Stereo Upgrades

[Deleted]

Hello All,

Would like some thoughts on EQ and active crossover networks. I've successfully completed a couple of basic speaker building projects, both open baffle. One is a very simple full-range driver design, the other is 2-way, but my car amp testing rig died, so no more 2 way at present. Would like to go 3-way, but this will involve some upgrades to pre-amp stage, and will also involve tri-amping. I've decided to go the active crossover route for a couple of reasons. First of all, I think creating a good testing platform for future projects is critical, and active is the way to go here. It may lead to future passive crossover designs. I simply haven't gotten that far yet, it will be awhile. Secondly, I may love the active experience, and never even attempt a passive solution. Either way, I believe that it would be money well spent, even after considering the downsides of active crossover networks. Of course EQ will play a role here also. I hope this stays focused on the active solution and that I'm not changing my mind here. Sometimes discussions can be laced with well intentioned opinions and ideas that are contrary to the overall goal. For example, the controversy between EQ and no EQ is hot. The controversy between active and passive crossover is hot. For the sake of this discussion, and any recommendations and assistance you may render, please consider that my goal is a 3-way active solution. So here's what I have considered so far:

1.) I've decided that amplification will most likely come in the form of an XPA. I have an XPA-5 for HT and love it. Perhaps it will be 3 XPA-200s. I have looked and looked, and I keep coming home to Emo for amplification. The value is simply phenomenal.

2.) For EQ, and crossover management, I've looked at the XSP-1, and even the XMC-1, and UMC-200. XSP-1 comes up a little short I think on being able to manage a complete 3 way solution electronically -- I think 2 way is possible. If this is wrong, please correct me. But even at 999.00, I would have to be a mindless Emo fan boy to pick up the XSP-1, and I'm not. I love their amplification, and a few speakers that I have, especially the Airmotiv6, but I'm simply not convinced that the XSP-1 is the unit, even if it did completely manage a 3-way active crossover stage. More on that later.  The UMC-200 isn't there either. On the other hand, the XMC-1, just may have it, but technically I'm not sure. But when the money comes into the picture, it's out of the question for me. If I'm going to spend 2000.00, I'm really hoping that amplification will be included or close to it.  Not so for the XMC-1.

3.) So finally, I've looked at some PA equipment, like EQs, and active crossovers. For the shear value, I think Nady has a really good solution for a full 3-way active crossover, and 4 way if you count the additional subwoofer management stage. Additionally they seem fairly well reviewed. But reviews aren't frequently in the referential context, but mostly in the context of live sound. Not sure if that makes a difference here, I know it does with live sound amplification. The Rane AC23S seems to emerge -- albeit considerably more money -- the victor for sound quality in a 3 -way active crossover. I've also considered EQs from the likes of Nady, ART, and DBX, etc. For the money ART seems to have a couple of well received solutions for EQ. Further, I've considered full speaker management systems like DBX driveracks. In theory, those actually seem very plausible, and well rated depending on model. But again, I have that burning question because it's application generally centers around live sound.  It is noteworthy, that any combination, or single solution options herein, all come well under the money I would need to fork out for Emotiva processing of any sort.

Again, I'm not sure about how any of these solutions relate to a referential home stereo setup. Are there going to be these glaring inherent flaws in sound quality because they are supposedly "designed" for PA/live sound environments?  If that's true, I simply can't ignore the absence of these components designed for "the home" stereo enthusiast.  Is it truly all wrapped up in pre-amp processors, and what we get is what we get?

So the question(s) boils down to this: Who out there have been in my position (hopefully I have explained enough)? And what advice do you have to offer here? For what it's worth, money is always an issue, but in this case, I'm not necessarily strapped to a particular dollar amount.  I just don't want to spend it something I don't need.

Oh, and to be sure, I am an Emo fan boy -- just not a mindless one. Not that mindless ones exist, but I'm not a mindless fan of anything.

Any input is greatly appreciated -- as always.

[ocezam]

I've done quite a few active bi-amplified systems over the years and currently use Bi-amplification to power the custom planers I developed. My brother also has been bi and tri-amping for years and years. Another good source on this forum is member Leonski. I think I spelled this correctly.

The DBX 234 is a good crossover for 3 way. I've been using DBX products for 3 decades. Great quality/cost ratio. I currently use a DBX 223 since I am currently only bi-amping. I've got a DBX Driverack on it's way to me now to play with.

