Sifus,


1) 3x low range price AMP (1 for tweeter, 1 for front & real components,
1 for sub)

1x active crossover connect after HU, to 3x amp.



2) 1x middle range price AMP for front & real components, 1x amp for sub.
(using passive crossover components)



Method A, 3x amp + 1x active crossover PRICING EQUAL to Method B 2x Amp



Eh, the method A could produce much better?

At first look of course the option 2 would be better but there are other factors in terms of what are your other part ie your components and subs.
Flexibility wise of course going full active is always better because you are in more control of your crossover points and slopes. but as you mentioned it low range amps there is alot of definition of low range amp.
But to say that the low range amp is not as good as the mid range amp is something until today that is debateable in terms of sound reproduction quality.
The famous Richard Clark USD 10000 amp challenge since 1980, no one has been able to claim the prize. You can google about richard clark amp challenge.

Basically lets just assume your amps in mind the low and the mid range have almost the same output, measured not rated<. lets say its 100 watt. then in setup 2 the 100 watt per channel is shared between the component and tweeter. therefore you might need to set a higher gain to have a decent sound output.
In setup 1 you have independent 100 watt to each component and tweeter.
Flexibility wise in setup 2 depending on your passive design most dont have db adjuster for the tweeter unless you are playing high end component such as focal utopia or MBquarts Premium and Q series.
What this translate to is if you want to increase the volume of your midbass you will interms increase the volume of the tweeter. sometimes it too ears piercing but you want the bass so how???? <<<

But in setup 1 you can independently control the tweeter gain and the midbass gain separately.

Last factor is of course the built quality.

But end of day its your choice and the type of sound you would like to listen to.

just my rm0.02

BTW i am not a sifu just a avid ICE follower

I have a single preout going to a crossover, and then from there I have three pairs going out to two amps - one to a 2ch amp driving the front tweeters, with the two others going to a 4ch amp driving front mids and the sub. Rear coaxs are driven by the HU.

So I'm basically running my front components full active, and it's worth every cent.

This post has been edited by DeaDLocK: Aug 10 2006, 11:05 AM

the active crossover play important role for SQ rite? instead of HU direct to amp?

To be honest, it's a bit too vague to gauge in this way, especially when there's no mention of brand names as i believe that audio is all about equipment matching as well.

There's some question about your "method A" though. So basically you'll be using a 2-channel for the tweeters, a 4-channel for the front and rear components(this, i don't really understand as you already had a tweeter's amplifier, you are adding another component set, making it 2 pairs of tweeters in front? ), and a 2-channel or monoblock for the sub?

Theoritically, being able to run active(run active as in tweeters get their own amplification, and the front woofer/midbass, whatever you call it, would be getting their own amplification and you can ditch the passive crossovers) would be better in an in-car environment unless you have the expertise to make and fine-tune your own passive crossovers.

My suggestion, if you ain't driving a HUGE MPV or Larger sized sedan, just ditch amplifying the rear speakers or just get a small amp for it. In fact, if you haven't bought the equipment, might as well ditch the idea of getting new speakers for the rear and just use back the stock ones powered off the HU, concentrate the $$$ on the front stage and subwoofer instead.

This way, you could still get an electronic crossover(with bandpass function, which is a combination of highpass and lowpass, on the midrange/midbass), a 4-channel amplifier for the front components and a 2-channel or monoblock for the subwoofer.