ASR reccomended external crossovers?

[pozz]

What would be useful is a list of crossovers on the market and some explanation of methods. Would anyone be up for putting that together?

 

[watchnerd]

They would be around 104db. Nah thats nothing. ; )

110 dB at 1 meter, 2 speakers, with boundary enforcement.

That's pretty effin' loud.

But if loudness is your big goal, Klipsch are more sensitive.

 

[RayDunzl]

How dose this work if the amps you use have different gain ?

Different gain in itself is not a problem.

They don't get out of sync when the "master" volume is adjusted, if that is your concern.

 

[Thomas savage]

Not even shure if you can break-in the compression drivers the right way at that level ?

I will die trying .

 

[tomtoo]

110 dB at 1 meter, 2 speakers, with boundary enforcement.

That's pretty effin' loud.

But if loudness is your big goal, Klipsch are more sensitive.

No reason to diskuss. I used two speakers in the garden. But
didnt measure how fare away they were in my dream. ; )

 

[Koeitje]

I'm really interested in a good crossover that I can use at a balanced line level, so I can split the signal between my power amps and subs. I've been looking at Dynaudio 9s as sub, because this sub can do it in the sub itself, but having an external crossover would give me many more options.

 

[RayDunzl]

I'm really interested in a good crossover that I can use at a balanced line level, so I can split the signal between my power amps and subs. I've been looking at Dynaudio 9s as sub, because this sub can do it in the sub itself, but having an external crossover would give me many more options.

There are many.

Example:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...commercial_ac23s_ac_23s_active_crossover.html

 

[Koeitje]

There are many.

Example:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...commercial_ac23s_ac_23s_active_crossover.html

I know that there are many, just want to know which are good and how good the digital ones are that also integrate room correction. I mean, how well does a DriveRack VENU360 or PA2 work in a small room and what's the quality of that.

 

[Neddy]

The Venu specs are published on their site, "THD+Noise: 0.0025% typical at +4 dBu, 1 kHz, 0 dB input gain" etc...
If IRCC, the Venu has better specs (newer design) than the PA2.
Mine works great in my 600sq ft room & love that I can modify the xovers/PEQS in real time & hear the changes immediately, or flip to the RTA mic screen and see the measured differences.
I just leave the mic hooked up; don't mind having a mic stand looking over my LP shoulder all the time.

>Download their app and try it out 'virtually'!
>Call Harman tech support and Ask The Factory.

"Good" is relative - at least until/unless Amir tests one - maybe you could buy one and ship to him?

 

[sergeauckland]

I use a Behringer DCX2496 in my main system. Whilst the ADC/DACs may not be SOTA, they are more than adequate for transparency, pretty much like all Behringer products.

The flexibility of the DCX is excellent, 48dB/octave LR filters, including time delay compensation, protection limiters for my fragile (actually not so fragile, but irreplaceable) tweeters, parametric EQ and 6 assignable outputs for three way stereo, or two way plus sub outputs. A very large number of set up memories allowing either multiple setups, or domestically AB comparisons between setups. All for a very affordable price typically around 250, or under 200 if you don't need digital input.

S

 

[gene_stl]

You don't need a "tube amp for the highs" nor for anything else. A nice class A or Class AB will have measurably better sound. Tubes and tube amps are obsolete.

JBL probably publishes data on how to cross over the drivers used in the 4367 which are largely similar to the M2. Maybe you should just get a pair of the Crowns with DSP input and load the JBL formulae into them.

I think the mini DSP ,Behringer, and Drive Rack solutions look very appealing too especially if there are budget constraints. There is a gadget from Parts Express something like the DSP 408 which is very reasonably priced.

https://www.parts-express.com/dayto...nal-processor-for-home-and-car-audio--230-500

If you really want to stay in the analog domain then:
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/pioneer/d-23.shtml
Very state of the art 1970s analog.

There are lots of analog crossovers available from the sound reinforcement folks that like to bi amp because of many good things it does.

