active or not???

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:08 am

ive seen alot of posts of people running their components active, if i have ti 6.5 elites in my front, and i have a ti 500.4 running them , what all do i need to do to try this w/out damaging the speakers, obviously i understand that both sets of tweets would go on the front out puts, and both mids would go on the rear outputs, but would i still leave the internal xover at hp., would i switch the rear xover to lowpass, what all does this really entail??? thanx for any input-Christian, also, what are the real benefits of doing this?????? more output, clearer sound??????

flogger11 · Post by **flogger11** » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:20 am

If your head unit is unable to cross your seps, you will need to do it with your amp. IMO, the best choice would be either a ZX-450 or Ti500.4. These amps have 75rms x 4, complete crossovers on board to do your tweets and mids, are reliable, look great and sound awesome! Just my 2 cents worth...

dwnrodeo · Post by **dwnrodeo** » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:42 am

To go active set your front speaker configuration switch to HP, set the frequency point to as high as is will go, and push the frequency multiplier button so that is gets multiplied by 10.
Set the input select switch to "3" and set the rear speaker config switch to BY/LP. Then set the rear crossover to about 150hz.

Now start lowering your tweeter crossover point until you think it sounds good without being too low. This is a lot of listening and trial and error.
Same with the rear crossover.

The benefits are that you have more control over your setup.
The downfalls, takes a long ass time to fine tune it!

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:52 am

so u mulitply the tweets to protect them, that makes sense!!!!! dddee- dee, i hear you- would definetly like to try;0

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:02 am

if i now have an external xover, same deal for running active as with using amps internal xover, or do i need to configure something differently( btw, with the external xover, ive already set the amps to bypass

bretti_kivi · Post by **bretti_kivi** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:12 pm

same settings, just now on the external XO. You shouldn't need much below 2.5kHz on the tweeters, if anything it ought to be higher than that. But: trial and error is the order of the day.

Maybe some test tones, but music is very valid to test results.

Bret

denim · Post by **denim** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:51 am

I say got for it.

flogger11 · Post by **flogger11** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:02 am

ACTIVE RULES, PASSIVE DROOLS! LOL! Ya, active blows passive out of the water bro...

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:56 pm

You folks here are kidding yourselfs. Not one of you have given "thedeal7235" correct information to his question.

First off rule to going active is; To know the Xover point & impedence of each drivers.

2nd) Know how to culculate tweeter protection cap based on Xover point of tweeter. This is called a "First Order High Pass Filters". And this is the formula>> To protect a tweeter, a bi-polar crossover capacitor should be inserted in series with the + terminal. (It really doesn’t matter, but let’s be consistent.) This “safety” capacitor will block dangerous pops and spikes, yet, it will permit the audio to pass.

The exact value for the “safety” capacitor can be calculated by first dividing the tweeter’s crossover frequency in half. Then a first order crossover filter capacitor value can be calculated by using the equation in Figure 2.

C = 1/2 (Pi) fZ

C is the "safety" capacitor value in Farads (1 Farad = 1,000,000 mfd).

f = one-half the tweeter crossover frequency

Z = tweeter impedance at the crossover point

For example, let’s say we’re using a crossover point of 2000 Hz on a tweeter with an impedance of 4 ohms (at 2000 Hz). One-half of 2000 Hz yields an f of 1000 Hz. Solving for C, we arrive at 40 mfd (39.8 mfd if you’re a math buff) for our safety cap. Remember, electrolytic caps can be used as long as they’re bypassed properly. Again, polystyrene film capacitors should be used for bypassing. If this is done correctly, the safety cap will have no affect on sound as it’s too low to have any audible effect, but if any low frequencies slip by they will be removed before they can cause damage. A tweeter safety cap sort of acts like a “subsonic filter” does for a woofer, only it works at the frequencies that are troublesome to tweeters.
Once you know these specs, then you will be able to set you Xover points "CORRECTLY" to match your drivers. And from there you adjust to match your personal taste.
A link on tweeter protection explained>> http://www.audiogroupforum.com/csforum/ ... php?t=3651

3) The Xover unit of choice, should have the following option to make the switch from passive to active worthwhile. Selectable slopes, choice of filters "eg, BW & LW ". Bandpass should be considered for added flexabilty/upgradeability. There are HU & external processor out there that can do this. But amp wise Phoenix Gold has nothing. The only amp that comes to mind off the top of my head is the Zapco DC reference series.

