passive vs. electronic passover

I agree with Bob Reynolds.When adding a subwoofer system,it is easy enough to position the them for phasing.Removing passives in an already full-range speaker system is another thing all together.The problem being that a passive crossover can adjust for timimg/phase.Taking these out and using an out-board unit usually won't compensate for the phasing.In order to get active units with a delay function can be an expensive proposition.
The best crossovers I have used were passive/capacitor based on top and active in the bass,similar to the Dahlquist and ARC units.JMHO.

Don't active crossovers screw up the time and phase alignment of the drivers? I'm not experienced in this area, but there seems to be a cadre of time-coherent devotees that warn of anything but a "slow" crossover. With minimal listening I do see some benefit to what they're saying (e.g., with Vandersteen's and the like), but have not listened to any "active" speakers. Anyone here care to comment or educate, especially someone familiar with both approaches?

"Read an interesting article on Bi Amping. It was stating that you should disconnect your passive crossovers to properly Bi-Amp, so you would need to hook up electronic crossovers! sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm#common-question
Any comments?

Hook up is easy. What you need to do is design and build a custom crossover since off-the-shelf crossovers are generally insufficient. Something like a DEQX might work with some effort.

The modified Behringer Ultra curve, that was available on Agon might be interesting.