can you explain this to me

[radio66]

I have been looking for speakers for a few months now. in my quest for the perfect sound.I came accross speakers with outboard crossover what is the reason for this? do speakers sound or work any better with an outboard crossover.

[RGA]

Well Audio Note did it for their AN E speaker and it gained 3db in sesnitivity. Which means you need half the power to get the same volume now over the previous model saving a buyer considerable investment in amplification. They claim there is an improvement in low level detail to boot.

Mny manufacturers do it - each likely with their own reasons.

[bturk667]

Well Audio Note did it for their AN E speaker and it gained 3db in sesnitivity. Which means you need half the power to get the same volume now over the previous model saving a buyer considerable investment in amplification. They claim there is an improvement in low level detail to boot.

Mny manufacturers do it - each likely with their own reasons.

If so, who was your favorite? Mine was Tom Baker, loved that scarf!

[RGA]

It's rare to find people who remember the show especially outside of Britain. I lived in Wales for a year when i was a kid and grew up with Tom Baker as the good Doctor. He was my favorite and Pertwee and Davidson were good. Then if fell apart IMO.

[bturk667]

Every once in a while PBS will show some episodes over here. When I drink coffee, it is out of my Dr. Who mug!

[Woochifer]

If so, who was your favorite? Mine was Tom Baker, loved that scarf!

Well, I guess I'm partial to Tom Baker as well because he was the Doctor that I grew up with. In L.A., this off-in-the-boonies UHF station used to show Doctor Who on weekday afternoons when I got home from school (I think "Brain of Morbeus" scarred me for years -- that glowing green brain scared the hell out of me). And this was before PBS stations in the U.S. began picking up the series in earnest. I also think that era of Doctor Who was really when the writing really clicked. Having writers like Douglas Adams and Terry Nation in their prime made for great pulp. A lot of American viewers can't really get past the cheap looking sets and effects, and just appreciate those great sci-fi stories, which is too bad.

[RGA]

Well, I guess I'm partial to Tom Baker as well because he was the Doctor that I grew up with. In L.A., this off-in-the-boonies UHF station used to show Doctor Who on weekday afternoons when I got home from school (I think "Brain of Morbeus" scarred me for years -- that glowing green brain scared the hell out of me). And this was before PBS stations in the U.S. began picking up the series in earnest. I also think that era of Doctor Who was really when the writing really clicked. Having writers like Douglas Adams and Terry Nation in their prime made for great pulp. A lot of American viewers can't really get past the cheap looking sets and effects, and just appreciate those great sci-fi stories, which is too bad.

I was watching an epesode at a friend's who has satelite or super cable etc a few month's back and spotted John Cleese in a Cameo. Tom Baker saved earth, naturally, from an alien who was collecting famous paintings from earlier periods. I love the campy stuff. Though it was smarter than the average kid's show for sure.

bturk667

They used to play Dr. Who every week and they had a guy trying to sell Dr. Who memorabilia...I kind of regret not buying the Tardis mug. When you filled it with a hot drink the Tardis would dissapear. Oh well. I still have the role playing game around somwhere and a Dr. Who book with a board game in it from 1974. A long while back(sevral years) I heard Spielberg was interested in making a film version. Hey Schindler's List sat for more than a decade so he may get around to Dr. Who.

I hope it's better than that awful made for tv movie(around 1997) with Paul McGann or whatever.

[Woochifer]

I was watching an epesode at a friend's who has satelite or super cable etc a few month's back and spotted John Cleese in a Cameo. Tom Baker saved earth, naturally, from an alien who was collecting famous paintings from earlier periods. I love the campy stuff. Though it was smarter than the average kid's show for sure.

bturk667

They used to play Dr. Who every week and they had a guy trying to sell Dr. Who memorabilia...I kind of regret not buying the Tardis mug. When you filled it with a hot drink the Tardis would dissapear. Oh well. I still have the role playing game around somwhere and a Dr. Who book with a board game in it from 1974. A long while back(sevral years) I heard Spielberg was interested in making a film version. Hey Schindler's List sat for more than a decade so he may get around to Dr. Who.

I hope it's better than that awful made for tv movie(around 1997) with Paul McGann or whatever.

