First Order Crossovers: Pros and Cons


I wonder if some folks might share their expertise on the question of crossover design. I'm coming around to the view that this is perhaps the most significant element of speaker design yet I really know very little about it and don't really understand the basic principles. Several of the speakers I have heard in my quest for full range floorstanders are "first order" designs. I have really enjoyed their sound but do not know if this is attributable primarily to the crossover design or to a combination of other factors as well. In addition, I have heard that, for example, because of the use of this crossover configuration on the Vandersteen 5 one has to sit at least 10 feet away from the speakers in order for the drivers to properly mesh. Is this really true and if so why? Another brand also in contention is the Fried Studio 7 which also uses a first order design. Same issue? Could someone share in laymans terms the basic principles of crossover design and indicate the advantages and disadvantages of each. Also, what designers are making intelligent choices in trying to work around the problems associated with crossover design? Thanks for your input.
128x128dodgealum
Driver aligment isn;t easy to do well (wavelengths are so short up there). A Supravox 215 fron mounted on the baffle and a tweet back mounted with a makeshift waveguide, blended quite well at ~8-9kHz. All open baffle.
bastanissells an open baffle kit called "prometheus airforce" that's reputedly very good (someone does sell import it in the US).
Do check the Tangbang's excursion capabilities -- I think you'd need to cross the Tang to a woof quite high up to avoid hitting xmax too soon. Also run a quick test to see if a small contour wouldn't be indicated (quite a few people at diyaudio have worked with the Tang).

As to the Hammer, I haven't heard it but given the many accolades (esp with a fostex supertweet) it may be an option. Good discussion at melhuish's site (super 12.
Cheers
Skrivis - Srajan Ebaen has recently written about the "Doppler Effect" in his quasi review of the Zu Cable Druid speaker. The following is an excerpt in which he mentions the Doppler Effect.

"Conceptually, single-driver loudspeakers (this one's technically a 1.5-way) are phase and time coherent though the Doppler effect could be cited when you consider how the high-frequency whizzer cone rides atop the woofer. The day-to-day observable Doppler effect occurs with police or fire sirens. They sound higher pitched as they approach (wavelengths shorten), then successively lower as they pass us and recede into the distance. Theoretically, each time the Druids' woofers move forward, they modulate the tweeter response. Once you do the math and consider the average stroke of this 10" driver -- to calculate possible tweeter response deviations in terms of how woofer distance traveled equates to wave length -- it seems more of a conceptual than audible problem. Still, it's only fair to mention in this context and avoid painting a picture of theoretical perfection. Clearly, if the single-driver ideal were the one perfect solution, nobody would bother with multi-driver designs. The market place rather demolishes any such notions in one brief instance. As usual, it's about priorities. What type of compromises are acceptable to facilitate certain concrete gains that matter more to you than that which is sacrificed?"

Here is the link: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/zu/druid.html
Perhaps the single drive IS the perfect solution. They just don't want people to know. Satisfied people don't need to upgrade evry few months.