Running active and passive

[79Bronco]

Running 3-way active is the way to go. So much room for small tweaks. It will take a bit to get it to sound right, but when it does, it's truly breathtaking.

[dereileak]

Active uses the power much more efficiently, gives you more control, and is clearer in most cases. Passive wastes power and you have no control, its nice to be able to adjust crossover points whenever you want, and sound levels. Its costs a bit more for a active processor, bit 100% worth it, i think its easier then having to find a place to mount the passive crossovers, 1 active processor, I'm never going back to passive

[Smoove]

Is there a level (highend) where you guys would use the passive crossovers? Like the Alpine F1 status 3 way components from back in the day. If I am spending that kind of money for a set components I am gonna trust the manufacturer set the crossovers correctly.

[79Bronco]

Is there a level (highend) where you guys would use the passive crossovers? Like the Alpine F1 status 3 way components from back in the day. If I am spending that kind of money for a set components I am gonna trust the manufacturer set the crossovers correctly.

I'm sure there are plenty of great passive crossovers out there. The only time I'd consider going passive is in a home audio type setup though. Sure the manufacturers build their crossovers to cross at a certain point, but it's much easier to just cross at that specified point electronically. Find out what the manufacturer recommends crossing the speakers at, and cross them there on the active crossover.

This will give you more flexibility when swapping speakers, and more flexibility to make fine tuned adjustments. Also, no parasitic loss of power using an active setup.

[dereileak]

Is there a level (highend) where you guys would use the passive crossovers? Like the Alpine F1 status 3 way components from back in the day. If I am spending that kind of money for a set components I am gonna trust the manufacturer set the crossovers correctly.

I am sure they do a good job setting them, but passive wastes power, there is no way around it, and some speakers sound better when you change up the crossover point, depending on the application of the install, and your listening preferences, but passive will still sound good, its not that it makes it bad

[BassMunky]

How does it lose power? Wow that a first that why

[BassMunky]

bump

[michigancapri92]

im going both !!! active and passive ... running my 3-way setup with a really good crossover for the 4" and Tweeter on the a-pillar to make it easier for the tweeter and 4" to blend and work together easier but that will be the only cross over for the whole system ... and also running a 360.3 for processor!

[jhmeg2]

I have found active to sound better and obviously give the ability for finner adjustments. If the space is great on the PLD, active is better, but passive can sound good. its more so in the tunning and placement of drivers I think. If you have the option and can afford it. active. If your new to it, passive is safer. How ever the vehicle can also determine how you will do it. In my '02 Accord, passive sounded great. in my '07 Mercedes E class, I'm going active. In my Trailblazer, I started passive, for ease and cost... However for the last 6 years, it been active. Anyhow, if your new to it and like to finger fuck it, passive is safer.

[dereileak]

If you do a lot of reading you will come to the conclusion that if you are serious about sound that active is the best way by a mile. Passive wastes power, causes impedance and load issues on the woofers and amps, and will change its crossover frequency on you.

im going both !!! active and passive ... running my 3-way setup with a really good crossover for the 4" and Tweeter on the a-pillar to make it easier for the tweeter and 4" to blend and work together easier but that will be the only cross over for the whole system ... and also running a 360.3 for processor!

How does it lose power? Wow that a first that why

Link:http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm#passive_xovers

From link: "When an amplifier reproduces the entire musical range, coils (inductors) and capacitors are used in the speaker cabinet to separate the high and low frequencies so that each may be supplied to the appropriate loudspeaker driver. A loudspeaker can be a difficult load for any amplifier, but when additional inductance and capacitance enter the equation, this only makes matters worse. Add to this the fact that all passive crossovers introduce some degree of loss (in some cases as much as 3dB - which means that they are "stealing" half the available power), and one can see that getting rid of them cannot be such a bad thing.

These vague thoughts are brought into stark reality when one learns that the inductors and capacitors needed for the low frequency crossover are quite large values, which leads many speaker designers to compromise in the interests of economy. The inductors may have an iron or ferrite core - which improves its inductance, but ruins its linearity. So now the crossover behaves differently depending upon the amplitude of the signal. High value high quality capacitors are expensive, so again, bi-polar electrolytics are often used. It is often stated that these sound awful, although this is a somewhat contentious issue, but without any doubt their characteristics change with temperature and age. They also have rather mediocre accuracy against their claimed value (+20/-50% is typical), so a 10uF crossover cap may be 12uF, or as low as 5uF. This does not make for an accurate crossover network, and most reputable speaker manufacturers will not make this sort of compromise, at least not for their top-of-the-line models.

In addition, at high powers, the impedance of the voice coil rises because of the temperature rise in the voice coil. This is not stable, and varies widely with the music. So with loud passages, the voice coil temperature might rise significantly, which will severely impact the performance of the crossover - relying as it does on the load impedance being a constant. A loud bass solo followed by a relatively quiet but complex passage might create an interesting shift in the crossover frequency and phase response as the voice coil cools, which is unlikely to enhance the listening experience."

im going both !!! active and passive ... running my 3-way setup with a really good crossover for the 4" and Tweeter on the a-pillar to make it easier for the tweeter and 4" to blend and work together easier but that will be the only cross over for the whole system ... and also running a 360.3 for processor!

I ran both and it actually causes a lot of issues, and will cause the amps to cut out. What happens is that the passive crossovers are meant to have the input of the tweet and the mids to be the same in power and in signal, and when you actively cross it over before it gets to the passive crossover it causes the crossovers to work in a way they were not designed too, you will have impedance issues where it may fall really really low, or go really high. I actually melted parts in my crossovers and caused the amps to cut out a lot, got rid of the passive and when 100% active, and the issues were all gone. I would just choose 1, also if you set the crossover differently then what the passives have then you will create a band pass essentially, and get rid of frequencies in the middle between you mid crossover point and the tweet crossover point.

Link:http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

From link: "In short, there is simply no comparison between the two systems. A passive XO will always add (usually) undesirable impedance to that seen by the driver(s), the impedance is frequency dependent, and ranges from perhaps an ohm or so to almost infinite. The potential for uncontrolled cone movement, intermodulation distortion and loss of performance is so great that it is impossible to determine in advance, but it is all negated in one fell swoop by using a fully active system."