The idea you have will work, but there are a few things you might not know about.

Passive crossover networks should be designed very specifically for the drivers they are matched to. You might get lucky and have the right combination of passive crossover and speakers, but that doesn't happen by accident very often. You won't break anything, but it might not be the "optimal" solution.

An active crossover will add to the effects of the passive crossover if you use both of them. You'll end up with something that is not the best of both worlds, and most people generally avoid this situation.

If you were to replace the active crossover with a DSP and use it more for other things like EQ, time alignment, and level settings, then you would have a good setup.

 

(1). The crossovers are from the exact same identical kits, that were included with the drivers. It's not mix and match. I ruined one of the drivers from the first kit, and I bought another set at the time, leaving me with all the other excess hardware.

(2). The active unit doubles as an eq too, not just a crossover.

 

Yes, and I read the post a few times and did not get the final objective.

The best thing would be to list the whole system components to suggest the best option.

There are only 4 channels shown, only a 4 ch amp, there is no reason to add an extra passive if the passive is already a bi ampable passive, and there are no channels left to add an extra set of components or even a coaxial set.
Based on the Op something is missing or something not needed, is being added in the mix of things.

 

Yes, and I read the post a few times and did not get the final objective.

The best thing would be to list the whole system components to suggest the best option.

There are only 4 channels shown
, only a 4 ch amp, there is no reason to add an extra passive if the passive is already a bi ampable passive, and there are no channels left to add an extra set of components or even a coaxial set.
Based on the Op something is missing or something not needed, is being added in the mix of things.

No, the passive crossovers pictured are NOT bi-amp capable. They are just normal configuration as per the diagram. I would be using TWO of those in lieu of the bi-amp capable crossover like the one from the Sony xs-gs1621c. It's more hardware, but if it works, I'll find a way to get it inside the door.

The reason I am still using the passive crossovers is for that extra non-variable level of safety for the drivers, in case a knob on the in-dash eq/crossover gets flipped to an extreme accidentally and runs the risk of doing damage to the tweets or midrange.

I hope that makes sense.

 

I'm also confused. Why passive crossovers after an active crossover? Maybe I missed something?

 

What gijoe says but also ...

Are you saying (for the left channel) you will use one 2-way passive crossover on the midbass, and another (completely separate) 2-way passive crossover on the tweeter? If that is the case, then you might want to avoid it. I have not experienced it but I've heard crossover networks can misbehave if all of the outputs are not connected to speakers, from someone who seems to know what they are dong.

 

That is unnecessarily complex considering you have an active crossover. If you're that worried just wire a simple cap on the tweeters. It's a whole lot easier, cheaper, and more reliable than having 4 passive crossovers wired up.

ok, I get you guys' point. Makes sense. Let's (for the sake of argument) just scrap the passive crossover networks altogether and wire in that in-line capacitor to the tweeters like you said. To get to my FINAL objective (INDEPENDENT control between tweeter and midrange) however, I would still need to run two sets of speaker wiring directly from the amplifier outputs. One set for the tweeter and the other set for the midrange. Correct?

Also, what setting for the amplifier internal crossover network? FULL RANGE for all four channels, or HIGH PASS for tweeter channels and LOW PASS for midrange channels? I want to have it so that complete TOP TO BOTTOM tweaking is done from the in dash active crossover, and no handicap corrections done by the amp whatsoever.

 

I hope your active crossover or DSP has the flexibility to band pass, many brands call their boxes active xovers, offering just a high pass electronic filter and sometimes if they band pass, the choices are limited or far from the component's specs and you need to settle in between or leave a larger frequency gap. Or if it lacks a band pass specially for the midbass you are better off with the bi amp passives, and simply follow the instructions from Sony.

For passives
Most likely you must set the electronic xover with a high pass at 80 Hz for midbass and no low pass, and a HP for the tweeters between 1500- 2000 Hz and either no low pass or low pass at 20khz. The tweeter crossing will give you extra protection and won't interfere with the passive filtering.


If your DSP is decent and ditch the passives, the difficult thing is to match the levels between tweeters and woofer, after you set the crossing points and slopes. Then you select a cap with at least 500- 1000 Hz below the crossing point for the tweeter.

This is why it is important to give your whole list of components, to avoid wasting time giving advice based on assumptions that you have a decent DSP, and for all we know, maybe your amp may have a decent or better xover with band pass ability than the active mystery xover box you have.