There are not a whole lot of people on this forum doing their own thing. Another good forum for you would be DIY audio.
www.diyaudio.com/

Peace

[Deleted]

ocezam, thanks for the input. I'm actually looking at the DBX Driverack PA+. I found it for 299.00 with free shipping, but haven't pulled the trigger yet. I'm hoping to get a little more input here before I commit. I like it because it also has built-EQ and all kinds of other goodies I may never use. But price point is really good I think. Aside from amplification, this might be all the processing I need for a sweet stereo set up. What Driverack did you get? If you don't mind, let me know what you think when you have an opportunity. Thanks again.

[ocezam]

Feb 22, 2015 16:29:44 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

ocezam, thanks for the input. I'm actually looking at the DBX Driverack PA+. I found it for 299.00 with free shipping, but haven't pulled the trigger yet. I'm hoping to get a little more input here before I commit. I like it because it also has built-EQ and all kinds of other goodies I may never use. But price point is really good I think. Aside from amplification, this might be all the processing I need for a sweet stereo set up. What Driverack did you get? If you don't mind, let me know what you think when you have an opportunity. Thanks again.

I got the DriveRack PA2. Should be here in a few days.

For $299, if you don't like the PA+ you could sell it. Big market for DriveRacks on eBay...

Take care

[Deleted]

Hi ocezam,

I do have one concern that I would like to mention, and in keeping with my desire to stay on topic, I'm hoping this doesn't go in the ditch. What are your thoughts on amplification as it pertains to individual speaker drivers? For example, my current 2-way project has a 4" full range driver that's quite capable, but it does have a 30WRMS limitation. How should this impact my choice of amplification? Is there such thing as too much power, or is this all going to be manageable with pre-amp processing? I've heard basic rules of thumb that say to buy amplification that's 1.5 - 2.0X driver limits. If that's even remotely true, and I should take all measures to stay within those parameters, then I begin to question the usage of Emo amps, at least for the high range on this particular speaker, as even the smaller ones are well beyond the tolerances of the 4" driver. I suppose I could modify the design to include a line array of sorts for the upper range.

The answer to this question will help me decide on amplification in this future 3-way system. I really hope that I'm not over thinking here, and that I can stay with Emo amps for this setup.

[Priapulus]

Feb 23, 2015 8:46:16 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

How should this impact my choice of amplification? Is there such thing as too much power, or is this all going to be manageable with pre-amp processing?

It's like a car. It's not so much how much horsepower you have; it's how hard you press a gas pedal. Do you have teenagers?

Sincerely

/b

[KeithL]

An amplifier is rated on how much power it CAN put out - which doesn't mean that you HAVE to play it that loud. Speaker ratings are also somewhat vague; that "30 watts RMS" rating is based on some assumed duty cycle (if you were to turn on a 30 watt RMS test signal and walk away, you would probably eventually overheat a 4" driver anyway).

If you're designing a system, then you need to decide your operating conditions. If you're designing a speaker for your kids, who might turn it up all the way and then walk away, you need to limit things so that no driver can possibly be damaged no matter what... which means you need to limit things in a lot of places. However, assuming that it's going to be run by a sane person, then the reality is that if that driver can handle 30 watts cleanly short term, then it can probably handle twice that for very short times... so, assuming that, and that it can handle 60 watt peaks, and assuming normal music, it's probably going to be playing four or five watts on average (by which I mean playing pretty loud). With a small driver like that you're also going to have to be careful to avoid sending it too much low bass and mechanically damaging the driver (but, again, that's something you can do with a low powered amp, although a lot of power will make it easier).

If you were to pair that driver with, say, a Mini-X, and don't clip it, you should be fine. (I think I might avoid using an XPR-1, though.)

It's cliche, but also true, that a low power amplifier being overdriven badly is much more likely to damage a speaker than an amp running clean and not turned up until it distorts. I've driven speakers of that power capability on 500 watt amplifiers with no problems at all - I just didn't turn them up too loud (but then you do run the risk of turning it into confetti if someone drops the tone arm on the record).

Feb 23, 2015 8:46:16 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

Hi ocezam,

I do have one concern that I would like to mention, and in keeping with my desire to stay on topic, I'm hoping this doesn't go in the ditch. What are your thoughts on amplification as it pertains to individual speaker drivers? For example, my current 2-way project has a 4" full range driver that's quite capable, but it does have a 30WRMS limitation. How should this impact my choice of amplification? Is there such thing as too much power, or is this all going to be manageable with pre-amp processing? I've heard basic rules of thumb that say to buy amplification that's 1.5 - 2.0X driver limits. If that's even remotely true, and I should take all measures to stay within those parameters, then I begin to question the usage of Emo amps, at least for the high range on this particular speaker, as even the smaller ones are well beyond the tolerances of the 4" driver. I suppose I could modify the design to include a line array of sorts for the upper range.

