Well, my friend is keeping his 2000 Ford Lightning.
He's asked me to build him a system next summer for it and his budget is very limited, so here's what I want to do....

Clarion 835MP(cause it will match the dash nicely)
Some kind of 5-7 band EQ
ARC 5150-CXL/XXK or possibly an Audison LRX 5 channel if the budget allows.
Focal Access 2-way's in the doors
and I haven't decided on whether to go with a pair of Focal 5WS for subs or maybe an IDQ10.

now, down to buisness. Because of the limited budget we cannot afford to get too crazy with EQ's and crossovers so I want to run a 5-7 band EQ into Passive crossovers to save money but I'm wondering how accurate they will be as opposed to an active X-Over....it obviosly won't be dead on like a 4XS but can I get it close enough that everything will blend in nicely where it's supposed to?

And one more thing, how much would a sub-sonic filter help me out? I know what it is and what it does, I'm just wondering if it would be worth it in this sysem?

Thank's for your input guys.

Most quality component sets will have fairly good passive crossovers. Components or coaxials with single capacitor crossovers are usually very poor and have very gradual slopes, quite a bit of overlap is common. Many quality passive xovers are 24db/oct and much more acurate.

Another drawback of using an active crossover to power mid/tweets is that you'll need seperate amplifier channels to power both the mid and tweet. If your not running rear fill, this can be done easily with a 5 channel amp. But with the passives you can do it with a 2/3 channel setup. You can usually get a more predictable load from a good passive crossover also, and you dont have to worry about setting individual gains.

I have mixed feelings about subsonic filters. In SQ, I find that unless you are running a really high quality eq/xover that incorperates it, it will cut some audible low frequencies ~20-30hz. If you want to maximize SPL though, it doesn't hurt. When running a ported enclosure, its much more useful of course.

The equipment you listed looks good. I ran a single IDQ10 for a while.. great sounding sub.

Most quality passives have a 24 dB slope? Hmmm, I'll have to say no to that one because it's very rare to find a 24 dB slope passive, and even uncommon to find that in an active! Most decent passives are 12 db slopes with the odd few being 18. Give me 3 different manufacturers who make 24 db slope 2 or 3-way passives.

I run MB Quart Musicomp 3-way passives. 12 db slope and one of the nicest passives out there. A 24 db 3-way would be massive in size due to the sheer number of caps and coils in the thing!

CDT x-overs are somewhere between 24b and 60db. Its too technical for me, but here it is on their website.

http://www.cdtaudio.com/satnet456-642.htm

Yes their x-overs are larger, but not overly so.

CM.

oops,

I was pretty tired when I wrote that [img]smile.gif[/img] . Yes, 99% of passives are 12db/oct or lower. You are right, most of the best component sets out there (2 and 3 way) use 12db/oct passives. Hmm, I've only seen a few component sets that use 24/db oct passive crossovers. Nakamichi's new s6500's do, I believe the soundstream 'exact' line and infinity perfect line does as well. audiobahn (ugh) has a 24db/oct passive. I believe the Alumapro ALC 6.2 does and CDT makes some nice satnet crossovers that are fourth order. Image Dynamics, CS-1.X is also 24db/oct and the Image Dynamics Chameleons too. The ones I listed are likely no match for a quart Q crossover or something of that caliber. In many cases you wouldn't even need a fourth order crossover depending on the component set. Obviously the musicomp crossovers are fabulous, and have won countless competitions, so its pretty obvious that the crossover slope is not what wins competitions.

I guess what I was trying to do was say that quality passive x-overs are somewhat acurate compared with most active crossovers, and provide a more simplistic install.

Most audiocontrol active crossovers are 24db/oct, and some high quality amps use them as well (Xtant etc). I didn't want to make them sound 'common place' because they are not, especially not passive fourth order crossovers. Certainly better than a 1st order 6db/octive capacitor [img]smile.gif[/img]

IF you are up on your passive crossover theory - that CDT claim is a bunch of crap [img]graemlins/freak.gif[/img]

I would use an active do divide between the woofer and the highs and then passives to split the highs up. It's easy and makes for good sound.

Subsonic is your choice but I like to include one.

Oh - give the guy a real woofer - no 5" wannabes [img]tongue.gif[/img]

wow...that IS a pretty tight budget..i mean audison and focal?!?! cant the guy save up for some real gear?! :rolleyes:

Alright his budget is $2000. I will be able to get everything I listed for that price or less.

And I don't know why you people automatically think expensive when the name Focal is mentioned.

The Focal Access set is only about $450 or so, for me anyway, and it would kick the pants off most comp sets I have heard lately.

And Dukk, 5" wannabes? MUHAHAHAAHAHAHHA.
Obviously you haven't heard the 5WS before. I've seen people use them for subbass before, so I figure in such a small area they would be perfect.

Oh I've heard them, in fact I've installed them. They're alright I suppose for a 5" but IMO a pair of them does not equal a decent 10. Hell I would rather use a decent 8 and it would cost waaaaaayyyy less $$$$$. [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img]

I agree.. Something about 5" and subwoofer being used in the same sentence that doesn't agree with me [img]smile.gif[/img] . A nice single 10" sub does the job beautifully. It'll hit lower notes and will likely cost less. Many new 10s can operate in quite small enclosures too.

Are those focal 5s designed for bass reflex enclosures?