Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
Speakers
passive or active?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="helotaxi" data-source="post: 1932311" data-attributes="member: 550915"><p>If you understand the electrical theory behind a passive dividing network you would understand how the power is divided within the crossover and that the losses are greatest around the crossover freq but are still fairly small. Away from the crossover point the losses are basically negligible. At lower frequencies, where you need the power for the best midbass response, pretty much all the power is going to the midbass with negligible loss. At higher freqs where the tweeter alone are playing, the losses are usually higher because of a resistor in line with the tweet as an attenuator. As such you wouldn't need double the power on an active setup, but you will need more. Active setups are not twice as efficient across the board, not nearly. The power is most important in the midbass freqs so a passive setup running 150x2 would have a definite advantage in the midbass range over an active one running off 75x4. 3dB of headroom is a big difference.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="helotaxi, post: 1932311, member: 550915"] If you understand the electrical theory behind a passive dividing network you would understand how the power is divided within the crossover and that the losses are greatest around the crossover freq but are still fairly small. Away from the crossover point the losses are basically negligible. At lower frequencies, where you need the power for the best midbass response, pretty much all the power is going to the midbass with negligible loss. At higher freqs where the tweeter alone are playing, the losses are usually higher because of a resistor in line with the tweet as an attenuator. As such you wouldn't need double the power on an active setup, but you will need more. Active setups are not twice as efficient across the board, not nearly. The power is most important in the midbass freqs so a passive setup running 150x2 would have a definite advantage in the midbass range over an active one running off 75x4. 3dB of headroom is a big difference. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
Speakers
passive or active?
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list