The answer to this question will help me decide on amplification in this future 3-way system. I really hope that I'm not over thinking here, and that I can stay with Emo amps for this setup.

[Deleted]

Priapulus, thanks for the input. No teenagers. So suppose I decided to HP this little driver at 125Hz. SPL is about 91db per watt. My take away from this is that this driver will reach it's peak performance faster than it would on a lower power amp theoretically? If so, this is what I've basically always understood. And my guess is I should be able to reduce the chances of a mishap with some basic EQ settings -- maybe.

So here's what's starting to shape up in the order of amplification:

1 - XPA-3 for starters at 330WRMS per channel/4ohm. This should get me what I need for a solid 2-way platform with channel 3 being for sub frequencies. Then down the road, I can simply add another XPA-3 for a full 3-way stereo configuration. I've abandoned the idea of trying to find a lower output amp just for the sake of protecting a particular driver. I feel like I would regret it in the future, especially if I need that headroom for a more complex design.

Is this reasonable, any cautions or otherwise?

[KeithL]

The XSP-1 (and the XMC-1 for that matter) both have BASS MANAGEMENT, which is not at all the same as the type of active crossover you would use in a full bi-amped or tri-amped system. Bass management is intended specifically to serve as the crossover between a full range or satellite speaker and a subwoofer. This means that only low crossover frequencies are allowed, and you only get a limited choice of filter types and slopes. Normal bass management is not going to do a crossover between a typical midrange and tweeter. If you're going to design a real active-crossover speaker system, you want a crossover with a lot more choices and a lot more options.

In terms of features, this is precisely what you're looking for:

www.amazon.com/Behringer-DCX2496LE-Signal-Processor/dp/B00EK1OSDA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1424711789&sr=8-1&keywords=DCX2496

It's also not terribly expensive, but it is "professional PA equipment", which means that it may not give you sound quality up to "audiophile standards" (and I've seen a few negative reviews in terms of reliability). I've heard a variety of reviews on that subject, and I haven't heard one in person, but it seems to me like it offers all the options you would want from a "prototyping and experimental system". If I were doing your project, I would pick up something like this to design it with. Then, once I'd decided on all my filter choices and settings, if I wasn't satisfied with the sound quality, I would consider building a custom designed active crossover that operated at the settings I'd determined.

(The Rane and DBX units should also do the job - although this one seems to have more features.)

Feb 22, 2015 12:02:12 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

Hello All,

Would like some thoughts on EQ and active crossover networks. I've successfully completed a couple of basic speaker building projects, both open baffle. One is a very simple full-range driver design, the other is 2-way, but my car amp testing rig died, so no more 2 way at present. Would like to go 3-way, but this will involve some upgrades to pre-amp stage, and will also involve tri-amping. I've decided to go the active crossover route for a couple of reasons. First of all, I think creating a good testing platform for future projects is critical, and active is the way to go here. It may lead to future passive crossover designs. I simply haven't gotten that far yet, it will be awhile. Secondly, I may love the active experience, and never even attempt a passive solution. Either way, I believe that it would be money well spent, even after considering the downsides of active crossover networks. Of course EQ will play a role here also. I hope this stays focused on the active solution and that I'm not changing my mind here. Sometimes discussions can be laced with well intentioned opinions and ideas that are contrary to the overall goal. For example, the controversy between EQ and no EQ is hot. The controversy between active and passive crossover is hot. For the sake of this discussion, and any recommendations and assistance you may render, please consider that my goal is a 3-way active solution. So here's what I have considered so far:

1.) I've decided that amplification will most likely come in the form of an XPA. I have an XPA-5 for HT and love it. Perhaps it will be 3 XPA-200s. I have looked and looked, and I keep coming home to Emo for amplification. The value is simply phenomenal.

2.) For EQ, and crossover management, I've looked at the XSP-1, and even the XMC-1, and UMC-200. XSP-1 comes up a little short I think on being able to manage a complete 3 way solution electronically -- I think 2 way is possible. If this is wrong, please correct me. But even at 999.00, I would have to be a mindless Emo fan boy to pick up the XSP-1, and I'm not. I love their amplification, and a few speakers that I have, especially the Airmotiv6, but I'm simply not convinced that the XSP-1 is the unit, even if it did completely manage a 3-way active crossover stage. More on that later.  The UMC-200 isn't there either. On the other hand, the XMC-1, just may have it, but technically I'm not sure. But when the money comes into the picture, it's out of the question for me. If I'm going to spend 2000.00, I'm really hoping that amplification will be included or close to it.  Not so for the XMC-1.

