AudioAficionado.org  

Go Back   AudioAficionado.org > Manufacturers Forums > JL Audio

JL Audio Ahead of the Curve

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-18-2017, 02:15 AM
Mike-48 Mike-48 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 197
Default CR-1 Inquiries

Through the years, I've used various digital crossover arrangements with a pair of F112. As time goes by, I've grown impatient with the resulting system limitations. For one thing, no two-channel DACs need apply -- four channels are needed. Those are rare birds, and I'm not looking to pay the price of, say, two Mytek Manhattans.

Does introducing something like the CR-1 into the signal chain reduce transparency in the midrange and highs? I'd love to hear from actual users of the CR-1 about your experiences.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-18-2017, 02:34 AM
GaryProtein's Avatar
GaryProtein GaryProtein is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 5,393
Default

I don't have a CR-1, but I have been using electronic crossovers for many years.

Electronic/active crossovers will improve clarity throughout the spectrum. I'm not sure why four channels of DAC is necessary. Can't you just use the two channel DAC before the crossover? The DAC will have done its job and then the signal gets divided appropriately by the crossover.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-18-2017, 09:37 AM
nycjazz nycjazz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryProtein View Post
I don't have a CR-1, but I have been using electronic crossovers for many years. Electronic/active crossovers will improve clarity throughout the spectrum. I'm not sure why four channels of DAC is necessary. Can't you just use the two channel DAC before the crossover? The DAC will have done its job and then the signal gets divided appropriately by the crossover.

I have the f113 and the esoteric k01x. Does anyone use this combo with the cr1 and does it color the sound?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-18-2017, 10:57 AM
mtroo's Avatar
mtroo mtroo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,297
Default

__________________
Tim
Amplifiers: McIntosh 1.2 Kw
Preamp: Esoteric C03
Speakers: Salon2 with F113v2 x 2
Analog: VPI Avenger Reference with Ortofon A95 and Esoteric E03 phonostage
Digital: Silenzio and Esoteric K03-x and G02
Power Management: PS Audio P10 x 2, P5
Cables: WW PE7 SC & IC, Furutech Flux-50 Filters
Rack: HRS SXR Signature
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-18-2017, 05:16 PM
kaarmstrong kaarmstrong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Northwest USA
Posts: 232
Default

I am currently using the CR-1 to blend my mains with two F212 subs. I previously was using the internal digital crossover in my classe cp-800 which I think sounded very good but not ideal for analog sources so I purchased the cr-1. I had the same concern as you but am very happy with how it sounds. Going into it, I was just hoping I'd get compariable sound to using the classe cp-800 digital crossover with a digital source but in my system I think using the cr-1 is slightly better but not substantially better.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-18-2017, 06:37 PM
Mike-48 Mike-48 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 197
Default

Gary, Four channels of DAC, because I was talking about digital crossovers. After the signal is divided in the digital domain, the four resulting channels of digital audio need DAC.

kaarmstrong, Thanks for the info -- it's quite helpful to find someone using a similar setup. In my room it is necessary to EQ the bass. I am wondering if you do any of that, and what product you use. Of course, the CP-800 does that, but I'm thinking of eventually moving away from its DSP features.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-18-2017, 08:51 PM
GaryProtein's Avatar
GaryProtein GaryProtein is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 5,393
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike-48 View Post
Gary, Four channels of DAC, because I was talking about digital crossovers. After the signal is divided in the digital domain, the four resulting channels of digital audio need DAC.
So why not do the DAC first, then the crossover--analog or digital?

Why does the DAC need to come last?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-18-2017, 10:54 PM
kaarmstrong kaarmstrong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Northwest USA
Posts: 232
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike-48 View Post
Gary, Four channels of DAC, because I was talking about digital crossovers. After the signal is divided in the digital domain, the four resulting channels of digital audio need DAC.

kaarmstrong, Thanks for the info -- it's quite helpful to find someone using a similar setup. In my room it is necessary to EQ the bass. I am wondering if you do any of that, and what product you use. Of course, the CP-800 does that, but I'm thinking of eventually moving away from its DSP features.
Mike-48, I currently to not use any EQ. I have used it before with the Classe and it did work well however I was able to move away from EQ with speaker placement and room treatments which I preferred. Kyle
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-19-2017, 01:46 AM
Mike-48 Mike-48 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryProtein View Post
So why not do the DAC first, then the crossover--analog or digital?

Why does the DAC need to come last?
If you do the DAC first, you have an analog signal, so there's no problem following the DAC with an analog crossover, which then outputs two pairs of analog signals (one pair for the mains, one for the subs). That's what I'm thinking of switching to.

But if you do the DAC first, you can't use a digital crossover, because the signal is in analog form, and a digital crossover works on a digital signal.

I suppose there is some gear that implements a digital crossover on an analog signal. But to do that, it converts back to digital first, then runs the crossover, then has four channels of DAC. In my mind, the repeated conversion between digital and analog domains is best avoided.

Clearer?

Last edited by Mike-48; 08-19-2017 at 01:54 AM. Reason: Typo
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-19-2017, 01:53 AM
Mike-48 Mike-48 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaarmstrong View Post
Mike-48, I currently to not use any EQ. I have used it before with the Classe and it did work well however I was able to move away from EQ with speaker placement and room treatments which I preferred. Kyle
Thanks, Kyle. Glad to hear that you've been able to move away from EQ by using treatments and positioning. That is, to my mind, the ideal solution.

Not that I'm opposed to EQ, but it adds a whole other set of variables.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Audioaficionado.org tested by Norton Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:18 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©Copyright 2009-2023 AudioAficionado.org.Privately owned, All Rights Reserved.
Audio Aficionado Sponsors
AudioAficionado Subscriber
AudioAficionado Subscriber
Inspire By Dennis Had
Inspire By Dennis Had
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Wyred4Sound
Wyred4Sound
Dragonfire Acoustics
Dragonfire Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
Esoteric
Esoteric
AC Infinity
AC Infinity
JL Audio
JL Audio
Add Powr
Add Powr
Accuphase - Soulution
Accuphase - Soulution
Audio by E
Audio by E
Canton
Canton
Bryston
Bryston
WireWorld Cables
WireWorld Cables
Stillpoints
Stillpoints
Bricasti Design
Bricasti Design
Furutech
Furutech
Shunyata Research
Shunyata Research
Legend Audio & Video
Legend Audio & Video