going active

[Solid_State13 1]

I was wondering if it would be a bad idea to run active x-overs at all 4 corners with one 4 channel amp. Like run both left tweeters off of one channel, both left woofers off one channel, etc

[hiloracerboy84 0]

i dont see why not, but you'd lose a lot of the adjustability fading/balance wise to get good imaging, which is part of the reason to go active in the first place

[Solid_State13 1]

ok, i was just wondering, because that would give a lot more flexibility, not having to worry about building/buying a crossover if i get new speakers

[hiloracerboy84 0]

you could just go w/ 2 4ch amps i guess..or go active up front, and run a small amp for passive in the rear...idk

[///M5 2,833]

Or be smart and just don't use rears. They are useless.

[fritosaregood 0]

noob question time.... im never hearing wat exactly active is. Im about to change my front doors to have a tweeter and 8in midrange with an external crossover(front L&R channels), and an 8 in each rear door for midbass(rear L&R channels). Is that "going active"?

[ABXX49 20]

noob question time.... im never hearing wat exactly active is. Im about to change my front doors to have a tweeter and 8in midrange with an external crossover(front L&R channels), and an 8 in each rear door for midbass(rear L&R channels). Is that "going active"?

Active vs. passive refers to the crossovers. In a passive the cross over will occur after the amplification. Active occurs before amplification. When you go active it allows you to changes your crossovers points and slopes. You will need a processor, active capable headunit, or active capable amplifier to run active. Passive would be like what you see in a component set. (with the crossover block).

So it depends on your processing you plan on doing to decide if you go active or not.

[bassahaulic 155]

Ok, I been wondering. Kinda what he is asking.

What if, I did a two way active. But instead of 1 speakers on each channel, I did 2.

Like, instead of 1 tweeter on the left I did 2. Get the concept?

And the SAX-100.4 is active capable right?

Edited March 13, 2009 by bassahaulic

[fritosaregood 0]

noob question time.... im never hearing wat exactly active is. Im about to change my front doors to have a tweeter and 8in midrange with an external crossover(front L&R channels), and an 8 in each rear door for midbass(rear L&R channels). Is that "going active"?

Active vs. passive refers to the crossovers. In a passive the cross over will occur after the amplification. Active occurs before amplification. When you go active it allows you to changes your crossovers points and slopes. You will need a processor, active capable headunit, or active capable amplifier to run active. Passive would be like what you see in a component set. (with the crossover block).

So it depends on your processing you plan on doing to decide if you go active or not.

What makes the h/u active capable? pre outs for front rear and sub channels?

What about the amp?

[bassahaulic 155]

That is an active capable amp.

[fritosaregood 0]

That is an active capable amp.

thats what i was thinkin, but why would you need an processor if you amp can control everything?

[bassahaulic 155]

That is an active capable amp.

thats what i was thinkin, but why would you need an processor if you amp can control everything?

You would need one of the 3 he named.

Either an Active capable H/U, a processor, or an Active capable amp.

[fritosaregood 0]

ok, thats pretty easy then

[ABXX49 20]

The primary reason for going active is to allow you to tailor your system for you SQ needs. I can't see a point in running multiple drivers. A headunit that is active capable will allow you to set your crossover points and your slopes at the headunit. An active capable amplifier will allow you to set your points at the amp, and a processor will allow you to do so there.

[ABXX49 20]

ok, thats pretty easy then

One of those easier said than done things. It will take time to get it right, but with time you can do it!

[bassahaulic 155]

The primary reason for going active is to allow you to tailor your system for you SQ needs. I can't see a point in running multiple drivers. A headunit that is active capable will allow you to set your crossover points and your slopes at the headunit. An active capable amplifier will allow you to set your points at the amp, and a processor will allow you to do so there.

Multiple drivers right next to each other off the same channel. Make sense?

[///M5 2,833]

The primary reason for going active is to allow you to tailor your system for you SQ needs. I can't see a point in running multiple drivers. A headunit that is active capable will allow you to set your crossover points and your slopes at the headunit. An active capable amplifier will allow you to set your points at the amp, and a processor will allow you to do so there.

Multiple drivers right next to each other off the same channel. Make sense?

Not at all without knowing why?

thats what i was thinkin, but why would you need an processor if you amp can control everything?

Because the crossover itself is only part of the equation, you will need eq and t/a capabilities as well.

[Adrian_D 520]

What if, I did a two way active. But instead of 1 speakers on each channel, I did 2.

Like, instead of 1 tweeter on the left I did 2. Get the concept?

Bad idea because of interference.

The sound sorces on the same side are at diffrent distances from your ears, meaning the sound waves will interfere. Constructively or destructively and as a result the frequency response will be hurt (peaks and vallyes).

You could possibly eq out the problems but I'm not a fan of too much processing. I have seen it done with midbasses a few times but only once with tweeters.