3.) So finally, I've looked at some PA equipment, like EQs, and active crossovers. For the shear value, I think Nady has a really good solution for a full 3-way active crossover, and 4 way if you count the additional subwoofer management stage. Additionally they seem fairly well reviewed. But reviews aren't frequently in the referential context, but mostly in the context of live sound. Not sure if that makes a difference here, I know it does with live sound amplification. The Rane AC23S seems to emerge -- albeit considerably more money -- the victor for sound quality in a 3 -way active crossover. I've also considered EQs from the likes of Nady, ART, and DBX, etc. For the money ART seems to have a couple of well received solutions for EQ. Further, I've considered full speaker management systems like DBX driveracks. In theory, those actually seem very plausible, and well rated depending on model. But again, I have that burning question because it's application generally centers around live sound.  It is noteworthy, that any combination, or single solution options herein, all come well under the money I would need to fork out for Emotiva processing of any sort.

Again, I'm not sure about how any of these solutions relate to a referential home stereo setup. Are there going to be these glaring inherent flaws in sound quality because they are supposedly "designed" for PA/live sound environments?  If that's true, I simply can't ignore the absence of these components designed for "the home" stereo enthusiast.  Is it truly all wrapped up in pre-amp processors, and what we get is what we get?

So the question(s) boils down to this: Who out there have been in my position (hopefully I have explained enough)? And what advice do you have to offer here? For what it's worth, money is always an issue, but in this case, I'm not necessarily strapped to a particular dollar amount.  I just don't want to spend it something I don't need.

Oh, and to be sure, I am an Emo fan boy -- just not a mindless one. Not that mindless ones exist, but I'm not a mindless fan of anything.

Any input is greatly appreciated -- as always.

[Deleted]

Hi KeithL

I was responding while you were responding apparently, but your explanation is what I've always understood. What gives rise to this is I went looking in a brick and mortar store for EQ/Crossover equipment, and the subject came up of over-amplification. The salesman presented it in such a way that I felt like this small driver would barely even stand a high powered amplifier being turned on, much less putting some music to it. He discussed a risk that some transients would perhaps get through, and fry the VC, no matter what I might do to limit that. I've misunderstood before, and probably at least a little in this case. Nonetheless, I came away rethinking things a bit. I certainly understand that risk if I simply turn the volume up too high. But thanks for validating my question, and clarifying.

What I've looked at so far is an XPA-5, because cost per watt is attractive. But I like the XPA-3 because it has a tad more flexibility, and I can at least get started with a couple hundred less. The rest of the 3-way platform can come with another XPA-3. And if I strike it rich, I just might go all mono block one day.

[garbulky]

Hi ahogg. It looks like you already know your stuff. As for bi-amping. The XPA-5 and the other emo amps share the power supply over the channels. So their amp circuitry is capable of outputting more than its rated power as it's rated all channels driven. So for instance an XPA-5 which is rated 200 watts per channel with only 2 channels driven will use most of the surplus power and put it towards the channels in use. I think it can do something similar to an XPA-2 with 2 channels driven. So...bi amping with the same amp using all five channels may not necessarily get you....double the watts or anything like that as they pull off the same power supply.
Now if you used separate amps (with separate power supplies), the advantage of bi amping may be more evident. But then you have to consider that an XPA-5 has a TON of power in it. So, I guess you gotta weigh the options.

You can also try to get a set of UPA-1 monoblocks used. You may end up with some really nice prices for them. I wouldn't be surprised if you got a pair for about $500 shipped. Do you have a picture of the speaker you propose to build. If your drivers appear to have widely varying power handling and efficiencies, you may be better suited matching them more evenly but I really don't know anything about that.

[Deleted]

Feb 23, 2015 13:21:40 GMT -5 garbulky said:

Hi ahogg. It looks like you already know your stuff. As for bi-amping. The XPA-5 and the other emo amps share the power supply over the channels. So their amp circuitry is capable of outputting more than its rated power as it's rated all channels driven. So for instance an XPA-5 which is rated 200 watts per channel with only 2 channels driven will use most of the surplus power and put it towards the channels in use. I think it can do something similar to an XPA-2 with 2 channels driven. So...bi amping with the same amp using all five channels may not necessarily get you....double the watts or anything like that as they pull off the same power supply.
Now if you used separate amps (with separate power supplies), the advantage of bi amping may be more evident. But then you have to consider that an XPA-5 has a TON of power in it. So, I guess you gotta weigh the options.