In my not at all humble opinion, biamping is the most economical way to improve a home audio system by the most bang per buck. Especially if you are starting with 4367s which seem like a very good start indeed. Triamping is better and I personally quad amp. ymmv.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

I'm using those woofers (ND1s) in my setup. I considered buying the 4367's LF crossover, but cost was prohibitive.
I ended up using a dBX (Harman) Venu360 for both crossover and room EQ (and MUCH more, like sub integration), basically a 'stereo bi-amped mains + mono sub' config.
(I cribbed the M2 DSP settings into the Venu, and it's basically flat to 20hz; pretty stunning.)
I just can't recommend it highly enough, even w/o it being tested by Amir...the specs are pretty impressive, FWIW.
(Harman tech support is also superbly helpful.)

But, if you have 4367s, then why not just "bi-amp" as per the instructions shown above????

The two linked threads, by the way, are the mains ones I used to 'inform' my choice of the ND-1 and Venu360.

I appreciate the comment. I forgot dBX was a thing. I realize now that any active crossover solution will require hard wiring inside the speaker. I'm really concerned about messing something up, I may get a techie friend to help me do this. I don't think it's that hard to take out the woofer of my speaker. I will probably not attempt this, but it might be fun to try. I assume I invalidate my warranty attempting something like this?

The 4367 has level controls to solve for that.

The level controls are only + and - 1.5dB. I don't think this is very useful for matching different amplifier gain.

Yes, spending more often makes one feel good, and indeed safe amongst those for whom more is better. Something like the amp that goes to 11.

Given how often passive bi-amping is recommended by the magazines and forums, and how pretty much all loudspeaker manufacturers have had to bow to the commercial inevitability of providing extra terminals, it doesn't surprise me that passive bi-amping is seen as an upgrade.

But then not much of audiophile stupidity surprises me any more.

S.

Well I didn't know about any of this until you mentioned it. I thought bi amping was bi amping, I did not realize passive bi amping is something else entirely and that it's actually rather useless. I'm not advocating stupidity. So please don't think I even want to continue this plan anymore. I was simply unaware how passive crossover networks work. Thanks for educating me.

 

[direstraitsfan98]

You don't need a "tube amp for the highs" nor for anything else. A nice class A or Class AB will have measurably better sound. Tubes and tube amps are obsolete.

JBL probably publishes data on how to cross over the drivers used in the 4367 which are largely similar to the M2. Maybe you should just get a pair of the Crowns with DSP input and load the JBL formulae into them.

I think the mini DSP ,Behringer, and Drive Rack solutions look very appealing too especially if there are budget constraints. There is a gadget from Parts Express something like the DSP 408 which is very reasonably priced.

https://www.parts-express.com/dayto...nal-processor-for-home-and-car-audio--230-500

If you really want to stay in the analog domain then:
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/pioneer/d-23.shtml
Very state of the art 1970s analog.

There are lots of analog crossovers available from the sound reinforcement folks that like to bi amp because of many good things it does.

In my not at all humble opinion, biamping is the most economical way to improve a home audio system by the most bang per buck. Especially if you are starting with 4367s which seem like a very good start indeed. Triamping is better and I personally quad amp. ymmv.

After reading all the comments here I'm not even going to bother with bi amping. I did not realize until researching with all the info provided here that passive bi amping is similar to bi wiring. There are definiitely differences between the two but it does appear it wont effect sound. I did like the idea of picking up a tube amp, and imparting some 'tube magic' to the highs but if the effect of using two amps to bi amp is lost due to the internal passive crossover it seems prudent to skip this plan of action. Not only that, but I feel a bit sick now that dealers and even the manufactures themselves validate their customers to spending so much money on bi-amping when it offers no difference in sound. This is akin to a dealer pushing you to spend 20% of your budget on cables. Worse, actually since adding a second amp is probably even more costly then cables.

I think it's telling that Harman calls using two amps to hook up to highs/lows as 'bi wiring with two amplifiers' I think this is actually a very accurate description of what's going on when you passively bi amp.

