Recommendations for electronic crossover.

11Audio.com aka OCD hifi guy on you tube is in the process of having Marchand design one for him. Should be available soon, if not already

Old thread - oh well, as poster @jaystereo said.

@georgehifi --

Don’t go digital to me it only led to sterility no matter what I tried. And I lost the sound of my favorite dac for whatever rubbish dac is in the digital dsp/xovers ones.

Not my experience. Recently went all-active with my existing Xilica digital cross-over, and it’s a bliss. Indeed, once clear what can be done with a quality digital cross-over (and the Xilica is that), even very early in the tuning process, there’s the strong sensation of not wanting to go back to a passive filter - like, ever.

There are caveats, however; an amp channel is needed for every driver or drivers that are coupled in parallel, and in my case a 110dB sensitivity horn/driver combo can lead to a degree of background noise depending on the amp/filter used. Moreover, unless the filtering has been preset by the manufacturer (like Sanders Sound Systems) one will have to do this him- or herself, and to do this accurately measurements will have to be made, though only as a guideline; remember to let your ears be the final judge with every step taken, because measurements need to be interpreted in light of their specific implementation, and often what is measured isn’t the direct link to its audible "equivalent," so to speak. Although, audiophiles invest their time in many a thing when it comes to their stereo set-up, and I don’t see an active approach being an insurmountable task with care and attention to detail.

Doing the filtering ahead of the amplification on the signal-side, and hereby letting each amp channel see its respective driver(s) directly without the interference of passive components, can have obvious advantages. To my ears passive filters invariably infuse some degree of softness or smear, whereas with a quality active configuration transient cleanness, clarity, resolution and dynamic prowess is enhanced. Actually I also find the overall presentation with active to be easier and smoother on the ear. Done right going active is the real and preferable deal, I’d say.

Or what I would do with those speakers is to go horizontal Bi-amping with the apms you have as the B&W internal xovers are of very high quality and well sorted.
Or with something like a nice Pass Labs Class-A XA30.5 (amp1) on the mids and highs and a cheap Class-D (amp2) on the bass

I’ve tried bi-amping both horizontally and vertically, yet every time I’ve preferred bridged mode configuration with two identical amps, where possible (and where not I usually preferred vertical bi-amp config.). To each their own, but bridging is seriously underrated in hifi.

Not my experience. Recently went all-active with my existing Xilica digital cross-over, and it’s a bliss.

Each to his own, on that.

To each their own, but bridging is seriously underrated in hifi

That’s because all you get is more wattage, everything else takes a hit, especially current drive into lower impedance’s and stability, distortions. It almost makes what was a good amp into a PA amp.

@georgehifi --

That’s because all you get is more wattage, everything else takes a hit, especially current drive into lower impedance’s and stability, distortions. It almost makes what was a good amp into a PA amp.

Sounds to me mostly like theoretically-based conjecture. Have you listened to bridged configurations to form an opinion this way?

At a friend’s place a few weeks ago I heard the latest bridged amp installment to come across my ears. My friend already had one Crown Studio Reference II in his set-up driving his main speakers, but then bought a second one for bridged duties. Once gain matching between the mains and subs had settled as well as some minor delay and PEQ tweaks, a bunch of us came over to listen (all of us were very familiar with the sound of his set-up with only one Ref. II).

Each and every one of us preferred the sound of the bridged configuration, with some describing the sound as now being "more hifi" in the sense of it being even more refined and smooth in the top end, while being more open and lively overall. I agreed with this sentiment. My friend found that in bridged mode it (subjectively) didn’t sound as loud at elevated SPL’s, though clearly feeling the loudness on his body. There wasn’t necessarily anything "PA" about the sound with the two bridged Ref. II’s, but simply a more open, effortless, refined and lively presentation (sorry to reiterate) that accommodated every music musical genre we cared to throw at it. Which, btw., mirrors my impressions from the previous bridged amp constellations I’ve heard.

jpahere, I hat to be a stick in the mud but B+W does a good job designing it's cross overs. In my experience you are going to wind up pulling out your hair trying to get the system to sound right. I think you are much better off with something like a 100watt/ch Class A amp, perhaps a lightly used Pass amp. Used JC 1's would also be a great choice and because the new JC1+ is out a lot of old JC1s should show up on the market soon.

As a note to others considering this sort of approach dynamic speaker do not benefit much from bi amping and frequently wind up worse. You are much better off adding two subwoofers with both high and low pass filters.