how many of u guys are running an active front stage and how are you going about it?deck with 3 way capability, or external xover?
what do you think the pros/cons are?
Attention all members!
Have a cool ride? Then show it off on our website! All vehicles welcome!
Have a cool ride? Then show it off on our website! All vehicles welcome!
how many run an active front stage?
I have run them before when I can, but my last installs have been in regular cab trucks where I just don't have the room for the extra amps required.
When I did run them, I used external processors. Head units can do a decent job, but they just don't have the tuning capability that a good processor has, as far as equalization and time alignment go, anyway. Unless you want to use all 3 sets of preouts and buy 6 mono 1/3 octave EQs, but a processor will have all of this built in for the cost of roughly two good mono equalizers. I try to avoid processing when possible, though. If you get a midrange driver angled correctly in kick panels and tweets crossed over over 6khz on the pillars, you don't need time alignment. By 6khz and up your ears aren't dependant on pathlength differences anymore, anyway. Few sets can do this, but there are some.
When I did run them, I used external processors. Head units can do a decent job, but they just don't have the tuning capability that a good processor has, as far as equalization and time alignment go, anyway. Unless you want to use all 3 sets of preouts and buy 6 mono 1/3 octave EQs, but a processor will have all of this built in for the cost of roughly two good mono equalizers. I try to avoid processing when possible, though. If you get a midrange driver angled correctly in kick panels and tweets crossed over over 6khz on the pillars, you don't need time alignment. By 6khz and up your ears aren't dependant on pathlength differences anymore, anyway. Few sets can do this, but there are some.
I aam running active with my Focals. The mids and highs I use the decks X-over, and the sub I use the one on my amp. I would use my deck for it to, but 63 herts just isn't quit low enough.
So far I am really happy with the set up. The 8455 doeas really well with an active setup, and it gives me just enough control. I thought about going with an Audio Control Digital X over / EQ, but without an RTAhandy it would be pretty pointless for now. (who knows maybe come this summer??)
So far I am really happy with the set up. The 8455 doeas really well with an active setup, and it gives me just enough control. I thought about going with an Audio Control Digital X over / EQ, but without an RTAhandy it would be pretty pointless for now. (who knows maybe come this summer??)
I was tired of the 'all active' bandwagon...
...particularly when you see people claiming they are running 'all active' - using the filters built into their amps.
(go ahead - align THOSE two filters.
)
So, I decided to do a SQ-focused all passive system, using a huge (it's pretty much my entire rear headliner, in my Pathfinder winter-beater) custom built crossover. It feeds a phase-aligned (think: line array concentric to your headrests) array of midrange drivers in the door, and behind that another smaller phase-aligned array of midbass drivers.
Single prototype 12" subwoofer in a tunable 28hz/32hz/36hz/sealed vented enclosure in the hatch.
One 2 channel Alpine MRV-1507 running the show.
Not that I'm opposed to going all active - for a more serious system (and with a REAL CROSSOVER), it offers additional tweakability - for people that know how to tweak (hopefully these forums help lend to that) them.
Next year, my Civic has gained some competition sponsorship - it's going to be an all-active 3-way setup plus two sub systems (one for competition, one for SPL demonstrations) - my challenge has been in finding a crossover (plus processing would be nice) that can handle that many channels in one package.
I may end up using two RF three-sixties at this point, rather than a single-box solution.
But my point is simply that for MOST people, using the well-designed passive crossover supplied with your component set is the best option, and certainly the safest option with regard to avoiding tweeter damage.
Some tweeter/mid responses (unfiltered) don't even cross over one another much - and without much overlap, there isn't much room for tweakability anyway.
...particularly when you see people claiming they are running 'all active' - using the filters built into their amps.
(go ahead - align THOSE two filters.
)So, I decided to do a SQ-focused all passive system, using a huge (it's pretty much my entire rear headliner, in my Pathfinder winter-beater) custom built crossover. It feeds a phase-aligned (think: line array concentric to your headrests) array of midrange drivers in the door, and behind that another smaller phase-aligned array of midbass drivers.
Single prototype 12" subwoofer in a tunable 28hz/32hz/36hz/sealed vented enclosure in the hatch.
One 2 channel Alpine MRV-1507 running the show.
Not that I'm opposed to going all active - for a more serious system (and with a REAL CROSSOVER), it offers additional tweakability - for people that know how to tweak (hopefully these forums help lend to that) them.
Next year, my Civic has gained some competition sponsorship - it's going to be an all-active 3-way setup plus two sub systems (one for competition, one for SPL demonstrations) - my challenge has been in finding a crossover (plus processing would be nice) that can handle that many channels in one package.
I may end up using two RF three-sixties at this point, rather than a single-box solution.
But my point is simply that for MOST people, using the well-designed passive crossover supplied with your component set is the best option, and certainly the safest option with regard to avoiding tweeter damage.