Knowing Your sound processor is more important than knowing the speakers you plan to use. I'm curious to know about these Sony showing a crossing point of 5000 Hz, I doubt those woofers can play happy crossed at 5000 Hz to be honest, I would start at 2500 Hz and if the tweeters minimum is 5 kHz, looks like a gap of 2500hz, nothing to worry about the gap, you can always boost EQ in the 3-4khz range. Nothing is set in stone, you may have to try for weeks different points maybe go as low as 1800hz for the woofer.

 

Ya, you're right, I should list all the components.

Source unit: JVC KD-AR865bts
Proposed EQ/Low pass crossover : Clarion EQ-746s
4 channel amp: Kenwood KAC-8405
components : Sony XS-GTX1621s with extra crossover set from partial XS-GTX1622s set. Sony carried over the same passive crossovers from the previous line.

Sometimes I think this whole active EQ business is more trouble than it's worth. I didn't even think about the in-dash install, My car has a classic Jap double din ISO-mount setup, and the EQ does not mount with the classic M5 x 8mm machine thread metric crews. Not to mention I would have to source a 1/2 Din pocket to fill the gap, and also sand the sides of the EQ face to make it fit into an ISO-mount config. Maybe I'll just fiddle with the amp crossover and use those two passives on each side. Do you think each driver can handle the power from one dedicated channel, (60w rms), or would it be ill-advised because of a traditional passive crossover setup that splits the power between both? The component set is rated at 60w rms, the same as the rated power of the amp output per channel.

 

If the passive crossover is anything above a 12db slope, it is a dead short without the voice coil attached

 

This thread is gone for now, due to strange things going on, I got the notification and checked a few things based on the list of components.

That clarion EQ, only has a 60 and 90 Hz low pass.

The head unit will be more useful with the HP at 100 Hz.

Depending on the blue tooth operation, you may be better off, selecting the front channels for the woofers, and the rears for the tweeters, assuming you care about BT phone use, just in case.

Use the bi amp passive for the the components in bi amp mode.
Connect the rear channels for the tweeters and set the xover HP to the max (200 Hz)
Connect the front channels for the woofers and set the HU xover HP to 100 Hz.

Then work with the passive attenuation switches to level match between woofer and tweeter.

7 band EQ versus 5 from the HU, is not going to make a difference in my opinion, you don't need this clarion unit in between, it may cause more harm than good things.

The HU does not offer time alignment from what I saw. This means if you have no choice you will have to use it.

I recommend a 6 ch HU with a xover HP at 80 Hz time alignment and output level control preferably for each channel to tune a nice stage for the car driver.

A subwoofer will also be recommended, you can keep th 4 ch amp, bridge 2 ch for mono sub output, drive the woofers with the other 2 channels, and drive the tweeters with the HU, I did this before.

You may want to still drive the tweeters with the HU, and bridge the amp to get more power for the woofers, until you get a sub.

I hope this helps

 

broken

 

Lost like 30 posts due to these issues too :mean:

This thread is gone for now, due to strange things going on, I got the notification and checked a few things based on the list of components.

That clarion EQ, only has a 60 and 90 Hz low pass.

The head unit will be more useful with the HP at 100 Hz.

Depending on the blue tooth operation, you may be better off, selecting the front channels for the woofers, and the rears for the tweeters, assuming you care about BT phone use, just in case.

Use the bi amp passive for the the components in bi amp mode.
Connect the rear channels for the tweeters and set the xover HP to the max (200 Hz)
Connect the front channels for the woofers and set the HU xover HP to 100 Hz.

Then work with the passive attenuation switches to level match between woofer and tweeter.

7 band EQ versus 5 from the HU, is not going to make a difference in my opinion, you don't need this clarion unit in between, it may cause more harm than good things.

The HU does not offer time alignment from what I saw. This means if you have no choice you will have to use it.

I recommend a 6 ch HU with a xover HP at 80 Hz time alignment and output level control preferably for each channel to tune a nice stage for the car driver.

A subwoofer will also be recommended, you can keep th 4 ch amp, bridge 2 ch for mono sub output, drive the woofers with the other 2 channels, and drive the tweeters with the HU, I did this before.

You may want to still drive the tweeters with the HU, and bridge the amp to get more power for the woofers, until you get a sub.

I hope this helps

 

Alrojoca,

Thanks for the info. Hell, yes, I do want to keep the Bluetooth... no question about it with all the bans on cell phone use while driving in most major cities.

