electronic v. passive crossover, opinons?

Ok .. I read this page:   https://www.bcae1.com/elxovsp2.htm

It leads me to believe that there is next to no benefit to keeping my mb quart crossovers in my system since the Eclipse deck has a great 3-way digital crossover built in and I am bi-amping to the component speakers. 

How do you feel about this?  After reading that site it seems obvious that it will increase the available headroom in from my amplifier.  I guess I don't know how much this matters for me though, I don't listen at extreme volumes.  Will it increase the quality at all? 

I the only risk is that the tweeter protection will not be available from the mb quart crossover.  Additionally, if for some reason the head unit would reset, I could turn on the stereo and not have any crossover on the tweeter. 

Btw.  My problem with the left channel has been fixed.  It was installer error/laziness (me).   When I did the install I started off soldering all my speaker wires to the spades but it was taking forever, it was hot, etc. so I did the old crimp and electrical tape for a few of them.  Thought I squeezed that bugger tight enough.   Sure enough, one of the spades was loose after the movement of the car, etc.    Lesson learned!

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

I think you may want to keep your factory passive crossover in play.  My reasoning is that passive crossovers do a little more than simply divide frequencies between signal paths (which is pretty much all an electronic crossover does.)  Passives add subtle qualities to the sound.  They can dramatically affect the voicing of the system, and a good crossover is matched to the speakers it drives.  Also (since they are analog) the smoothness at the crossover point cannot be beaten... in any case, this is just my opinion (and I love what can be done with good passive crossovers and play with them all the time.) 

I suggest you try the all-electronic setup and see if it sounds different/better to your ears in your application.  You can always change it back!  Just be certain you are not overpowering your tweeters.

-------------
Support the12volt.com

DYohn,  I was hoping that you'd respond!  Thanks.  It is hard to find non-technical information about subtle details like that without asking.

Did you decide on that audiocontrol eq yet? 

Anyone else have a contrary opinion re: the electronic crossover issue?  

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Thanks for asking.  I have a nephew who works for DEi so I'm working a deal on an Orion DEQ30.  I love Audio Control, but sometimes you have to go for the best price! 

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Nope, I agree with Dyohn, funny thing....... I'm just about as far West as anyone in North America though so I don't get to respond until you guys have already sorted things out.

-------------
Top Secret, I can tell you but then my wife will kill me.

I agree wholeheartedly with DYohn.

The voice of the set comes from the passives. The ability to provide off axis responce comes from the passive. The smoothing of an otherwise rough dynamic impedance curve comes from the passive (this leads to a smoother more natural presentation). None of these things are possible with an active crossover, without a lot of EQ work... and even still, some of it is not possible at all following that route.

I always reccomend passives.

-------------

I wanted to agree with Dyon as well.  You should always run the factory passive crossover unless you have the ability to measure the drivers in-car, and have processing available to add back in notch filters/eqalization/etc. that was in the passives.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

-------------

ummm... without stepping on anyones toes, and please believe this is just my opinion, in the digital domain, with semi-parametric equalization (which is what your deck has, not TRUE parametric equalization) you COULD get better response with separates that are bi-amped and crossed over actively. Most likely, (and here, I am talking out of my a$$ - not being completely familiar with the Quart lines puts me at a bit of a disadvantage) the crossovers in your Quart system do nothing more than basic crossover functions. I would almost be willing to bet there is nothing in the crossover boxes that allow or provide for padding, damping, impedance control, or any of the other thing the guys are referring to. True, the crossover does all of those things, but unless it is DESIGNED FOR THE SPACE TO BE PLAYED IN and THE SPACING OF THE DRIVERS, there is little, if any possibility that the crossovers have those functions built in. Quart simply CAN'T build a crossover for every car on the road; they could recommend a spacing though... Do they?

Everybody that has responded has raised some good (and perfectly accurate) points. Steven said "unless you have the ability to measure the driver in-car" and I agree with that COMPLETELY! Without a good RTA for measuring, you CAN end up with worse response than the passives might allow.

DYohn said that "passives add subtle qualities to the sound". This also is true. This is based completely on the quality and construction of the components used in the crossover. The difficulty with most of the mass market separate systems of today is that the manufacturer will likely save money by building one crossover, but packaging it with two or three different woofers. (Same tweeter, to be sure) The problem with this is that a larger driver i.e. a 6.5 inch driver will "beam" sooner than a 4 inch driver (just below 2kHz, vs just above 3.5kHz). That's just physics, and NO AMOUNT of equalization will fix it... You need an intermediary driver to fill in the "hole". This is why you need to make certain that the spacing of your drivers is within one half the diameter of the largest driver in the array. This will minimize the drop in sound power at the crossover slope. This will keep the sound power in your environment as smooth as possible. (this gives the best imaging)

And sandt38 said "the ability to provide off axis responce comes from the passive" Also true, but this rule only applies if you follow the rule I stated above. It is true, but this applies primarily to more on-axis response, and in the car you are nowhere NEAR on-axis. Have you ever seen a speaker cabinet with a slanted baffle? This is to place all of the drivers' voice coils on a common vertical line in space, but now the manufacturer must "align" the drivers electrically, (to steer the sound downward, so you don't have to be sitting 8 feet in the air...) so the sound fronts all arrive coincidentally at your ear, and they do this with passive crossovers. There are advanced acoustic rules why this happens, but I am still trying to understand those a little better before I go on. Also, there are MANY more things to do with this subject, but I do not have the space to do it here.

