Phoenix Gold Phorum

Can it be done?

So in my other thread, I was debating the merits of using passives for mid mids and highs without sacrificing my midbass i was wonderin...

If I send my signal to the bit one, it will come out as 8 channels.

2 for the mids and highs
2 for the midbass
2 for rearfill
and probably 2 for the sub(or one, whatever)

However I will have a 9 channel amp meaning 2 channels will be sitting idle unless I toss in a center channel, but meh, I have time alignment with my bit one.

SOOo what if we did the above, only as the mids and highs signal coming out of the bit one, then went into a bit ten D?

from there i could further seperate the signal to both mids and highs.

this would allow me to scrap the passives and go full active.

for set up I suppose i would have to set up the Bit ten first so that the crossovers and equalizers were all set before I Set up the bit 1.

I'd be able to have individual time alignment for all 10 speakers in the system.

just not sure if it will work LOL.

I'm also now considering going with all Audison speakers. which would give me the tweets, 3 inchs and 6.5s with maybe a pair of their coaxials for rearfill.

any thoughts?

I dunno, even if it did work, I'm. Of a fan of too much processing. You seem to loose the natural sound of the music. All of that work and you still are running rear fill. I'd rather scrap rear fill than daisy chain two DSPs.

It will work if you can tell the Bit one that the output going to the input on the bit 10 is a straight through or fullpas signal...

Ive done it with 2 AX406s before, I ran the rear channel on the first one with no chip, or as a full range passthrough signal to the input of the second 406 and used it as a 3 way... so I had HP and LP on the first and a HP/BP/LP on the second... gave me 10 channels of processing.

Why dont u use the bigger of the 2 audison not worry about 2 of them and bridge channels on the zen9.

U need to remember the more devices u use in the chain the worse ur s/n becomes so ultimatley the purpose of using an amp lile the zen becomes pointless unless its to show off.

In all honesty id find a high end hu w balanced outs (@ least 3 sets) or a unit that has a seperate dsp from the unit itself and run straight to the zen9.

Then ur signal becomes as pure as it can.

STROKD wrote:It will work if you can tell the Bit one that the output going to the input on the bit 10 is a straight through or fullpas signal...

Ive done it with 2 AX406s before, I ran the rear channel on the first one with no chip, or as a full range passthrough signal to the input of the second 406 and used it as a 3 way... so I had HP and LP on the first and a HP/BP/LP on the second... gave me 10 channels of processing.

yes I can do that. Im not removing the OEM Head unit, it works very well and has too much off the car integrated into it.

the bit one will clean up any factory equalization that the head unit adds and provide a pure signal. in addition, I can add a Ipad with a Pure docking station to provide full 24 bit playback and send it straight to the bit one. from there i have complete control of all crossover points, 31 bands of equalization, and time alignment for each channel.

more is not always better.

well what would be worse?
an audison bit DSP in line or passive crossovers?

realistically the passives are designed to work with the speakers and I think your setting yourself up for a LOT of tuning just to get it to sound as good as the passives would, let alone better. I am a tweeker and love to do it myself but I am also a fan of the keep it simple-stupid theory as well.

ok.

I feel that if you can go active by keeping it simple then yes, do it. But if you have to really complicate things to go active then you are shooting yourself in the foot and with added complication comes added noise and an unnecessary amount of tuning.

Chiapet, if you are a tuner and tweeker like me, do it... I would love to fiddle to get it to sound correctly for weeks than just install and be done, esp if it is going to ultimately sound better. That Audison is a BAD ASS unit, I in fact am buying one to integrate into my BMW i drive nav system, which in no way is getting replaced by a head unit...

I dont know if you need to do the double processor setup or not, just depends if you want active control on the front or rear channels, or passive. That said, I am in the same boat as you, BUT I dont want to spend the extra money on a bit ten, or the install time for the stereo shop to do it... so I am going BI-AMPED passive to the fronts, BI-AMPED passive to the rears, and bandpass active to the factory 8s under the seats and active to the 12w7... this lets me use 7 of the 8 channels on the Bit One with the easiest way of install and the best sound quality. Problem is the only true Bi-Ampable passive I know of is the Focal Utopias, but Im sure there are others out there... That just happens to be the ones I am using. As far as I know, bi-amping is the same as active for power, but it uses the passives crossover frequency instead of letting it be adjustable which isn't really needed since the speaker company would know where their speakers work most efficiently... Bi-Amping is truely the best of both worlds if that is an available option for you.

There's actually a bunch of bi-ampable passive out there. I just got a set MB Quart MUSIcomps, I think many others exist too. Lots of higher end components are capable. Utopias are of course the cream of the crop.

vwdude wrote:There's actually a bunch of bi-ampable passive out there. I just got a set MB Quart MUSIcomps, I think many others exist too. Lots of higher end components are capable. Utopias are of course the cream of the crop.

Focal has new line thats supposedly better, but I can only imagine the cost. Id really love to hear them someday.

Just buy a Helix DSP Pro

Now I'm looking at the helix and drooling.

Also, if I do daisy chain, I could just do the 2 channels out of the bit one as full range, then split via bit ten for rearfill full and subs.

Or go with the Helix LOL

it seems as though you are really fixated on the digital eq idea? I think at some point almost any tweeker loves playing with them, we all like the dancing lights. I how ever lost almost all interest in them after watching one after another come out, hear how amazing they are and what they can do, and then slowly over the next couple of years while either working with them of hearing from others that did all the bugs they had or things they didn't like. I remember drooling over the PG EQ when it first was out but after hearing about how much time it took with windows to set up and how it wasn't even supported with the new windows platform it didn't last long at all. The JBL MS-8 I heard about SQ issues as well as just hardware failures and it came and went pretty quick too. I can remember troubleshooting sound issues with the JL cleansweep all the while hearing that it was the DEQ that was going to change the world. hell I currently own the alpine imprint stuff with my deck and went with an eq232 to do my eq'ing instead with an old electronic cross over doing the work splitting the signal. The only thing I could imagine that would be worse then one DEQ is two and this is not just my old school fogey ass talking as much as I just need to hear/see a real bullet-proof DEQ that truly does everything I want and has the sq I demand.

Well it's a dsp with eq built in. What this unit does is allow factory head unit to be used, it then cleans up the signal by removing any factory built inn equalization and drops it to its pure state. Then from there you can cross everything over digitally, hook up a rta and equalize everything as well as time align each speaker individually.