Eldartford,
I'm not pontificating at all. It's just that things aren't as cut-and-dried as you would like to assume. The crossover point in a series crossover is a function of both the inductor and capacitor. If you want, you can change them both, and yet still keep the crossover point the same. If you don't believe me, look it up. It's not that hard to find.
In order to carry this conversation further, you are going to have to dedicate some effort to learning the actual math behind the problem, starting with the concept of transfer functions. It is in most college junior-level electrical circuits classes.
The advantages of series crossovers are real, but again require some mathematical background to understand. The two that in my mind are the most beneficial are:
1. It guarantees a constant-voltage transfer function. This is theoretically possible, but by no means guaranteed, by the parallel.
2. It is essentially insensitive to tolerance variations in both the drivers and reactive elements, thus giving a much better chance of good performance in the real world compared to the parallel.
To this can be added the additional benefit, stated in one of my earlier posts, that the series topology forces you to do everything exactly right. While this is also theoretically possible in the parallel, for all practical purposes it NEVER happens in the real world. Almost every speaker you look at with a parallel network has grossly obvious and serious flaws, simply because the designer didn't want to spend the effort necessary to make it perfect. Thus it is a final "test" of the design, ensuring that there is no "fudging" going on and compromising the end result.
What I'm saying is that if a parallel is done exactly right, there is no reason, at least theoretically, it can't be as good as a series. But in the REAL world, it never is.
Karl Schuemann
AudioMachina