Actually, I have that Doctor Who mug with the disappearing TARDIS. Got it a few years ago when I made a pledge to my local PBS station, and they happened to have a bunch of vintage Doctor Who goodies that they were emptying out of their closet for a pledge drive. That mug was the only premium they were offering for pledges under $100, so I jumped on it. Now, I have to periodically remind my wife not to microwave that mug or throw it into the dishwasher because that disappearing TARDIS will disappear permanently if that happens.

I doubt another film version will go anytime soon since the BBC announced a few months ago that a new Doctor Who series is in development. They've yet to cast the new Doctor, but I understand that the series will return to the BBC sometime in 2005. No idea when or if it will be available in N.America. I do know that my local PBS station had to drop Doctor Who after a 23-year run because the BBC has made even the classic series prohibitively expensive to acquire. Also, I understand that there are some rights issues with the Daleks, so who knows if they will return in the new series.

http://www.gallifreyone.net/newstv.php

[skeptic]

RGA, you've written some pretty silly things to the point where I no longer usually even bother replying but this one really takes the cake. To increase efficiency by 3db, the old crossover network configuration would have to have eaten up more than half the amplifier power. That would have made it the worlds least efficient crossover network. Mabye you meant 0.3 db. Even that seems like a lot for just moving the electronics outside of the box and in fact is impossible to believe unless the design changed as well. The real reason for moving the crossover network outside the box is to facillitate repair or replacement when they come up with a better design. It may be slightly easier to manufacture it that way also.

[RGA]

RGA, you've written some pretty silly things to the point where I no longer usually even bother replying but this one really takes the cake. To increase efficiency by 3db, the old crossover network configuration would have to have eaten up more than half the amplifier power. That would have made it the worlds least efficient crossover network. Mabye you meant 0.3 db. Even that seems like a lot for just moving the electronics outside of the box and in fact is impossible to believe unless the design changed as well. The real reason for moving the crossover network outside the box is to facillitate repair or replacement when they come up with a better design. It may be slightly easier to manufacture it that way also.

Where did you get the idea that I said this...I answered the question with a claim made by an audio manufacturer - Legacy does it among others - Audio Note claimed it not I and that is what I said in the post. Since they manage to make infinite baffle small sealed speakers with 90db sensitivity and an easy load all across the band with extremely low measured bass distorion - all of which is supposedly impossible - yet they do it perhaps they have a clue after all.

Their claim "The complete range of E loudspeakers has been revised with the development of the external crossover for the the upper part of the range, and a new, higher efficiency woofer which raise the sensitivity of most levels to 98dB/w/m."

The higher efficiency may be mostly due to the woofer for all I know - it was 94db/w/m sensitive before the change. The original E from Snell was 90db.

http://www.triodeandco.com/

[radio66]

thanks

[Jimmy C]

...x-over certainly facilitates upgrading when the "new and improved" comes out. Alon and Wilson Audio, for eg.

Also, some manufactures feel isolating the x-over leads to better sound... the N800 Signature has its x-over network in a heavy base for this reason.

[kfalls]

Is it possible that going with an external xover allows the use of an active instead of passive design? That might account for the change in efficiency since active xovers don't draw power from the amplifier where passives do.

[markw]

Is it possible that going with an external xover allows the use of an active instead of passive design? That might account for the change in efficiency since active xovers don't draw power from the amplifier where passives do.

The extrernal crossover has absoultely no effect on the increase of efficiency. If you notice in RGA's response when Skeptic called him on this, he backed down on his "implication" that the external crossover was responsible for the gain in efficiency.

"Where did you get the idea that I said this...I answered the question with a claim made by an audio manufacturer - Legacy does it among others - Audio Note claimed it not I and that is what I said in the post. Since they manage to make infinite baffle small sealed speakers with 90db sensitivity and an easy load all across the band with extremely low measured bass distorion - all of which is supposedly impossible - yet they do it perhaps they have a clue after all.

Their claim "The complete range of E loudspeakers has been revised with the development of the external crossover for the the upper part of the range, and a new, higher efficiency woofer which raise the sensitivity of most levels to 98dB/w/m."

The higher efficiency may be mostly due to the woofer for all I know - it was 94db/w/m sensitive before the change. The original E from Snell was 90db."