I am running a 3 way active setup using the Zapco DSP6-SL & DRC-SL processor and two Arc audio 4150XXk amp mated to set of Dynauio woofers, dome mids and tweeters. To utilized the Zapco processor you need a pc. Once in the software you can choose between two types of filters. Slopes starts a 6db then goes up, you also have Equalization, Q-Bass and Time Delay for each channel. Originally I had two ZX450 installed. Their weakness shine thru very quickly with the other pieces. I had to remove and release them via ebay. I plan on installing my ZPA soon to see if they can out do the XXK.

My opinion for what you mention is really not worth the effort. 24db slope only, is a waste of amp. Will you hear a difference over the passive?? Maybe! But I believe not if, the speakers are installed and aimed properly. And if the system is tuned properly. I suggest you do a search over at DIYmobile and ECA on active setup. You will find tons of information from guys with tons of knowledge on this subject. No pun to anyone here. But the subject of active is very weak over here.

[/i]

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:19 pm

flogger11 wrote:ACTIVE RULES, PASSIVE DROOLS! LOL! Ya, active blows passive out of the water bro...

You are entitled to your opinions. But, I would suggest you work on your installing/tuning skills before such comment. If we were geographically close. I would issue you a challange, that would send you home crying. And nope it would not be my current setup! That would be too unfair to you. I would pull my system out, install a set of JLaudio XR653-CS 3-Way Component Systems, and two mono block Blade Audio Amplifiers. That would be enough to send you back to the drawing board.

.

gkitching · Post by **gkitching** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:54 am

Oh PLEASE! Get over yourself.

First and for most .. You never answered his question. The question was 'Active or Not'. To which the closest resemblance of answer from you was

"Will you hear a difference over the passive?? Maybe!"

Well that's not exactly a very scientific answer. I mean, after such a dissertation on tweeter protection and chest bloating over your Zapco's capabilities, come on!

The bottom line is the 'thedeal7235' doesn't have the processing capabilities you describe. Can he still benefit from going active with the equipment he has? The answer is YES! Telling him how, with what he has, and suggesting how he could make it better would be more worth your effort of typing so much.

I suggest you spend more time trying to figure out how to actually help someone rather then spout out criticism and theory, tooting your own horn and issuing challenges. Of coarse there is more in-depth information available. I think we're all big boys and already assume people are capable of using google to help find such topics. Around here we tend to get more directly to the point.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Which you stated "My opinion for what you mention is really not worth the effort. 24db slope only, is a waste of amp." That's great. And that's really all you needed to say. My opinion would be that I disagree. It sounds like a good topic for debate. And maybe helpful if he decides to go further with his system.

Meanwhile, if you're gonna issue a challenge then do it! Don't call us out then say "well if .... I would ... " . Idle threats will not go unchallenged. Make the challenge or keep it to yourself!

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:12 am

Oh PLEASE! Get over yourself.

You need to get over yourself first! You avatar shows your level off intelligence.

First and for most .. You never answered his question. The question was 'Active or Not'. To which the closest resemblance of answer from you was

"Will you hear a difference over the passive?? Maybe!"

Go read the last paragraph again!

Well that's not exactly a very scientific answer. I mean, after such a dissertation on tweeter protection and chest bloating over your Zapco's capabilities, come on!

1, Chest bloating??? Why?? Because I am smarter than you!!!
2, I do not work for Zapco.
3, So I should not tech him how to protect his tweeters?

