. They reduce the amount of control the amplifier can exert over the driver. Something a passive crossover cannot do is alter the time alignment between drivers. Lastly, drivers' physical characteristics change over time. An active crossover can be easily adjusted to cope with this; passive not so much.
My now deceased best friend had a pair of KEF Concertos. He purchased a Radford crossover for them and that made a marked difference to the quality of the sound. If we'd had active crossovers back then like we have today, it would have been a simple matter of adjustment in software rather than a far from trivial expense. Today you can still purchase KEF Concertos 2nd hand, but good luck purchasing a replacement crossover if they still have the original KEF crossover design.
IOW the issues are not all that "simple".
I have a 4 chhanel DIY monoblock and full active 3 way with Behringer Active Loudspesker management system. What a superb sounding system. Now next project 8 chhanel Monoblock and 5.1 and 4 way stereo. I had heard the Kii three loved but has less power my system beats that and with way much power. Full project done in 4K $. More configurable open power headroom way more than Kii. I come from India
I have two hi-end hifi dealer friends that have lent me stacks of amps and passive speakers over the years which enabled me to cherry pick to put a fine system together. However, a few months back I tried a pair of active ATC SCM50 speakers. I sold all my gear and bought them and have never looked back. It has been a fun journey getting here trying all sorts of gear so the only negative I can provide against actives is the lack of choice in driving equipment. However, if you just want the best sound, just add a preamp and your done.
A good passive crossover in a speaker is a crossover and an equalizer in one but only that it is passive and is made of coil capacitor and resistor. An active crossover is usually without equalizer and then you do not lower frequencies that are too much in a speaker that you do with a good passive crossover.
I wonder how the AN-3's would sound if you decided to make the mid/tweeter active, and the mid-bass/woofer left up to the customer for amplification?? Just a thought.....LOL!
Eventually speakers will have everything built in, they will have perfect symmetry. And the sooner the better i say. Come on Harbeth get them made.
Blade Style Amps....Mix & Match.....Modular. PS Audio is taking the "Apple Approach" where you're STUCK with what you buy!!!....want more storage for your Apple iPhone??? SORRY!!!...You're SOL!!!...gotta buy a more expensive iPhone!!!....can't put a MicroSD card in it to UPGRADE!!!
I think active speakers are the best thing to happen to the PA industry and I get there are differences in the 2 but the idea is that the amp matches the speaker, and I bet if you did that it would be a big hit. Especially for just getting into it.
...add in the Zobel Network for the Impedance Rise with Frequency Rise AT THE SPEAKER DRIVER ITSELF!!!
Seems the trend is for Active, audio is changing and I think a good active would outsell a good passive, but I am only guessing.
The "trend" for actives has been here since 70's
Every coil and capacitors and long cables stores energy.
The more you have and and larger on this the more muddy sound you get and lesser damping factor.
You will not have better sound than speaker units directly connected to the amps.
Some say but the amps in active speakers are in a lesser quality than external amplifiers.
Well they DONT have to be, since there no passive filters draining the powers and transparency.
Planars and ribbons are "typically easy loads"??? As I recall, the Apogee ribbon speakers presented a notoriously difficult load for amplifiers.
most ¬= all
looking forward to it ...thanks Paul
A Spout active speaker could be a sweet spot. around $1.5K mark
Interesting
Paul, I realize that the AN series of speakers are complex and take time and engineering to produce...but the Sprout speakers are fairly conventional in design, can you pop those puppies out first? Give the world a taste of this new PSA dimension?
Build The mid and top with an external passive crossover On all speakers make a Active Cross Over For those with the money Or Those that Might up grade later Easy and something else to sell Active always sounds special to Me
Hey Paul. Have you considered the possibility of making a fully active speaker where the target market prefers active designs? Studio monitors.
Is the market too small for you to consider manufacure?. As far as I can tell the home studio market is exploding. Event ATC Adam & many others still despite current circumstance seem to be doing ok
Just thinking aloud for a way for you to explore the intellectual and practical optimum for speaker design and make a profit in doing so. I think audiophiles need to educate themselves
Or have your cake and eat it too.
It's nice to preserve the market for your big-power amps as long as possible. However using a PS 300 watt/channel amp to drive a midrange and tweeter is unnecessary. So 300 watt requirements are probably reduced to about 50 watts or so in a home.