And, Mash is corect. All crossovers in speakers are passive. To use an active, or powered, crossover would require biamping.

[RGA]

The extrernal crossover has absoultely no effect on the increase of efficiency. If you notice in RGA's response when Skeptic called him on this, he backed down on his "implication" that the external crossover was responsible for the gain in efficiency.

"Where did you get the idea that I said this...I answered the question with a claim made by an audio manufacturer - Legacy does it among others - Audio Note claimed it not I and that is what I said in the post. Since they manage to make infinite baffle small sealed speakers with 90db sensitivity and an easy load all across the band with extremely low measured bass distorion - all of which is supposedly impossible - yet they do it perhaps they have a clue after all.

Their claim "The complete range of E loudspeakers has been revised with the development of the external crossover for the the upper part of the range, and a new, higher efficiency woofer which raise the sensitivity of most levels to 98dB/w/m."

The higher efficiency may be mostly due to the woofer for all I know - it was 94db/w/m sensitive before the change. The original E from Snell was 90db."

And, Mash is corect. All crossovers in speakers are passive. To use an active, or powered, crossover would require biamping.

Audio Note made the implication - and Audio Note actually designs and builds products - Skeptic designs and builds stuff nobody wanted. Audio Note's speaker design is all about an undamped box...taking out that rather LARGE crossover unit means more internal space now doesn't it? Since their design is completely different than probably 99% of all other speakers on the market - an opposite one - then doing things that have no impact on a damped to the hilt box - may also have a different effect on the speaker than other designs. But you're welcome to ask Legacy, Wilson, B&W and Audio Note among others why they do it...I posted this question at AA and maybe someone with technical background can answer it for you and the original poster rather than the one dimensional Skeptic where everything in life is either A or B.

[markw]

Audio Note made the implication - and Audio Note actually designs and builds products - Skeptic designs and builds stuff nobody wanted. Audio Note's speaker design is all about an undamped box...taking out that rather LARGE crossover unit means more internal space now doesn't it? Since their design is completely different than probably 99% of all other speakers on the market - an opposite one - then doing things that have no impact on a damped to the hilt box - may also have a different effect on the speaker than other designs. But you're welcome to ask Legacy, Wilson, B&W and Audio Note among others why they do it...I posted this question at AA and maybe someone with technical background can answer it for you and the original poster rather than the one dimensional Skeptic where everything in life is either A or B.

You're grasping at straws again RGA. Face it, you tried to imply something that had no bearing on what was being discussed and was called on it. For what? To impress us?

Sometimes I just think you like to hear yourself talk, metaphoricaly speaking that is.

[RGA]

Ah Mark

The post as asking why one use an external crossover. I remember reading a few weeks ago that Audio Note made a change to their speaker - that change was an external crossover - the result was a 3db gain. I got it wrong in that Audio Note ALSO made a change to the driver and also that it was a 4db gain. Excuse me for not looking it up before I replied.

I suppose you have a measurement then that there is no way removing a crossover from an Audio Note speaker will increase the sensitivity.

"So far my reply on the other forum may offer this advantage "Enclosure design itself may make an outboard crossover necessary. TQWT (1/4 wave transmission line) enclosures can make mounting the crossover inboard impossible. Or the physical size and/or number of the crossover components may make it impossible to mount in a small two-way design or even some 3-ways." from AA.

One of AN's floorstanders is a quasi wave 1/4 transmission line interestingly enough and doesn't have an external crossover.

Since you know nothing about Audio Note's design - the bottom line is that WITH the external crossover the sensitivity went UP 4db. The woofer change didn't do all of that I doubt.

[Mash]

kfalls
I believe an active crossover, which is a low-level device, is always connected upstream of the amps, and you therefore need one amp channel for each crossover output. True, the active crossover does not consume amp power, the amp is directly connected to the driver, and the power feed level to the individual drivers can be individually selected. But the system does get complicated. I only suggest active crossover multi-amping when one wishes to use amps with specific strengths for specific frequency ranges: tube for midrange and treble, solid state for bass, and a feedback-controlled switching amp for sub bass. Otherwise, I see no reason to bother with an active crossover given the reasonable cost of powerful contemporary amps.