The bottom line is the 'thedeal7235' doesn't have the processing capabilities you describe. Can he still benefit from going active with the equipment he has? The answer is YES! Telling him how, with what he has, and suggesting how he could make it better would be more worth your effort of typing so much.

Do you know his budget?? Secondly sound is subjective to the listener. Will you be listing for him? Answering YES, is YOUR answer not his. I did say maybe in my original post.

I suggest you spend more time trying to figure out how to actually help someone rather then spout out criticism and theory, tooting your own horn and issuing challenges. Of coarse there is more in-depth information available. I think we're all big boys and already assume people are capable of using google to help find such topics. Around here we tend to get more directly to the point.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Which you stated "My opinion for what you mention is really not worth the effort. 24db slope only, is a waste of amp." That's great. And that's really all you needed to say. My opinion would be that I disagree. It sounds like a good topic for debate. And maybe helpful if he decides to go further with his system.

Clearly you are suffing from Inferiority complex! I give him a wide and indepth answer to his question. More on the lines of broadening the mind on ones knowledge of the subject on hand. But you on the other hand would rather feed short hand information. To have someone comming back to you, for more misinformed information, so you can feel good about yourself. And when they blow something up! You would then blame them for doing something wrong.

I believe in teaching someone to fish, so they can feed themself. Not toss them a slice of bread like you do. So they can come back to you the next day for more. His question clearly shows, he does not know much about going active. I gave him the information to help him make an educated decision.

Meanwhile, if you're gonna issue a challenge then do it! Don't call us out then say "well if .... I would ... " . Idle threats will not go unchallenged. Make the challenge or keep it to yourself!

Well............... I would answer. But I already stated the facts. Once again your avatar speaks volume about you.

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:29 pm

Uh oh.

I thinks we got a smarty pants who clearly needs everyone to know it......... Kinda like the forgotten kid in the corner, screaming like a little school girl. That's a fact too.

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:40 pm

LOOK, GREG WAS RIGHT!!!!
I USED to run the 500.4 bridged(250rms by 2) to the front set of 6.5 elites-passive, i took his advice, bypassed the amp, ran the tweets off the front 2 channels of 500.4, the 2 mids off the rear channel, all getting signal from the mx3i, it sounds better and the output sounds just as loud and clearer at the 75 watts rms, than the 250 by 2 passive setup- i have mulitplied the tweets by 10, i would say they are around 2khz, the sub end of the mx3i is crossed at 80hz, so my understanding, per the manuel of mx3i, is tha tthe bandpass is playing at 80-2khz? irregardless, it sounds very clean, incredible etc, i feel all these years ive been ROBBED via passive xovers, never opposed to external xovers-my old stereo shop said to NEVER< EVER go active, they were almost always right about alot( i placed 2nd and third alot from their instsalls)
but i love active and have been playing it that way 2 days straight, no issues, my mids are more alive than ever, -ive been robbed for 15 years from true , natural , realistic reproduction, -Christian

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:58 pm

thedeal7235 wrote:LOOK, GREG WAS RIGHT!!!!
I USED to run the 500.4 bridged(250rms by 2) to the front set of 6.5 elites-passive, i took his advice, bypassed the amp, ran the tweets off the front 2 channels of 500.4, the 2 mids off the rear channel, all getting signal from the mx3i, it sounds better and the output sounds just as loud and clearer at the 75 watts rms, than the 250 by 2 passive setup- i have mulitplied the tweets by 10, i would say they are around 2khz, the sub end of the mx3i is crossed at 80hz, so my understanding, per the manuel of mx3i, is tha tthe bandpass is playing at 80-2khz? irregardless, it sounds very clean, incredible etc, i feel all these years ive been ROBBED via passive xovers, never opposed to external xovers-my old stereo shop said to NEVER< EVER go active, they were almost always right about alot( i placed 2nd and third alot from their instsalls)
but i love active and have been playing it that way 2 days straight, no issues, my mids are more alive than ever, -ive been robbed for 15 years from true , natural , realistic reproduction, -Christian

GREAT!!! As long as you are happy. Thats all that matters.