Bi-amping and tri-amping (and multi-amping) within the speaker is the eventual solution. So much more can be done, so much more accurately with signal-level audio rather than speaker-level, it's obvious. Servoing the subwoofer and woofer is existing art. Adding feedback loops to the midrange and tweeter amp/drivers is established art. Precise matching of speaker phase angles to match other system drivers is virtually impractical with high level passive elements, but straightforward with signal-level active circuitry.The outcome eventually will be fully powered speakers with an in-built driver amp for each section. And, probably, a new class of pre and control amps to feed them. Voila! A new market for PS. Balanced connections to the speaker signal inputs will become practice.
I don't know many audiophiles, save the manufacturers, who will want to buy and own two 300 watt or so amplifiers to drive a powered or mostly-powered speaker. But I understand that, when you are in the amplifier business, it's unwise to eliminate the need for separate amps.
During the transition, I would really like PS to develop a solid-state preamp/controller that SOUNDS like a tube amp, without all the heat, voltage, tube change, hiss, and microphonics of real tubes. Get busy!
This technology is already available. I just had a Legacy Audio Aeris speaker system installed, custom configured for full active operation. This has two 325 watt Legacy Audio mono block power amps and two 500 watt mono block power amps in the speaker cabinet itself. The Legacy Audio Wavelet includes DAC, room-correction, active cross-overs. There are 3 balanced XLR cables from the Wavelet to each speaker. What's funny is that the Wavelet doesn't really have a DAC to process the incoming signal from the digital source in the usual sense. Since all the processing (room correction and active crossover) happens in the digital domain, the digital input (via SPDIF) goes straight into the room correction system. There are essentially 4 DACs in the system, all outputs from the active cross-overs. For the Aeris in full active mode, only 3 of the DACs are used. The Legacy Audio Valors already come in full active configuration, and they use all 4 DACs. I have a record player which is sending in analog. In this case, there is a ADC to get the signal into the digital domain for processing. However, this was a custom system. The speaker designer told me that I was the first to get amps within the Aeris. There was another system he put together which was configured for multiple external amps to power the speakers. I was quite happy with the way the Legacy Audio mono blocks sounded as an external amp, and so it made sense to move them into the speaker cabinet itself.
I've just finished watching your vid on the BBC dip. Here's what I was wondering: do mid-range speakers help in keeping tweeters and woofers farther from extreme frequencies or does introducing another crossover lead to more problems in the making?
For me, a well-designed multi-way is much better than a 2-way. But, emphasis on the "well-designed"! :)
Still the Question Remains....Why not make a Blade Amplifier System, much like a Blade Server that you can slot specific amps in with programmable crossover modules???....Only Makes Sense!!!
Why does an active speaker have to use specific amps? This is answered as if there are only two clear-cut choices -- when it is not. The speaker could have the speakers wired to the back . . . each with their own terminals. The electronic crossover that provides the separation between the drivers is put in its own box; hence, the amps can still be a matter of personal choice. The way this is presented is that the manufacture's only choice is to have the amps built-into the speaker . . . sorry, not so!
In fact, I'll go you one better. I bought an electronic crossover, and I already have my subs actively powered and controlled . . . with the main speakers being still passive, but controlled by the electronic crossover BEFORE the amps; however, owing to the design and ease of working with the crossovers -- I am converting the speakers also to active with a total of four (4) amps . . . my choice.
What I heard from him is that a well implemented fully active speaker is the top of the heap. If that's true does that make most of us fools for doing it the other way? Do we just want to accumulate gear. I have to admit when I hear some full active speakers they sound great. Kii comes to mind.
The future of wireless speakers will make fully active speakers with active crossovers become more common. At least that is what I believe. But you can have a passive crossover in an active speaker though.
@@oysteinsoreide4323 The last bit is where you're technically wrong. There is a clear distinction between the terms 'active speakers' and 'powered speakers'. What you described is actually a powered speaker, _not_ an active one (this is formal language btw).
@@Beos_Valrah people are using the terms interchangably. But I look at speakers that have only active crossovers and one power amp per driver to be fully active.
@@oysteinsoreide4323 I know, but that is colloquial language.
And yes, your second sentence is correct.
I never heard a passive crossover that I liked.
Heh.. been using active Meridian’s for over two decades and active ATC’s for over a decade; all driven by my PSA PWD w bridge 2.