So yeah, I think skipping the active EQ is all for the best. Although my main concern was feeding the full rms power of each amp channel to one driver through the passive X-over. What do you think about that? The component system (as a whole) is rated 60w rms. does this mean I would need to cut the wattage in half for each driver?

Also, I took the passive crossovers apart (see below) Everything looks exactly the same except for the strength of the mystery part coated in black heat shrink. Apparently they must have modified it during the production run that year. I don't know how much of a difference it would make acoustically, since I'm running the same paired set for the tweeters and ditto for the midrange. Opinions on that one?

[/URL][/IMG]

Oh ya, the Sub part is sorted. The HU does have 6 channel RCA outs, and the sub outs are going directly to a 2 channel amp driving my Infinity 1262w DVC. So the tweets will not get HU internal amp power.

Thanks for not giving up on me.

 

As I already said, it will be a dead short on the amp if both drivers aren't connected to the crossover

 

Ok, these Sony components do not offer bi ampable passives like the 1621C or 1720 series. Confusing but just the s for a C changes the game completely



The passives will work better with 2 channels, bi amping even with the extra passive is not a good option for a better result.

How much power does the other amp driving the components have? Never mind this may not be a time efficient move.

Instead give those 2 ch for the comp passives more power. I would bridge the 4 ch amp to use the components except that I would set the power with a dmm for 22 volts for a 4 ohm power of 125W, using a 1khz tone, I would be confortable there since the components handle 60W, 180 is 3 times power handling and that may not be a good idea. Therefore Dmm to 22 volts will limit the power in bridged mode to around 125 W and the components will be fine, happy and sound better than with 60 W.

Then Crossing or using the HU HP at 100 Hz since there is no 80 Hz option. Or try the amps HP filter at 80 Hz and see what happens.

This is the case of a thread where if all components are listed on the first post, and researched properly ( my fault in this case since I assumed the passives were bi ampable) the help would have been better and faster.
My fault, due to assuming the passives also offered bi amp mode when they don't, all due to a letter at the end of the model number. Oh well

 

Instead give those 2 ch for the comp passives more power. I would bridge the 4 ch amp to use the components except that I would set the power with a dmm for 22 volts for a 4 ohm power of 125W, using a 1khz tone, I would be confortable there since the components handle 60W, 180 is 3 times power handling and that may not be a good idea. Therefore Dmm to 22 volts will limit the power in bridged mode to around 125 W and the components will be fine, happy and sound better than with 60 W.

Ok, so the Bi-amp wiring is out then... :disappointed:

I had absolutely no idea that you could modify input voltage to an amplifier from 14.4 to 22... do you know of a video that explains this procedure?

ok, which kind of a dmm are we talking about? just a simple one or an advanced kind?

Thanks again.

 

Yes xover and processing limitations unfortunately.


You are confusing D.C. Voltage, power voltage from the amplifier is turned in to AC voltage


Here is a video, you can skip the math and confusion of the act voltage set by him, also the video is for a sub he mentions a 50 Hz test tone, for full range ch you use 1khz as mentioned, and also the voltage setting for a 2 ohm load is tolaaly different.


I have a chart where I simply pick the power at either 2 or 4 ohms and just set it at that, it skips the science and math time bs and avoids potential errors.
If you want to double check the math and equations to confirm the voltage for a given power output, go ahead it's good to learn it.


Just keep in mind the measure V out of the amp terminals need to be in bridged mode and depending on the amp reading it has to be from each terminal and 2 dials need to be equally, test with music and listen for distortion, HU volume I recommend 85-90 % since we do not know where this HU's RCA's clip unlike the video where he use max volume

Setting gains for a beginner to an amp in bridged mode may be difficult, sometimes the amp may need an rca splitter in order to bridge it.

That's why I was wondering if the 2 ch amp delivers 120w/ch it may be easier to use it for the components, at least you have 2 amps and bridging the 4 ch for mono would be easier than for the 4 ch amp, also this option would leave 2 free ch out of the 4 ch, and if later you get a head unit with active DSP you can use those for the tweeters.

I guess now the mystery box is the 2 ch amp, another reason why this thread keeps derailing and options and choices need to be changing

The video promotes matching power amplication and speaker ratings, however I'm not the only one on this forum that will tell you that doubling the power will hurt speakers since music is dynamic and many here even more than double the power to their speakers. Currently I run a 220w sub with a 500W amp and no issues, it works better.

https://youtu.be/gg2gl-fz2Qc