I know the topic of bi-wiring and bi-amping speakers with passive crossovers has come up in the past. I believe this is a different idea (and it may be silly).
I am thinking about trying to put a SNAXO 2-4 after my NAC552DR and in front of a pair of NAP500DRs.
My ‘idea’ is to adjust the SNAXO so that the treble cutoff is below the crossover point of my speakers treble section at the binding posts and the bass cutoff would be above the crossover point of my speakers bass section at the binding posts.
I would also look to roll back the gain in the SNAXO to get a bit more range on the volume control on the 552.
Has anyone ever tried this stunt?
I have a ‘spare’ NAP500DR which is motivating this idea.
Ultimately you will still have a crossover in your speakers. Seems to me you aren’t getting the potential benefits of a powered external (active) crossover, and you are creating a very messy and contrived way of sort-of biamping. With two crossovers…
If I understand correctly, your plan is to biamp a pair of biwirable presumably 2-way speakers with internal passive XO in place, using an active XO to split the signal to bass and treble before the power amps?
The primary benefit of active driving arises through direct drive of the speaker drivers with no crossover components between, a benefit you wouldn’t reap, so this is a variety of passive bi-amping. The only benefit I can see over straight passive bi-amping would be is that each amp channel would only handle a part the frequency range. But with a sufficiently powerful and capable power amp I would anticipate the benefit to be minor. Meanwhile you would be adding extra circuitry, and changing the rolloff, though to what extent and whether audible would depend on bith passive ans SNAXO rolloff slopes and the frequencies you apply
It begs the question why not seek to remove the passive XO and actively drive properly.
Not familiar with the OP’s speakers. Do they have separate terminals for the treble and mid, (so “separated” XO circuits), and would normally be joined by a pair of bus bars?
They are ProAc K-6 Signatures. The internal crossovers are split-out two pair of binding posts.
At the moment, I have SL jumpers going from the treble posts to the base posts, with the SL from the 500 connected to the treble posts.
I also toyed with the idea of running the two 500’s in ‘mono block’ mode, where only one channel in each amp is driven by the 552.
The predicted issue is that the two 500’s are not from the same-ish time of manufacture, so the chance of speaker to speaker differences are more likely.
In my mind I am trying to avoid man-child dreams of the statement.
I would say no. To be blunt, sorry. It’s either proper active with a snaxo or not at at all. Snaxo crossover points are designed for specific speakers and won’t work in the way suggested.
I suspect that is the most trivial of issues- unless one well past the recommended re-capping date and tge other well within the amps will be sufficiently similar in character that you won’t be able to tell the difference.
It seems you have a spare 500 amp and dob’t know what to do with it. Looking at those speakers tgey are 3-way, so even if you can take out the internal preamp you wouldn’t be able to drve actively with two power amps and a SNAXO, but if indeed you can access the internal XO you could wire to drive bass active with no passive XO components in circuit (the area with greatest benefit from direct drive), with the second 500 channel then driving mid + treble through that section of the original passive XO. Alternatively get a third 500 and go fully active. All this is said not knowing how easy or whether at all you can access the speaker’s internal crossover.
Alternatively sell one 500 and pocket tg money, or also the speakers and buy better speakers, …
BTW, I assumed in your opening post that you know how to change XO frequencies of SNAXO - something that is not intended to be a user function but is factory alterable and further discussion of this not being permitted under forum rules.
