Crossover or crossoverless


The founder and builder of the highly respected high-end speaker company Gauder AkustikDr. Gauder, says that using a full-range driver is very bad. He uses 3- to 4-way speakers with extremely complex 10th-order crossovers consisting of 58–60 components.

In contrast, some other well-known and equally respected speaker companies — such as Voxativ, Zu, Cube Audio, and Totem — use crossoverless designs.

Who is right, and who is wrong?

bache

I’m not an advocate of a Dual Concentric Driver, Multi Driver or a Panel Speaker Iike an ESL. 

I own and use all Three Types. 

I am an advocate of how they are Set Up. As Cabinet Construction are not all equal and the impact of energy produced by Drivers and this energy effecting a Cabinet is not all equal. 

The Structure used under a Speaker has a substantial influence on End Sound being produced. 

The Interface of the Speaker to the Room and the Rooms capability of managing Sound Energy within it, substantially effects the End Sound produced. 

A preference for a particular design for a Speaker, if all that is being considered, will create one outcome only. 

Only Luck on one’s side will create the End Sound that thoroughly impresses. 

When an Interface for a Speaker is discovered that shows End Sound being produced that really impresses. Why care about a Xover or no Xover. Bring new options for an End Sound into the Space allocated for experiencing the Audio System. 

 

 

 

 

@bdgregory , Roy of Green Mountain advocated for 1st order / 6 dB crossovers. In practice they were more complicated than standard text book illustrations, in that they had elements added to compensate for driver irregularities, etc. in an effort towards making a complete time coherent speaker system as heard from the suggested listening position to speaker distance.

Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 

Driver quality has improved. While the answers have all been correct, listening through the clairAudient 1+1 v5 may change a few of them. This is a remarkably designed product that compensates for the very few resonances in the full range of the newest version of the driver.

I grew up using speakers that were no more than 8” full range drivers with wizzer cones attached.  Then I bought some ADS 300’s. Tiny two way speakers with a big sound. Then came my first subwoofer and a separate active crossover to fill in the bottom.  Essentially making my system a three way. Much later came the DQ-10’s with their 5 way crossovers.  When I added the sub and crossover it became a 6 way speaker system. Now,  I have a 3.5 way and a sub. 
I bet the crossover’s in the Amati’s cost more than my first few systems combined!

I sure have come a long way in my journey.

Bache, this question is no different than you post on single or multiple driver speakers. See my response in full.  Conclusion, it depends upon the execution of the design intent and our personal sound quality preferences.  There is no right or wrong.  

 

I have a pair of PearlAcoustics Sibelius single driver Voigt tube speakers, and love them. If one argues that the audio signal can only be degraded by components, having no component such as crossover is the ideal situation.

I've also seen some old audio luminary quote (from B&W founder????) that ideally there is a single driver speaker, but if you cannot get a decent result, then add a second, if that is not decent then add a third. That means, multi driver speakers are the result of the inability of a speaker designer to make a good single driver speaker.

There is also the problem of wave cohesion from multiple drivers, that is non-existent with single driver models.

But as always, to each their own.

Crossovers take energy. I use an electronic crossover.less energy less distortion and dsp the room a nd change frequency without component change.however if it sounds great someone got it correct no matter what magic they used and that's what counts.enjoy the hunt.

Most popular new Model  Element Metal  V2 , got only tweeter crossover, probably  only one or two elements , but two main drivers  -crosoverless see ( The design is a controlled ferocity that amazingly requires no crossover, channeling vast dynamic potential into the purest musical experience)  -from Totem  web site 

That intricate a crossover may give you a textbook frequency response, but I would think it sucks up dynamics like a sponge.

No one is 100% right or 100% wrong.  It’s highly subjective and depends on the objective.  All have pros and cons, and there are many ways to skin a cat.  It boils down to highlighting the best choices, and minimizing the effect of the unavoidable less desirable ones.