DSP vs. active analog crossover vs. passive analog crossover. What is your take?


What is you take on the sound quality?  Any personal experience and knowledge on the subject will be greatly appreciated. 

128x128tannoy56

Showing 1 response by rolox

For me it's analogue active. After the digital to analogue conversion, adding another conversion to digital then to analogue again doesn't seem transparent. I know, DSP allows for things that an analogue crossover will never allow you to do, important things like time alignement, slope selection, sometimes FIR filters... but my question is: do we ALWAYS need those? Isn't it better to try to solve things differently? Time-align physically when needed (and possible)? Use drivers that don't need EQ? treat your room, not your signal? etc etc.

I just love the way my simple Sublime Acoustic K231 crossover sounds. It doesn't mess with the signal. 

We are all different and are all sensitive to different things, I guess, and there's no absolute answer that fits each and every situation. That's the beauty of this hobby.

Still, I have a feeling DSP has become the "universal solution" for everything these days, for a certain percentage of audiophiles, and to me that is not the way to deal with things.