You can also try to get a set of UPA-1 monoblocks used. You may end up with some really nice prices for them. I wouldn't be surprised if you got a pair for about $500 shipped. Do you have a picture of the speaker you propose to build. If your drivers appear to have widely varying power handling and efficiencies, you may be better suited matching them more evenly but I really don't know anything about that.

Hi Garbulky,

Yes, I really wish Emo had kept that one. I believe it had XLR inputs, at least up until a particular time. Great lower cost option. I might be wrong, but I thought the UPA-2's also had XLR inputs. I've pretty much resigned myself to XLR, what with the crossovers/EQ networks that I'm looking at. It would be great if I could find any combination of those units that would get me going. The cheap impatient side of me has done some research on live sound amplification, but i'm going to try and force what little patience I have to overcome it, and wait until I have the cash to do it right, and then trim the fat here and there where it makes sense.

[garbulky]

Feb 23, 2015 13:56:29 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

Feb 23, 2015 13:21:40 GMT -5 garbulky said:

Hi ahogg. It looks like you already know your stuff. As for bi-amping. The XPA-5 and the other emo amps share the power supply over the channels. So their amp circuitry is capable of outputting more than its rated power as it's rated all channels driven. So for instance an XPA-5 which is rated 200 watts per channel with only 2 channels driven will use most of the surplus power and put it towards the channels in use. I think it can do something similar to an XPA-2 with 2 channels driven. So...bi amping with the same amp using all five channels may not necessarily get you....double the watts or anything like that as they pull off the same power supply.
Now if you used separate amps (with separate power supplies), the advantage of bi amping may be more evident. But then you have to consider that an XPA-5 has a TON of power in it. So, I guess you gotta weigh the options.

You can also try to get a set of UPA-1 monoblocks used. You may end up with some really nice prices for them. I wouldn't be surprised if you got a pair for about $500 shipped. Do you have a picture of the speaker you propose to build. If your drivers appear to have widely varying power handling and efficiencies, you may be better suited matching them more evenly but I really don't know anything about that.

Hi Garbulky,

Yes, I really wish Emo had kept that one. I believe it had XLR inputs, at least up until a particular time. Great lower cost option. I might be wrong, but I thought the UPA-2's also had XLR inputs. I've pretty much resigned myself to XLR, what with the crossovers/EQ networks that I'm looking at. It would be great if I could find any combination of those units that would get me going. The cheap impatient side of me has done some research on live sound amplification, but i'm going to try and force what little patience I have to overcome it, and wait until I have the cash to do it right, and then trim the fat here and there where it makes sense.

Unfortunately the UPA-2 does not have XLR's. It does however have a daisy chain pre-amp output which allows you to hook up multiple amps in a row (as well as a gain matching volume knob to match gain levels between different amps). The UPA-1 does have XLR's and still pop up reasonably often on the used market.

[Gary Cook]

XPA-100's are on special at the moment for $339 for EClub members, well worth considering as an option to a pair of used UPA-1's.

Cheers
Gary

[Deleted]

Feb 23, 2015 19:08:25 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

XPA-100's are on special at the moment for $339 for EClub members, well worth considering as an option to a pair of used UPA-1's.

Cheers
Gary

Yep, at that price, it's not worth the hassle of seeking out a UPA-1. I suppose at this stage, what I haven't quite decided is how important mono-block is for me. Price per watt goes up considerably, my guess is because of having to buy 6 toroids of usual size instead of one monster, and of course the whole power supply stage is repeated 5 times, that is once I eventually go with full 3-way stereo. But this may just force me to be more patient, and I could easily start out with 3, and just have the 3 one for the sub frequencies which are virtually all mono anyway.

Thanks a bunch Gary, my wife really appreciates it! Seriously, though, you have given me something to think about. It's really not that far out there.

[Gary Cook]

Feb 24, 2015 6:28:01 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

Feb 23, 2015 19:08:25 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

XPA-100's are on special at the moment for $339 for EClub members, well worth considering as an option to a pair of used UPA-1's.

