I was just trying to see, because you have actually done the work, to what i am guessing is a pretty high level of success, as how much R&D is involved in going from passive to active.
Having designed both types of crossovers, and upgraded passives to actives, I can say the following:
- Time to measure and gather the electro-acoustical parameters of the drivers in the cabinet are about the same
- The active crossover is much easier and faster to implement. While easier, neither is trivial to do well.
- The DSP version wins for the built-in digital delay. It’s a lot easier to pick and choose your filter slopes without regard for phase matching. For instance, Troels often uses a stepped baffle when he wants to use 4th order filters, the alternative is a lot more parts for an all pass circuit.
My implementations used off-the-shelf Hypex plate amps, which have too many features for a sellable product. Where I think active designers need to spend more time is in getting a plate amp/dsp combination with exactly the right form factor, features and connectors they need. It’s not just the silk screen that needs to be altered, but I’m sure companies like Hypex and Pascal have entire teams to do this for you.