.

thedeal7235 · Post by **thedeal7235** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 8:05 pm

I DO APPRECIATE all KNOWLEDGE- can never have too much, but the active ( w/external processing sounds soooooooooooo much better, the soundstage is ALIVE! thanks for ur knowledge as well, i do appreciate it, and Greg has also always been very helpful-would of never known of making a time delay circuit- which enables me to turn the processor off last so no spikes are created

Post by **mhyde71** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 8:41 pm

i'm going to ask a stupid question, well what might be a stupid question for some, but not me

It is my understanding that an active crossover is a crosover with gain functions and typically done before the amplification process. Passive Xovers are for when after the amplification process is comp0lete and just before the driver...
What does that make the crossovers in the HU then.. active right?... I'm just curious about that.. but it leads me to more...
how does/what's it mean to use both and what is happening then?? am I really screwing things up or am I thinking to hard about this... what I am getting at is the HPF (high pass filter) on my head unit is typically xovered @ 125hz, sometimes 80 but mostly 125... and then from there it shoots to amp then through a passive 2 way separtes xovers (Image Dynamics Chamelions), anyways.. is there something, am I missing something doing this?? when I shut off my HPF in the HU, i get pops and all kinds of BS out of the drivers (fronts and rear fill) as there is too many lows (i suppose) getting through the passsive network?? why is that..??
ID didnt think/say when they made these xovers that everyone that has these will have a HU with a HPF at 80/125hz...? so what is it that is going on then? in theory I should be able to turn it off, and even xover @ 50hz HPF if I wanted to right? or what?

Post by **smgreen20** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 8:59 pm

Evo, the bottom line is you opened your mouth with a cocky attitude.

Sorry, but only when we get to know you do we tolerate it.

If you have something informative to share (as you did) then by all means do so. Just think about the way you come across to us. You did have a sound that seemed that what you had was the best. ZAPCO is good hell yea! BUT!!!!!!!....... That's also your opinion.

We welcome you, but put the attitude on the back burner until we know you. It's just as if you met someone for the first time. You don't want someone thinking your an ass if they haven't gotten to know you.

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:49 am

smgreen20>>>>> You know who I am from the original PG & SB forum days.
Here's a reminder D!ckhead

HoseHead · Post by **HoseHead** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:52 am

Stick a fork in evo. He's done in here......... See ya.

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:02 am

HoseHead wrote:Stick a fork in evo. He's done in here......... See ya.

WE Hornswoggle....... eh!

.

evo9 · Post by **evo9** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:06 am

mhyde71 wrote:i'm going to ask a stupid question, well what might be a stupid question for some, but not me

It is my understanding that an active crossover is a crosover with gain functions and typically done before the amplification process. Passive Xovers are for when after the amplification process is comp0lete and just before the driver...
What does that make the crossovers in the HU then.. active right?... I'm just curious about that.. but it leads me to more...
how does/what's it mean to use both and what is happening then?? am I really screwing things up or am I thinking to hard about this... what I am getting at is the HPF (high pass filter) on my head unit is typically xovered @ 125hz, sometimes 80 but mostly 125... and then from there it shoots to amp then through a passive 2 way separtes xovers (Image Dynamics Chamelions), anyways.. is there something, am I missing something doing this?? when I shut off my HPF in the HU, i get pops and all kinds of BS out of the drivers (fronts and rear fill) as there is too many lows (i suppose) getting through the passsive network?? why is that..??
ID didnt think/say when they made these xovers that everyone that has these will have a HU with a HPF at 80/125hz...? so what is it that is going on then? in theory I should be able to turn it off, and even xover @ 50hz HPF if I wanted to right? or what?

Not stupid by any means. Those were some of the things that crossed my mind, years ago when I started thinking active.