Yep, at that price, it's not worth the hassle of seeking out a UPA-1. I suppose at this stage, what I haven't quite decided is how important mono-block is for me. Price per watt goes up considerably, my guess is because of having to buy 6 torroids of usual size instead of one monster, and of course the whole power supply stage is repeated 5 times, that is once I eventually go with full 3-way stereo. But this may just force me to be more patient, and I could easily start out with 3, and just have the 3 one for the sub frequencies which are virtually all mono anyway.
Thanks a bunch Gary, my wife really appreciates it! Seriously, though, you have given me something to think about. It's really not that far out there.

I've had an XPA-2 and an XPA-3, I now have an XPA-5 due to space considerations, and I really can't say as I noticed any difference in the sound, quality or quantity. For my sub woofer I needed a change from a DIY power amp, so I tried a few plate amps and numerous pro amps none of them quite gave me what I wanted. So in a previous "specials" I picked up an XPA-100, I figured I'd try it as a sub amp and if it didn't work out I could always buy another and use them as a stereo pair. Over a year later I still have it powering my sub, it gives me more musicality than any other power amp I tried and still has plenty of grunt for LFE. The are quite amazing sound wise and value for money is unbeatable.


Cheers
Gary

[audiobill]

There's much more to a good crossover design than crossover points and amplifier power.

Each driver's phase response, dispersion, baffle response and other parameters must be considered, modeled and tested.

You are unlikely to roll your own to the best result by just throwing electronics at the problem.

Crossover design is as much art as science , IMO.

[Deleted]

Feb 24, 2015 15:32:33 GMT -5 audiobill said:

There's much more to a good crossover design than crossover points and amplifier power.

Each driver's phase response, dispersion, baffle response and other parameters must be considered, modeled and tested.

You are unlikely to roll your own to the best result by just throwing electronics at the problem.

Crossover design is as much art as science , IMO.

Hi Audio Bill, I can't argue with you one bit, but inasmuch as I have decided to "throw" electronics at it, I just need some good pointers with the platform that I wish to establish. I have to start somewhere, right? As it stands, my old amp solution no longer works, it brokey. I need something else, because the home spun speakers that I do have, good or bad, don't shout no more. My old amp was an automotive style amp connected to a hefty server power supply, and the amp had a 3 way crossover stage. It was actually quite fun to play with. Very disappointing when it fried, but it's run it's course. For testing purposes, it was quite idea. But alas, on to bigger and better.

So actually, the basic context of this post is so that I can continue to do exactly as you are suggesting. I just need some help deciding what equipment represents the greatest value. So far I've received pretty good, simple comments. That said, I am in the early stages of this whole project and have much to learn, and would love to hear from you or others when it comes time to really roll out something nice. But that's another topic, and perhaps I will post on that subject in the future.

[Deleted]

Feb 24, 2015 14:50:58 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

Feb 24, 2015 6:28:01 GMT -5 @ahogg said:

Yep, at that price, it's not worth the hassle of seeking out a UPA-1. I suppose at this stage, what I haven't quite decided is how important mono-block is for me. Price per watt goes up considerably, my guess is because of having to buy 6 torroids of usual size instead of one monster, and of course the whole power supply stage is repeated 5 times, that is once I eventually go with full 3-way stereo. But this may just force me to be more patient, and I could easily start out with 3, and just have the 3 one for the sub frequencies which are virtually all mono anyway.
Thanks a bunch Gary, my wife really appreciates it! Seriously, though, you have given me something to think about. It's really not that far out there.

I've had an XPA-2 and an XPA-3, I now have an XPA-5 due to space considerations, and I really can't say as I noticed any difference in the sound, quality or quantity. For my sub woofer I needed a change from a DIY power amp, so I tried a few plate amps and numerous pro amps none of them quite gave me what I wanted. So in a previous "specials" I picked up an XPA-100, I figured I'd try it as a sub amp and if it didn't work out I could always buy another and use them as a stereo pair. Over a year later I still have it powering my sub, it gives me more musicality than any other power amp I tried and still has plenty of grunt for LFE. The are quite amazing sound wise and value for money is unbeatable.


Cheers
Gary

And you've basically described where I'm at with this. Remember, that eventually I would have to buy 6 mono-blocks to achieve stereo 3 way, or at least 5 if I just went mono on the low en, which would be fine. So cost per watt goes up considerably. I'm just not sure my ears are going to justify the difference. I already have an XPA-5, and it's been tremendous for HT, and I certainly don't think it would somehow be an underachiever in a decent stereo setup.
The good thing about all this, is there are plenty of amp choices that are awesome. I just need to pick.

[audiobill]

A lot of people, including Linkwitz, are having great results with DSP active crossovers:

www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4

Sorry to have sounded so harsh, but I don't like to see time or money wasted by anyone!