Active speakers are usually more expensive so put people off who want to run cheaper amps.
It's definitely the one time cost involved that puts people off, verses the one by one cost of septates.
This is more a matter of perception than any "objective reality". Consider the following:
Rotel A12 integrated amp, RB1552 power amp, Dayton DSP-408 and VAF DC7 Mk 3 speakers versus Rotel RA 1572 integrated amp and KEF Q950 speakers. Both systems cost ~$AU5,000 ($US3,500) here in Australia. Both should sound quite similar with the active system having a slight edge due to the DSP allowing room correction. Setting up the active system could be seen as a chore, or one of the enjoyable aspects of being an audiophile depending on one's attitude towards such things.
I'm quite certain that I could live with either and that both systems represent excellent value for money. For most musical content neither system demands a sub-woofer.
i just call them powered speakers if they have all drivers powered by plate amps, then some has individual amps allowing for active crossovers. ind if this is going to be the future, then make them silent, no hiss problem like we got now, and finally we can have sealed boxes since we can easily add eq. and DO NOT add wireless crap in it, i am not paying extra for that.
then comes auto on off problem just remove it, ir works only for 1% of people, rest of us have to fix it and it can be difficult if there is not switch to do it.
Powered speakers and active speakers are not the same thing, so don't get confused between them.
yes it is different because it has two different names and that means different things, the are similarities.
i have not used the word active speaker much, don't make much sense since what is active(active mean on)?
powered speaker clearly has meaning and you know it means it has power inside.
@@sudd3660 a powered speaker is when the amplification is internal (inside the speaker box). For example many subs would be considered "powered" but that doesn't mean they are active. A typical powered sub woofer normally have a passive crossover network sitting between the plate amp bolted to the back of the sub and the driver, but active is when the passive components of the crossover are replaced by electronic components to do perform a similar task (not the same but similar). In an active speaker each driver has it's own amplification circuit, whereas a typical passive speaker will only have one amplification channel per speaker. Also in an active system the active crossover sits in front of the amplifier, whereas a passive system the crossover sits between the amplifier and the drivers. The greatest benefit of an active system is that you can change the crossover points via software without pulling the speaker apart. The downside is they are very expensive, my active xover system cost about $6,500, although you can buy much cheaper ones.
ah, thank you for clarification. active speakers are the only one with benefits it seems.
@@sudd3660 yes and no... there kind of is a benefit to powered speakers, by putting the amp into the speaker you can amplify the woofer separately, which allows you to power the woofer with a more powerful amp for bass, that then allows the main channel amp to work across a narrower band which may lead to less distortion.
However you could just as easily do the exact same thing externally. Active takes it one step further by individually amplifying ever driver in the speaker. Only real difference is an active crossover is far superior to a passive crossover, and it sits in front of the amp not behind it.
Yes ,active, but audiophiles get in there own way. :(
It can be done using passive crossover before power amp and bi amping.
An active crossover is not an amplifier there two separate things is connected between the head unit and the amplifier
You can buy an active crossover unit in a separate box uses a standard amplifier a DSP ASP is an active crossover but got nothing to do with amplification. Not sure where you're coming from. Have I missed something.
Plus you don't need to have a capacitor in series for roloff you can still have low pass high pass filter in parallel and resistors. Try this Paul make you inductors out of silver wire especially if there in series you won't suffer any losses
It's either after power amplification or before. Whether you are using it digitally or after preamp or like those active speakers doesn't really matter.
An active filter has a signal amplifer in it, by definition.
And since you are working with low power signals you will need to amplify each filtered section with a power amplifier.
Yes you can buy a seperate active crossover box (though it is better to design it yourself if you're this far into it anyway) and use different amplifiers. Though you would still need to amplify each filtered section seperately.
An analog signal processor is just a different name for a combination audio effects (usually filters). In speakers this generally means a couple of active filters.
Digital signal processing is a bit more advanced, but the idea stays the same. You need to keep every section seperated, but now you are in the digital domain. To keep things seperated you also need seperate DAC's.
As for the silver inductors, there more reasons than just ESR to use a capacitor instead of an inductor. Inductors tend to be large, expensive, they create magnetic fields, can have significant nonlinear behaviour.
