As any Linn person will tell you, active multi-amping is the way to go. However, this presumes that the speaker is designed to be upgraded in this fashion. Many speakers are designed as a total package, drivers are matched to the crossover as it is presently implemented. If you start messing around with the crossover, the speaker may behave in a way that the designer hadn't anticipated. Unless you've asked the manufacturer whether the speaker can be used with an active crossover, it's a leap of faith whether it will improve its performance. I would have regard to Eldartford's comments.
Someone w Experience Active/Passive Biamping
I'm considering either line level active crossover to biamp my Magnepan 1.6QR's, or speaker level passive crossover to do same.
I'm seeing on the MUG website that line level active xo is better, since the signals are "treated" prior to amp getting them. The Behringer 2496 has been suggested for me to use.
Anyone confirm, challenge this? I'm willing to bypass the Maggie caps, inductor etc. in order to do the Behringer thing, but I'd like to hear pro's/con's prior to executing the change.
Some may be fans of speaker level passive crossovers. I was planning on building my own, but those using the line level active crossovers are insisting it's inferior. Comments?
Thanks!
I'm seeing on the MUG website that line level active xo is better, since the signals are "treated" prior to amp getting them. The Behringer 2496 has been suggested for me to use.
Anyone confirm, challenge this? I'm willing to bypass the Maggie caps, inductor etc. in order to do the Behringer thing, but I'd like to hear pro's/con's prior to executing the change.
Some may be fans of speaker level passive crossovers. I was planning on building my own, but those using the line level active crossovers are insisting it's inferior. Comments?
Thanks!
- ...
- 6 posts total
- 6 posts total