Im too lazy to switch my system over to active, so passive for now.

 

I myself prefer active over passive. As mentionned before, the whole system sounds a lot more dynamic, not to mention that I can get it crazy loud while still sounding clean. And flexibility is a tremendous bonus. You don't need to wonder how a new driver will affect your x-over, if it will still sound ok. And, I never could've done a dual midbass configuration in a passive setup without getting custom built x-over networks.

 

I vote passive
I tinker and play too much and then get way to indecisive with too many options and too many variables . . . maybe active makes me ADHD for playing.
So I vote passive because there isn't much to tinker with.

If I were to go active, my best option would be to pay a professional to tune it well for me so I wouldn't be tempted to mess with it knowing that I paid some one to set my stuff up right for me

And I agree with the above Active always for the sub . . . to get a passive set-up to do a 12db or 18 db slope and handle 500wrms is not worth the time, cost or effort.

 

Passive = audio signals are filtered through electric components such as capacitors, resistors and inductors. You can change the cross over frequency by changing the value of the capacitor used, inductor used and resistor used. Passive cross overs are the little boxes that component speakers plug into. +,- from speaker output on amp +,- to tweeter, +.- to mid. Passive crossovers require no power source. They do their "magic" purely with the music signal produced from the amplifier.

Active: This is done Before the amp. Low level signal (RCA) plugged into the active crossover. The active crossover sets the cross-over point. Most (if not all) active crossovers today have infinitely variable crossover points. Once the signal has been processed, the cross-over sends the "new" filtered signal to the amp. Active crossovers require their own power source (unlike passive which simply routes the frequencies from the amps outputs).

Active crossovers do all of the work before the signal gets amplified, while passives do the work after amplification. I believe it is for this reason that active crossovers are cleaner as was noted above.

I hope that helps you understand what we're talking about

 

both are great I have used both and am currently using both in my vehicle

each has its points but active makes A LOT of sense in the automotive environment... for instance crossover points may need to shift due to installation... much easier active

 

I'll elaborate on my last post. The drawbacks of passives are that:

1. crossover points shift as the voice coils heat up
2. added distortion
3. lost power to heat

A good (most are not) passive crossover can easilly cost as much as a second amplifier.. The only reason to go passive IMHO is that it may be easier to install and setup..

 

i have all the toys to do it do but.......... i will go back to it one day

 

it's almost like driving automatic or manual
you want to eat cereal while you're driving and don't care about getting the most out of every gear go automatic
you wanna race save on gas and be in control get a manual

if you know what you're doing and have processor (like the alpine 701) NOTHING beats active
you're in control with the crossover points you're in charge how much power your mids and tweets get and the speakers come to life and sing like they never before

since i have gone active every set of comps or separates i tried ended up sounding amazing after a little bit of tweaking by my buddy Sashenka

 

this is a no brainer..active all the way...so many benefits...very few negatives.

 

Active all the way....so easy to make simple and effective changes,and changing slopes and x-over points for SQ makes things so much easier.