Some tweeter/mid responses (unfiltered) don't even cross over one another much - and without much overlap, there isn't much room for tweakability anyway.
I currently run active through the cd8455 on the mids and highs, if you know the frequency points of your components, and can tune the active crossover accordingly , you probably won't have any problems with over-running the capabilities of your speakers. We used an AudioControl RTA to tune my car and produced a very nice sound. Now we have some true midbass drivers added to the mix so I am unsure if I will go totally active. I may use the supplied crossovers with the Focal K3P midbass drivers just to keep things simple. We have decided that the first show this car goes to will be in South Padre Island for the USAC triple point show. Not a bad place to make a first impression.
I truly think that if you are skippy enough to understand the crossover points and the capabilities of your system components, then you are good enough to figure out active crossover points...if not, there are always the ones your components came with.
I truly think that if you are skippy enough to understand the crossover points and the capabilities of your system components, then you are good enough to figure out active crossover points...if not, there are always the ones your components came with.
IASCA Certified SQ Judge
USACi Certified SQ Judge
MECA Certified SQ Judge
2010 USACi Spring Break Jam Modified SQ Champion
Moderator for https://www.facebook.com/groups/524841581331183/
CVD Audio Sales and Acquisitions Team
http://www.cvdaudio.com
USACi Certified SQ Judge
MECA Certified SQ Judge
2010 USACi Spring Break Jam Modified SQ Champion
Moderator for https://www.facebook.com/groups/524841581331183/
CVD Audio Sales and Acquisitions Team
http://www.cvdaudio.com
That's really my whole point...
It isn't "going all active" that results in better sound...
...it's the knowledge that is required to take advantage of "going all active" that results in better sound.
And the "all active bandwagon" seems to miss that stop too often.
I'm not sure I like using the Audiocontrol 3056 for RTA duties.
I prefer using the LMS system, because you can control the resolution of the display to virtually infinite - with the Audiocontrol RTA you are locked into 1/3 octave display, and at best 1dB increments (and usually 3dB for doing RTA tuning).
But more importantly, yes, it is wise to learn your factory Xover points and work from there... but it is difficult to learn the frequency response characteristics of each driver (unless you use a system like LMS
), to therefore learn how much overlap you can tweak smoothly within, before you start introducing distortions or another anomolies... moving your Xover point up high enough that you exceed the inductance of the midrange and start impacting transient response at those frequencies - or maybe more fundamentally important, run something like a tweeter too low and encounter overexcursion.
There's a lot to consider, that often isn't - even with experienced enthusiasts.
I haven't used the three-way K2P set personally, but have used the 4" K2P set in a 7-series BMW we did two years ago (and this year the owner had us switch things into his new 7-series after the lease on the first was up ), and the results were stunning - the system was integrated in with the factory Logic-7 system, plus Focal subs and Audison amplifiers that we had managed the OEM integration with the BMW I-drive system on.
That 4" driver is very transparent, and the TN52 is one of my favorites.
And with the 6.5" K2Power set, the midbass capabilities really are amazing - it's got a tremendous linear throw to the midbass driver.
But since you mention that - there is a "case in point" where you might NOT want to upgrade away from the passive Xover - the included passive Xovers are some of the nicest you will ever find, and the attenuation options on the tweeter and mid being adjustable in 1dB increments are a beautiful, easy-to-use thing.
(We've got an "ultra-install" vehicle in the works - we're even bringing in some celebrity-installer assistance - that'll be incorporating in two sets of Focal Be components, using the little 8" focal Be subs, and multiple Thesis amps if you can believe that from an equipment standpoint... that'll be the first I've played with or heard the new Be's - I'm interested to compare them to the K2P's... and if you haven't checked out THAT crossover - DO! It's the most highly engineered passive I've ever heard of)
It isn't "going all active" that results in better sound...
...it's the knowledge that is required to take advantage of "going all active" that results in better sound.
And the "all active bandwagon" seems to miss that stop too often.
I'm not sure I like using the Audiocontrol 3056 for RTA duties.
I prefer using the LMS system, because you can control the resolution of the display to virtually infinite - with the Audiocontrol RTA you are locked into 1/3 octave display, and at best 1dB increments (and usually 3dB for doing RTA tuning).
But more importantly, yes, it is wise to learn your factory Xover points and work from there... but it is difficult to learn the frequency response characteristics of each driver (unless you use a system like LMS
), to therefore learn how much overlap you can tweak smoothly within, before you start introducing distortions or another anomolies... moving your Xover point up high enough that you exceed the inductance of the midrange and start impacting transient response at those frequencies - or maybe more fundamentally important, run something like a tweeter too low and encounter overexcursion.There's a lot to consider, that often isn't - even with experienced enthusiasts.
