Analog or digital crossover for subwoofer integration?

For the record, I did much the same as Bob, jettisoning ARC and Joule preamps for an Onkyo prepro.  I don't use active speakers because I prefer omnidirectional response ( and, AFAIK there are no active omnis).  You might consider flipping to NAD's two channel integrated that offers bass management and room correction.  You could also try to find a used (discontinued model) Harman Kardon HK 990, which is another 2 channel integrated with similar capabilities.

As to an analog crossover, the Marchands are hit and miss, mine was just too noisy.  You could try to find a used NHT X-1 or X-2 (also discontinued) which is an excellent, cost effective solution - if available.

Thanks bob.

I'm having a hard time finding what exactly is different about the Rane and Ashly than a Marchand, Bryston, etc.  I'm sure there are better quality parts, but they are all 24db/octave linkwitz-riley circuits. 

I looked at the first watt, bryston, and JL, but the prices just don't make sense for a $3k sub.  I'd rather have two F113s and a simple crossover than a bryston crossover and a single F113... 

Do you really feel that the SVS would have a better HPF than a Rane or Ashly crossover?  I'm doubtful that the crossover circuitry is any better and I'd suspect it to be worse.

And yeah, you're right, I don't want to go down the path of getting an AV pre-pro JUST for subwoofers.  I want to keep things simple.  I like the NAD, the DAC sounds great.

Also, I should mention that I run everything balanced and would like to keep it that way.  It's one of the reasons I'm looking at the pro stuff, it's all balanced. 

I'm almost thinking about getting the Ashly (I've ruled out the Rane because it has non-defeatable infrasonic and ultrasonic filters built in), as well as the miniDSP 2x4 and just trying out both.  At the very least, I should get their microphone and use REW to see what the room looks like.

I'm learning there are two options.  Get an analog crossover, which solves the crossover problem, has the least impact on the signal, but doesn't solve any other issues like room EQ, etc.  OR, go with a digital crossover or DSP, potentially introduce some noise or character in the signal path, but can do a lot more than just a crossover.

I use strictly digital source material, but the crossover would have to happen after the DAC, because the NAD M51 is my volume control and switcher (digital preamp).  If I kept everything digital, I would do the processing before the NAD, but I would need to do so for all of my digital sources, making things a bit complicated. 

The JL has room correction built in, but I assume you're referring to room correction for the speakers, correct? 

One of the reasons I was looking at a strictly analog crossover was because I wanted to avoid ADC>DAC in the chain.  Adding any of the digital/DSP solutions would add this conversion. 

IME, successful integration of a sub is vastly easier to achieve in the digital domain. If you use strictly digital source material, I'd say it's a no-brainer, go digital.  If you use analog source material, there may be  a philosophical issue with ADC and DAC in your signal path, so it's up to you and your philosophy.

By the way, IME room correction will help with the integration process  immensely.  Once you eliminate all of the FR ireegularities in the x-over region, getting a seamless hand-off is so much easier.  

As always, YMMV.