I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but can't the active x-over be set up to be exactly the same as the passive x-over? I mean, at the same frequencies and with the same slopes? Then the sound would be at least as good as the standard HT3 but with tri-amping/room correction/phase correction as well.
Yes, and no. The W18, like any metal cone driver is prone to cone resonances. Dennis Murphy designed a trap circuit in the passive crossover to address this situation. So it is not an issue.
DEQX offers the capability of using very steep slopes that can accomplish the same thing. Another benefit of these steep slopes is being able to cross the G2 tweeter lower than in the passive crossover. Since the tweeter has better dispersion than the W18, this can also improve things. But, as you can see, the crossover is now not the same.
The bottom line is that to take advantage of what the DEQX offers, you will most likely not use the same frequencies and slopes as you would in a passive crossover.
Also, if you believe DM's passive x-overs can't be beat, what advantage does the DEQX offer over the Tact used on the standard model with a single high quality amp (such as George's system)?
I didn't say DM's crossover can't be beat. But they certainly set the bar very high.
In a passive crossover, you set the frequency, the slope and the relative level of the drivers. Everything else is essentially left to the natural performance of the drivers.
DEQX correction, on the other hand, can address time and phase relationships between the drivers as well. So, in theory, you should be able to create a better crossover. With lesser drivers, the results can be rather dramatic. In fact, DEQX can made some very mediocre drivers sound very good as it can correct for their deficiencies. With the drivers in the HT3's, less "correction" is required to begin with.
As for George's approach, you have a good point. The most glaring problems using any speaker in any room are going to be in the area of mid-bass and bass response. Both DEQX and TacT, used on conjunction with the passive crossovers and a 2-channel amp, can address these issues.
But there are gains to be had by having separate amps for each of the drivers as well - lower distortion among them.
As I indicated above, time will tell as to whether or not the DEQX version of the HT3's offers a compelling justification for the increased cost and complexity of the system.
There are obviously a number of alternatives to either DEQX or TacT that cost considerably less. But the major benefit of DEQX is that a single unit is capable of doing the entire job. Behringer, for example, makes some very inexpensive and fairly capable electronic crossovers. But you need to set up a computer-driven measurement system in order to dial them in properly. With DEQX, everything is contained in a single unit that is much "friendlier" for the average consumer.
And finally, I can't wait for my new speakers!
Likewise. It should be a very fun project.
- Jim