opaqueice;169659 Wrote: > Please, let's not discuss absolute phase - it's silly and will lead us > off topic quickly. > > About what you say here, though, why do you think this preserves phase? > Perhaps I'm not understanding something, but if your crossovers are > analogue (irrespective of whether they are placed before or after > amplification) I don't see how they can possibly do so. Furthermore > the drivers themselves have a resonant frequency and therefore will > also distort the phase (which is something DEQX claims to be able to > correct for).
I agree absolute phase is silly (hopefully I made that clear - sorry if not!). My experience - based on listening rather than any scientific measurements - is that active crossovers at line level seem to provide a smoother, more controlled, lees "phasey" sound than passive x-overs in the speakers. I actually agree that digital x-overs would be better than the analogue ones I use - but then the ones I use are about £175 per driver module and I use 12 of them in my 5.1 active system. I really don't believe it is possible to build a passive crossover that can deliver the same results as an active one. To a certain extent, all digital DRC solutions are going to react to the speaker resonance you mention... As I alluded, there are other reasons why I prefer active solutions, but this one is pretty important to me. I do believe that digital x-overs would give you the best shot at what you want. -- Phil Leigh ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31590 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