You are correct on the HU xover being active! Active in this case simply means, there is an electronic xover between the signal and the amplifer.

how does/what's it mean to use both and what is happening then?? am I really screwing things up or am I thinking to hard about this

A series of xover is being used together creates a cascading effects. You would only be able to tune between the highest and lowest order set up stream. For example; if you set the HU xover high pass at 18000hz. Dont set the amplifer hi pass xover below 18000hz. There wont be much to amplifi, since the higher order from the HU already removed the frequencies below the set 18000hz. The amplifier cannot poduce what is already removed. Also keep in mind the xover slopes comes into play. Another example; if the hi pass is xover at 18000hz at a 24db slope. And you amp has a 16db slope xover. You may not want to set you amp hi pass at 19000hz. Reason being a 24db slope is much steeper than a 16 db slope, and the amp cant produce whats already removed. Once again the higher order comes into play. These are some reasons why, some say their system gets louder,clearer,etc when they go active. And this all falls back to understanding and tuning.

Here something to think about. A home stereo receiver has the typical bass, treble and maybe eq and, a frequency range of 20Hz - 20kHz

Where is the xover to be used located? In the speaker of choice to be used! So in a passive setup do you really want to use the amplifer xover?? One would be surprised if they shut the amp xover off. It might sound like you are running active.......

I dont have a direct answer for the poping noises you mention. Could be a problem with one of the device or, over modulated frequency. But this is a good reason why tweeter protection is important in an active setup.

.

gkitching · Post by **gkitching** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:26 am

mhyde71 wrote:i'm going to ask a stupid question, well what might be a stupid question for some, but not me

It is my understanding that an active crossover is a crosover with gain functions and typically done before the amplification process. Passive Xovers are for when after the amplification process is comp0lete and just before the driver...
What does that make the crossovers in the HU then.. active right?... I'm just curious about that.. but it leads me to more...
how does/what's it mean to use both and what is happening then?? am I really screwing things up or am I thinking to hard about this... what I am getting at is the HPF (high pass filter) on my head unit is typically xovered @ 125hz, sometimes 80 but mostly 125... and then from there it shoots to amp then through a passive 2 way separtes xovers (Image Dynamics Chamelions), anyways.. is there something, am I missing something doing this?? when I shut off my HPF in the HU, i get pops and all kinds of BS out of the drivers (fronts and rear fill) as there is too many lows (i suppose) getting through the passsive network?? why is that..??
ID didnt think/say when they made these xovers that everyone that has these will have a HU with a HPF at 80/125hz...? so what is it that is going on then? in theory I should be able to turn it off, and even xover @ 50hz HPF if I wanted to right? or what?

Yes, you are thinking right. The passive x-over that comes with a component set only filters the frequencies between the tweeter and mid/woofer. It does not filter the low freq signal to the mid. Using the headunit's HPF , you are stopping any frequecies below the selected point from reaching the amp. The amp will amplify only the signal it receives. Then your passive will divide the remaining, amplified signal to the speakers.

So yes it is still very common to use an active hp filter, be it from the head unit, outboard x-over or on the amp itself, to block the extreme lows going to a component set that ultilizes a passive x-over.

The popping you hear is the mid over excurting trying to play those lows that it can't handle well. This is why we want to 'limit' them with the HPF. Then let your subs do all the dirty work for the lows.

gkitching · Post by **gkitching** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:38 am

evo9 wrote: Once again your avatar speaks volume about you.

Thank You! I searched a great deal for one that gives any viewer an immediate and precise indication of my exact mental and physical aptitude. I'm glad you like it soo much.

gkitching · Post by **gkitching** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:12 pm

thedeal7235 wrote:i have mulitplied the tweets by 10, i would say they are around 2khz, the sub end of the mx3i is crossed at 80hz, so my understanding, per the manuel of mx3i, is tha tthe bandpass is playing at 80-2khz? -Christian

Yes you are correct.

I might suggest tho that you raise the x-over point between the tweet and mid. 2000hz is probably the lowest I would run those tweets. And not at a very high level for very long either. I've found that 3.1k - 3.5k hz is a comfortable range for those tweeters.