I think I got a little off my point... my point is, if you have the tools to do it correctly, then use the active crossovers in your deck, after all you paid for 'em. There are many benefits to active crossovers and equalization, such as driver output matching, amplifier efficiency, no power lost in passive devices, improved transient response, and other things. If you do not have the tools necessary, you might be better with sticking with the passive crossovers provided by the manufacturer, but be aware, you may need to do some experimenting with placement to find your optimal "heads-up" listening position. In NO case is it a good idea to put your tweeters on the "A" pillars, or more than about 5 to 8 inches from your midbass.

Again, sorry guys, and please belive I hold your opinions very high, but I needed to say these things. I am in no way saying any of you are wrong.

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

Oh I totally agree with you.  I am planning on bi-amping my components and going active as well.  But I have available to me some serious testing equipment, and crazy precise digital processing (example: PEQ with 1/18 octave steps and 72 dB per octave crossovers).  So I can get better results than what's in the passive crossovers supplied.  But for the average joe, this isn't a possibility. 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

-------------

holy sh*te! 1/18 octave and 72dB!?!? well smack my ass and call me sally! I thought I had some sweet stuff at up to 10 bands per output (6 of em) 18 global bands, and 48dB per octave... damn, son when you getting to Bakersfield to share some of that stuff?

I have some pretty good testing gear as well, and I am aware that not everybody does. i am also of the opinion that that Eclipse deck, as nice as it is, should not be sold to just anybody. Those of you that have one, please take no offense, but it is far too powerful a deck with too many functions for everybody to use, please refer to stevens and my previous posts...

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

haemphyst wrote:

---

holy sh*te! 1/18 octave and 72dB!?!? well smack my ass and call me sally! I thought I had some sweet stuff at up to 10 bands per output (6 of em) 18 global bands, and 48dB per octave... damn, son when you getting to Bakersfield to share some of that stuff? 

---

Haha, yeah.  Sony used to make some amazing stuff.  It's too bad they make crap now.  Here's a link to info on the processor I use: https://www.matronics.com/xdp4000x-list/   You can also download the DSC software that controls it to see all the functionality.  It doesn't have 10 per output like what yours does though.  The 4000X only has 10 bands left and 10 bands right.  But it does give you 250 different Q positions.  Also the crossover selection, although steep, doesn't give many points.  That's the biggest problem with the unit.

BTW, what unit are you using?

My boss was talking about a design he has that makes mine look like pitiful.  In fact, it sounds like it would make Alpine's F1 system look pitiful.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

-------------

I totally agree with the latter part of that statement, that Eclipse head has no place in most people systems. No offence intended as well, for some people it will solve a dedicated problem or task that makes it necessary, for others, well when in Rome....... 

-------------
Top Secret, I can tell you but then my wife will kill me.

And there i was trying to answer in layman's terms and to keep it simple... 

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Wow!  Thank you all for the rundown.  I have enjoyed reading your posts.  I appreciate you all taking the time to speak at a higher level about the question I asked.  Let me say first that I am not one of those people that would buy a unit like the Eclipse and play around with the parametric eq until I understood what I was doing.  While I am not an electrical engineer, a professional in the car audio industry, or even a long-time participant in the car audio field/hobby, I did get a degree in computer science, work for a few years as a programmer/database administrator, and am now using car audio as a much needed sanity device during the summer after my first year of attending a competitive law school.  I don't write that to prop myself up in any way, I would simply assert that if a concept is adequately presented I am confident that I can at least come to some base understanding of that concept or ask appropriate follow-up questions until I do.

Having said that, it is my goal this summer to acheive the best possible sound quality from my system under my somewhat limited budget.  I listened to the available equipment in my price range, with the exception of the ID subwoofer, before I bought.  Although I was not experienced with installation, I took the time to do research the correct way to install the amplifiers and the components myself.  Yesterday I just finished damping each door with over 20ft^2 of dynamat xtreme.  The drivers are mounted to a foam gasket with the back cut out on 3/4" MDF brackets sealed to the door with silicone caulk.  The inside of the door is also lined w/ xtreme everywhere I could reach and directly behind the speaker is a cascade audio deflex pad.  The tweeter is installed in the coax position and I spend considerable time trying to get the imaging right before mounting the speaker.  I adjusted the l/r balance with test tones and an spl meter and set the time correction based on the Eclipse manual. I only tell you this to let you know I'm serious about achieving the best possible sound this summer on my budget.  With the exception of my soldering laziness (see a previous post), the system has come a long way toward that end so far.