@@johnyang799 yes but that's not what Paul was talking about he was talking about individual amplifiers being tuned for each driver what isn't an active crossover as such
@@johnsweda2999 That's one of the ways to implement it.
I have no crossovers in my speakers.
jokrmidnite, one of my first pair of true HiFi speakers were Infinity 1001A’s. They were a two way design with two simple cone tweeters, one in the front baffle board and the other was out of phase on the rear surface and a 10” treated (tar?) cone woofer / mid bass driver. The enclosure was a largish bookshelf size wood veneered box in a transmission line configuration to band pass the lowest frequencies. There were no discrete crossover components of any kind. The tweeters were designed to roll off down to the woofer and the woofer’s upper frequencies rolled off into the two tweeters. Looking back, I regret selling those pretty amazing sounding and easy to drive speakers.
i wanted to say that choosing crossover frequencies by ears is no better than blind guessing but... eh. screw it.
Well, to do it all according to measurements would also be a wrong approach in my opinion. In the end is still has to sound good!
Although measurements do give a really good starting point, I'll admit that!
@@hidjedewitje yeah? and how long do you think it will keep sounding good? this is one of the reasons most audiophiles keep walking in circles, they trust their perception more than measurements. they think designing a speaker is an art (no, it's not, it's science) sounding fantastic at first glance then get tired of it over time then need an upgrade and the cycle repeats... figures.
@@ped-away-g1396 ....it's called a CIRCLE-JERK!!!...LOL!!!
@@ped-away-g1396 Don't get me wrong. I think loudspeaker design should involve lot's of science, but there is also a bit of pseudo science. Because there are always problems in engineering. It's the engineers job to make a good compromise.
With passive loudspeakers you can't get perfect phase and frequency response due to the behaviour of caps and inductors. How does science make a compromise within these two things?
Sure you can go digital and get perfect phase and frequency response, but then you will get ringing (especially off axis), how does science decide what solution is the best?
I understand your point. Though, there's a lot of bullshit reasoning within audio that could easily be solved with science, but there's also points that are a matter of preference.
The reason I call it a pseudo science is that it's isn't truly 100% factual, but it's not an art either.
For instance, odd harmonics sound a lot more damaging that the 2nd harmonic. Why? because 2nd harmonics are musically related and odd harmonics aren't. Though is the origin of musical notes science based? I don't know, I never went that deep.
@@hidjedewitje yeah, i was just saying out of my frustration on how audiophiles see audio.
Dynamics & Clarity are MUCH better with ACTIVE!!!
Kind of over the Mickintosh bs. Next time I hear it I'm going to be like "Piss Audio". Put that in your Schitt amp and smoke it.
Seems to me the question was about active vs passive and not about amps. To even think of matching an amp to s driver is not even s good idea. All your doing is building filters in the amp.
Lol this is getting ridiculous.
Dear Travis, regarding your question on Active Xovers here is our new line of speakers. Hope that clear your doubts.
the question specifically references PS audio's line of speakers. Hence it would be silly for an answer to dodge that
lol
i have a deja vu
'Active' almost every time.
Far superior in audiophile speaker design, but there are exceptions.
I sure would like to know what the "exception" is, because any time you put a coil of wire between an amp and a speaker, you're killing/choking the efficient transfer of energy. Look at car audio...been using active crossovers since the 80's....smaller amps for tweeters and mids, larger amps for subs with stiffening caps for amps in the FARAD range!!!...go figure...you'd think PS Audio would #GETACLUE !!!
@@fookingsog as usual for car analogies (we've all been there), this one doesn't help sorry. We don't want our speakers to sound like car audio!
Active !!!
Why is this called a passive vs active cross-over?
Irrelevant.
Cheers.
Talk talk talk is all we get.You want all this stuff to happen but talk talk talk. Sounds like you bit off more than you and the company can chew. Understand your a small company, but talk talk talk.
CRAP....WTF??? ...I posted this topic several videos back!!!....don't you ever read these messages here Paul???
here's how to get Paul to talk about ur topic......th-cam.com/users/redirect?v=K6K7Sj-PE6I&redir_token=vSg8cGAX_ssJAKJmi4n-fL-4hiR8MTU1NzM0MzcwMkAxNTU3MjU3MzAy&event=video_description&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.psaudio.com%2Fask-paul%2F. Not from You Tube comments.
Cheers.