![]() |
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: TYVM. Are you saying the efficiency of the speaker will increase... posted by jeffreybehr on July 14, 2005 at 15:58:48:
Depends on the passive crossover design, but no, I was too extatic about multiamped systems, I ran some sims with 2nd, 4th and LR 4th order filters, and got respectively about 2,4 and 6dB loss.That said, I forgot some important points:
(1) when driving hard (up and above clipping) a PA connected to a passive Xover, the spectral content changes (due to distortion when clipping) and you got a huge amount of energy located in the highest harmonics (up to one half of the total energy content). This energy will be fed to the tweeter alone, which will likely fail. It can happen for example with a PA of 150W rated power (clipping above, with standard 8ohm load) feeding a two-way system with a 200W boomer and a 50W tweeter.
This is the cause of many tweeter failures.
(2) when bi-ou tri-amping your system, have the PAs connect DIRECTLY to its speaker. I mean, unsolder, skip and swap the passive crossover. Most advantages about impedance (seen from the driver, and seen from the PA) would be lost if you let derelict components in the signal path. In fact, it is to the point that I don'"t see real advantages in multiamped systems where the passive crossover stay connected
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: TYVM. Are you saying the efficiency of the speaker will increase... - Jacques 08:48:02 07/15/05 (4)
- I certainly agree with #2 if one is actively filtering, but surely... - jeffreybehr 19:56:18 07/15/05 (3)
- Active Biamping vs passive - Jacques 04:26:12 07/18/05 (1)
- Jacques, I surrender! Besides, I already said I agree that active biamping... - jeffreybehr 09:51:19 07/18/05 (0)
- Active Biamping vs passive - Jacques 04:22:08 07/18/05 (0)