My friend and I drove out of town last night to demo some b&w, mirage, and energy home theater systems.  We spent hours with the dealer doing a/b tests before buying.  While I don't claim to be an audiophile, I can recognize and appreciate what sounds good.

Now, haemphyst, your conclusion was that the Eclipse's crossovers could provide me better sound with the proper tools.  I'm assuming that you'd say my analog spl meter and autosound test tones aren't going to cut it, correct?    If there is a substantial improvement to be gained by using my active crossovers in the deck, I am willing to at least consider what I'd need to do to get there.  Suggestions everyone/anyone?

Thanks again,
Kfr

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

As one suggestion, and a pretty descent place to start, and probably a minimum piece, may I suggest theBehringer products? EXCELLENT quality, and for what you get, not a whole helluvalot of money. While it is true this may be quite a bit more than you are looking for, for CAR use, a 31 band RTA by-itself could cost quite a bit more than 409 bux, and you will be able to use this item in your (I guess new?) new home theater, as well. (SEGUE! thank you for not mentioning Blose audio in your list of speakers... none of them are remotely audiophile gear) I have also found that if you do a few quick searches on the internet, you will VERY likely find this unit for quite a bit less! I am looking into this very same box for my RTA requirements as well (home, car, friends' homes, friends' cars, a few church jobs, etc.). The mic I have already purchased is the Behringer ECM8000, and their MSRP is $80.00, and I was able to buy it locally for $45.00 (this is also the mic I suggest, recommended to me by an engineer at Harman International). Look around at retailers in you area, and see if you can do something similar.

We (speaking for others here, too) are sorry, we didn't mean to say anything of the ilk that do not understand, and again, I hope I didn't push any buttons The deck you have IS an excellent piece of equipment, as are all of the Eclipse higher end pieces, we are just of the idea that this is a piece that should be left to people other than mass market. An extremely flexible piece with wonderful sound quality, I just feel it really does more than it has to for most people. I expect Eclipse wanted to sell it at the level it does, just to sell more of them. It seems people like bells and whistles... I know I do. (oooh, shiny... BWAHAHAHA)

Well, I hope this gives you another solid stepping stone in your travels to audio nirvana. Good to have another member in the fold! Welcome.

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

Aweome.  That unit looks fantastic and is in my price range.  It looks like a true investment piece that could serve an owner for years.  Thanks for the suggestion - I am seriously considering it.  You said you're also considering this unit, do you have any reservations about it?  Being a computer guy, I'm curious about what sound card/mic/software RTA packages are available for laptops.  It seems like that combination could be quite flexible.  Do you have any opinion about a setup like this or any experience with some packages? 

Unfortunately, the new home theater system was my friend's purchase.  He went with the energy connoisseur line.  I thought the Mirage was the smoothest and best sounding system, but he didn't like the effect of the omnipolar tweeters.  It was a close call between the b&w 600 series and the energy.  We picked the energy over the b&w because the high end of the vocal range sounded dry and strained when pushed during peaks on the b&w.  heh .. don't worry, I learned a long time ago that blose's smoke and mirrors setup doesn't impress me.  :-)

Don't worry, you didn't push any buttons.  ;-)   Thanks for the welcome.

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

haemphyst + others,

How would you feel about this RTA setup:

True RTA software, level 3 or 4:  https://www.trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm

Behringer ECM8000 mic
Behringer Shark DSP110 mic preamp
Creative Audigy 2 based sound card.

I've been wanting to upgrade to an audigy 2 based soundcard anyway, so this might be a way to kill 2 birds with one stone.

Thanks in advance, kfr

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

That would be killer.  I use trueRTA software on my laptop and it is very nice.  Be sure to get the paid version...

-------------
Support the12volt.com

DYohn, that's a good idea.  It would be much more convenient to setup an rta on my laptop than the desktop.  What sound card do you use for that application, a usb based solution?

-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder

Nope, just the OEM Dell soundcard in my D600 and the same Behringer ECM8000 mic you are considering (and the MIC100 preamp.)

-------------
Support the12volt.com

Hey DYohn, where you get that trueRTA, and how much was it? I have been searching for a GOOD RTA solution, and have not been able to locate anything that was inexpensive. kfr01, that'll do FINE.   The shark would be necessary IF you don't go with the 2496 unit, as the ECM8000 requires a phantom power supply (but I'll bet you already caught that little caveat, didn't ya?). The Audigy2 is a SWEET card. The nice thing about a descent RTA, is it should not matter the soundcard you are using, it should be able to self calibrate it's own non-linearities out of itself for measurement purposes. The mic also has a curve file to plug into your RTA software that should be fairly readily available on the internet, also for calibration purposes.

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

Found the trueRTA... which version do you have?

-------------
It all reminds me of something that Molière once said to Guy de Maupassant at a café in Vienna: "That's nice. You should write it down."

TrueRTA level 4.  A good deal at $100.  https://www.trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm

-------------
Support the12volt.com