I don't know what I'd do without you guys. Thanks to all, probably saved me couple thousand dollars. Not going to lie though. The tube amps out there are very nice. I can understand why someone with too much money might buy a tube amp to do the highs. It's just more 'bling' factor. But definitely a huge waste money, like dropping $5K on cables. Both are wrong way to approach audio, I think. Tweaks that offer nothing but psychoacoustic effects. Like little gems to tape to your interconnects or quantum stickers.

 

[Trouble Maker]

I fart louder than that .

Any place specific or just his general direction?

 

[Wombat]

I fart louder than that .

The Thomas upgrade:

 

[Trouble Maker]

That looks like a really stinky horn design.

 

[Koeitje]

The Venu specs are published on their site, "THD+Noise: 0.0025% typical at +4 dBu, 1 kHz, 0 dB input gain" etc...
If IRCC, the Venu has better specs (newer design) than the PA2.
Mine works great in my 600sq ft room & love that I can modify the xovers/PEQS in real time & hear the changes immediately, or flip to the RTA mic screen and see the measured differences.
I just leave the mic hooked up; don't mind having a mic stand looking over my LP shoulder all the time.

>Download their app and try it out 'virtually'!
>Call Harman tech support and Ask The Factory.

"Good" is relative - at least until/unless Amir tests one - maybe you could buy one and ship to him?

If I lived in the US I would have . But 0.0025% is pretty high THD+N.

 

[Neddy]

I don't know what I'd do without you guys. Thanks to all, probably saved me couple thousand dollars. .

These forum resources are rich indeed, though for my needs frequently more 'clues' than 'solutions'.

I forgot to mention that, in the 'discovery' path to my woofer upgrades, I took a step-wise, measured (w/REW) approach:
1. "Passive" bi-amping - just split the two crossovers, and bi-amped. -> No significant measurable or audible difference. (But similar amps for both).
2. 1/2 Active bi-amping - w/LF active crossover (Venu), MF/HF passive (but crossed over from LF, in the Venu) -> marginal improvements, barely measurable/audible. NOT worth the cost involved.
3. REW for RoomEQ of the above -> Major improvements (basically adding room eq to crossovers in the Venu), both measurable (duh) and audible...but still not what I was looking for.
4. Replaced original woofer with 2216ND-1 (4367), crossover/RoomEQ via Venu; applied M2 approximate PEQs and crossed over at 1Khz (slightly higher than 4367) -> Huzah! Magic! Amazing!! (Dang things measure flat to 20hz now.) Solved.

So, of interest to this topic, is that - using similar amps (older Brystons) - passive bi-amping achieved little or nothing.
Active crossovers+DSP allowed a bit more 'control', but opens a huge can of worms, too.
RoomEQ PEQs made more differences than either of the first two tests.

As mentioned above, bi-amping does allow more amp choice/selection (passive or DSP/active).
Perhaps if you find the HF too harsh for some reason, a 'softer' (tube?) amp might tone that down a little (personally, I like horns).
Personally, I wouldn't second guess Greg Timbers' design choices for crossovers in those speakers.

If you continue to have 'problems' with your 4367s, just send 'em to me, I'll gladly figure out a good use for them!

 

[Neddy]

That looks like a really stinky horn design.

Probably beamy, too

 

[direstraitsfan98]

Thank you so much for sharing your experience, @Neddy . Most invaluable.

I have no problems with my speakers and I wasn't looking to bi amp to tweak the sound. Like I said in my previous post, I don't agree with that approach to hifi. I think it's flawed way to approach this hobby and a waste of time. I just wanted to try it 'just because' but also I actually thought at the time I would be doing much more adding a second amp to bi wire. Now that I know that... this thread has kind of run it's course, at least for me and my applications: I definitely do not want to modify my 4367 right now. Totally agree with you that I should just use the internal crossover.

Otherwise, I should actually just buy a pair of M2 instead. Also something I'm considering... and have been considering for some time. Only problem is, they are quite rare to come up on the used market locally. I don't want to buy online.

PS. Love your dr.strangelove avatar. One of my favourite movies.