I think part of the reason I found the above Xover is because I would not need to split the signal from the preamp, the Xover does the splitting. I also planned on opening up the speakers and bipassing the first crossover, so at least the sub would be truly active. From what I understand there are two passive crossovers in a 3way speaker. 1 b/t bass and mid-high and 1 b/t mid and high.
I spent some time reading/looking at y splitters but my feeling there is no advantage to passive bi-amping. one, the signal would be passivly split. two, the amps would still be sending a full range signal to each speaker. three, all the passive xovers in the speaker would still be used, giving no realy sonic or power advantage.
And btw, if anyone has a better Xover suggestion in the <$200 range I'm all ears!
your point is a good one on the balanced/unbalanced signal. Whatever preamp I research, I will need to find out specifically if it will send a balanced signal independant of the source.
Thanks!
I spent some time reading/looking at y splitters but my feeling there is no advantage to passive bi-amping. one, the signal would be passivly split. two, the amps would still be sending a full range signal to each speaker. three, all the passive xovers in the speaker would still be used, giving no realy sonic or power advantage.
And btw, if anyone has a better Xover suggestion in the <$200 range I'm all ears!
your point is a good one on the balanced/unbalanced signal. Whatever preamp I research, I will need to find out specifically if it will send a balanced signal independant of the source.
Thanks!