I haven't used the three-way K2P set personally, but have used the 4" K2P set in a 7-series BMW we did two years ago (and this year the owner had us switch things into his new 7-series after the lease on the first was up
), and the results were stunning - the system was integrated in with the factory Logic-7 system, plus Focal subs and Audison amplifiers that we had managed the OEM integration with the BMW I-drive system on.That 4" driver is very transparent, and the TN52 is one of my favorites.
And with the 6.5" K2Power set, the midbass capabilities really are amazing - it's got a tremendous linear throw to the midbass driver.
But since you mention that - there is a "case in point" where you might NOT want to upgrade away from the passive Xover - the included passive Xovers are some of the nicest you will ever find, and the attenuation options on the tweeter and mid being adjustable in 1dB increments are a beautiful, easy-to-use thing.
(We've got an "ultra-install" vehicle in the works - we're even bringing in some celebrity-installer assistance
- that'll be incorporating in two sets of Focal Be components, using the little 8" focal Be subs, and multiple Thesis amps if you can believe that from an equipment standpoint... that'll be the first I've played with or heard the new Be's - I'm interested to compare them to the K2P's... and if you haven't checked out THAT crossover - DO! It's the most highly engineered passive I've ever heard of)I am very fond of the new Crossblock passive xover. and I am very intent to listening more on this new ultra install vehicle. My system is Focal, Audison and Eclipse so I am very interested in this new installation that you guys will be performing. Keep me posted and informed. Thanks
Joe
Joe
IASCA Certified SQ Judge
USACi Certified SQ Judge
MECA Certified SQ Judge
2010 USACi Spring Break Jam Modified SQ Champion
Moderator for https://www.facebook.com/groups/524841581331183/
CVD Audio Sales and Acquisitions Team
http://www.cvdaudio.com
USACi Certified SQ Judge
MECA Certified SQ Judge
2010 USACi Spring Break Jam Modified SQ Champion
Moderator for https://www.facebook.com/groups/524841581331183/
CVD Audio Sales and Acquisitions Team
http://www.cvdaudio.com
-
mikechec9
- Senior Member
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 5:53 pm
- Location: Chicago/Atlanta
- Contact:
it's all on the web page in the signature.
i'm running my highs and 6.5 with the 500.4. my mids are pushed with about 25 fewer watts from the 400.2. and of course the subs with the 1600.2. i cross them over via the alpine 701 at a steep 30 db slope. the unit offers the luxury of complete control over each driver, and each pair of drivers in the case of the eq (not afforded by the passives).
the advantages of running my system w/o the passives are control, power and dynamics. the passives ate up a significant portion of the power while the active set-up allows the drivers to really get open and provides a more revealing character to them. i'll likely never go passive again (in my own install).
i'm running my highs and 6.5 with the 500.4. my mids are pushed with about 25 fewer watts from the 400.2. and of course the subs with the 1600.2. i cross them over via the alpine 701 at a steep 30 db slope. the unit offers the luxury of complete control over each driver, and each pair of drivers in the case of the eq (not afforded by the passives).
the advantages of running my system w/o the passives are control, power and dynamics. the passives ate up a significant portion of the power while the active set-up allows the drivers to really get open and provides a more revealing character to them. i'll likely never go passive again (in my own install).
I LOVE the Alpine F#1 processors...
(a friend of mine had one in his MDX, went to finals this year, Novice division)
That's the processor I am really benchmarking against, in selecting one for my new Civic install for the upcoming season.
The liability of sponsorships chains me to specific brands however... and Alpine unfortunately isn't one of my choices.
Actually, the reason I liked that processor so much is the ability to make slope and Xover point adjustments from the front seat, which is a huge advantage in trying to make tweaks that might have at best a mild improvement on the sound and imaging - as opposed to exiting the vehicle, making an adjustment in the trunk, returning to your seat and trying to "remember" if you hear a difference or not.
That's one reason as well I like the RF 360 - it's got a nifty wireless interface controlled by a PDA, that you can use anywhere, including the front seat. And I like that it's "any PDA", not some proprietary 'extra piece' that you need to buy... unfortunately like that Alpine requires (or else - one hell of an expensive HU ).
(a friend of mine had one in his MDX, went to finals this year, Novice division)
That's the processor I am really benchmarking against, in selecting one for my new Civic install for the upcoming season.
The liability of sponsorships chains me to specific brands however... and Alpine unfortunately isn't one of my choices.
Actually, the reason I liked that processor so much is the ability to make slope and Xover point adjustments from the front seat, which is a huge advantage in trying to make tweaks that might have at best a mild improvement on the sound and imaging - as opposed to exiting the vehicle, making an adjustment in the trunk, returning to your seat and trying to "remember" if you hear a difference or not.
That's one reason as well I like the RF 360 - it's got a nifty wireless interface controlled by a PDA, that you can use anywhere, including the front seat.
And I like that it's "any PDA", not some proprietary 'extra piece' that you need to buy... unfortunately like that Alpine requires (or else - one hell of an expensive HU ).