Your thoughts on this?
I got my Boston Pro60's running off a Ti400.2 and was kicking around the idea of trying to run them active. I would have to find a Ti500.4 and another set of RCA's before I could do it. Alot of people at caraudio.com suggest going active.
Also, I would be using the crossover's bulit into my Alpine 9887
Going active with front stage?
Going active won't change the tonal characteristics of a speaker. It is more about the control over x-over points and slopes and using that control to make the speakers work in your particular set-up. Of coarse there is the argument of 'the least amount of devices in the circuit'. And one could argue whether a x-over on the signal side is more detrimental than filters on the output side. But reality is that the lack of control over the acoustics of the car means that designing something like passive x-overs that aren't adjustable is truely hit & miss. I personally would rather be able to adjust settings on the fly with an active set-up then rebuild passive set-ups over and over till I get the desired effect.
Soooo.. If you're not happy with the sound of your speakers, then going active won't change that. If its that you don't like how they blend and image then going active will change that.
Soooo.. If you're not happy with the sound of your speakers, then going active won't change that. If its that you don't like how they blend and image then going active will change that.
Greg Kitching
gkitching wrote:Going active won't change the tonal characteristics of a speaker. It is more about the control over x-over points and slopes and using that control to make the speakers work in your particular set-up. Of coarse there is the argument of 'the least amount of devices in the circuit'. And one could argue whether a x-over on the signal side is more detrimental than filters on the output side. But reality is that the lack of control over the acoustics of the car means that designing something like passive x-overs that aren't adjustable is truely hit & miss. I personally would rather be able to adjust settings on the fly with an active set-up then rebuild passive set-ups over and over till I get the desired effect.
Soooo.. If you're not happy with the sound of your speakers, then going active won't change that. If its that you don't like how they blend and image then going active will change that.
That is well put. It's hard for me to tell because I don't have "alot" of knowledge but I know a good bit and understand what your saying. I know what it should sound like but not so sure how to reach that sound. I have the mid's in the doors and the tweeters in the dash. EQ is flat but I played around with it alittle bit. Maybe i'm just too picky. These things just seem to be hard on the ear's with rock music.
I wouldn't say you're too picky. You know what you want/expect. Getting there just isn't cut and dry. That would be too easy!
Suggestions would be first try playing with the tweeter placement. Are the tweeters in the dash pointing directly into the windshield? Sometimes that will cause reflections and direct waves to interact resulting in a harshness I believe is called intermodulation distortion. (correct me if I'm saying this wrong) Alot of times just angling the tweeter away from the glass will clean it up quite a bit.
Next, don't be afraid to use that eq. How many bands do you have to work with? Let your ears tell you if your adjustments are 'pleasing'.
Both of these suggestions won't cost you anything except a little time playing. And nothing beats first hand experience playing around and understanding what changes effect your sound. To me it's what's fun about car audio. Experimenting. Listening to alot of good music. Drinking a few beers and debating why some things work and others don't. You know ... I think they call it 'The Bug' and you've been bitten.
Or .. you could have shitty speakers
J/K! Sorry, I couldn't resist after all that seriousness
Suggestions would be first try playing with the tweeter placement. Are the tweeters in the dash pointing directly into the windshield? Sometimes that will cause reflections and direct waves to interact resulting in a harshness I believe is called intermodulation distortion. (correct me if I'm saying this wrong) Alot of times just angling the tweeter away from the glass will clean it up quite a bit.
Next, don't be afraid to use that eq. How many bands do you have to work with? Let your ears tell you if your adjustments are 'pleasing'.
Both of these suggestions won't cost you anything except a little time playing. And nothing beats first hand experience playing around and understanding what changes effect your sound. To me it's what's fun about car audio. Experimenting. Listening to alot of good music. Drinking a few beers and debating why some things work and others don't. You know ... I think they call it 'The Bug' and you've been bitten.
Or .. you could have shitty speakers
J/K! Sorry, I couldn't resist after all that seriousness
Greg Kitching
Ya, I think maybe they just suck! 
But ya the tweets are facing the windshield so maybe i'll play around with them. The other Pro's i've heard where in kicks years ago and sounded awesome. I have the Alpine 9887 H/U which has a 7 band graphic EQ 63/150/400/1k/2.5k/6.3k/17.5k or I can choose Parametric EQ and select my own bands.
But ya the tweets are facing the windshield so maybe i'll play around with them. The other Pro's i've heard where in kicks years ago and sounded awesome. I have the Alpine 9887 H/U which has a 7 band graphic EQ 63/150/400/1k/2.5k/6.3k/17.5k or I can choose Parametric EQ and select my own bands.
The door location is not the optimal spot for mids and tweets. However, having the them together in the door would probably be better then mid in door and tweet in dash. It wouldn't nessesarily lower the stage. Your stage depth would be sacraficed but at the same time the width of the stage would increase. It would just be 'in your face' as opposed to on the dash. Image focus would probably get better. but you'll most likely have to deal with nearside bias. Does that Alpine have any form of left/right delay? If it does that may help offset the near side bias.
Give it a try! See whether you like the results or not. All vehicles are different and it's impossible to predict how it might work in your car/truck/suv.
Easiest thing would be to put a temporary extention on the wire to the tweet as it is now. Then using velcro or something, stick it to various places and listen to what works best. It will save you the time of re-wiring back and forth to the different locations. Once you've decided on the best spot, then do the wiring.
Give it a try! See whether you like the results or not. All vehicles are different and it's impossible to predict how it might work in your car/truck/suv.
Easiest thing would be to put a temporary extention on the wire to the tweet as it is now. Then using velcro or something, stick it to various places and listen to what works best. It will save you the time of re-wiring back and forth to the different locations. Once you've decided on the best spot, then do the wiring.
Greg Kitching
Well I picked up a ZX475.4ti and some rca's so i'm going to try running my fronts active using my Alpine 9887. I gave Boston a call yesterday looking for some info and the guy really thought it was a bad idea. Says about the different types of crossovers they could have used and so forth.. And here is a quote from there site...
"The first point is that the typical active crossover does not allow nearly the flexibility of a passive design. The second point is that we often stagger or overlap the crossover points to achieve a flat response. The actual electrical crossover points for the woofer and tweeter however are generally asymmetric and different on all of the Boston components. Finding an active crossover that will allow you to adjust each of these points independently and tuning it correctly is going to be difficult but not impossible. Just as a note: designing a passive network takes our team of experienced engineers several months to complete"
He says I would be better off just using the crossovers and bridging the amp with 250rms per side. What you guys think?
"The first point is that the typical active crossover does not allow nearly the flexibility of a passive design. The second point is that we often stagger or overlap the crossover points to achieve a flat response. The actual electrical crossover points for the woofer and tweeter however are generally asymmetric and different on all of the Boston components. Finding an active crossover that will allow you to adjust each of these points independently and tuning it correctly is going to be difficult but not impossible. Just as a note: designing a passive network takes our team of experienced engineers several months to complete"
He says I would be better off just using the crossovers and bridging the amp with 250rms per side. What you guys think?