so here is my question, I have Dynaudio 240gt 2-way components and a 4
channel MTX 4300 amp to power these. I also have an external Audio
control 2xs xover that I may or may not use.

I have the subs and sub amp figured out but am debating on the front
stage options. I have a hatchback and am omitting the rear speakers,
don't care for the fill.

I am planning on bridging the amp to get enough power for these, and
just using it 100Wx2 at 4ohm bridged.

I know this amp may not be in the same class as the separates but it's
all I have for now and I was always happy with the MTX quality, though
I may upgrade to a Zapco or Mcintosh if I ever get the itch bad
enough.

Question is:

Are there any benefits to using an external xover vs the one built-in
on the amp? The question is sound quality? Is there any diff?
Obviously if I add an external xover I am introducing more cables and
that's not good but I would think that the Audiocontrol stuff would be
better sounding than the built in Xover which I can turn off. I also
like the idea of having it set w/ a chip rather than a know that may
move and is set by my ears and not to a knowing frequency.

Just looking for thoughts. Thanks.
-Z

so here is my question, I have Dynaudio 240gt 2-way components and a 4
channel MTX 4300 amp to power these. I also have an external Audio
control 2xs xover that I may or may not use.

I have the subs and sub amp figured out but am debating on the front
stage options. I have a hatchback and am omitting the rear speakers,
don't care for the fill.

I am planning on bridging the amp to get enough power for these, and
just using it 100Wx2 at 4ohm bridged.

I know this amp may not be in the same class as the separates but it's
all I have for now and I was always happy with the MTX quality, though
I may upgrade to a Zapco or Mcintosh if I ever get the itch bad
enough.

That amp is fine. It easily does more than its rated power, which should be
plenty for those speakers. There's no reason to upgrade.

Question is:

Are there any benefits to using an external xover vs the one built-in
on the amp?

No. I'm assuming your internal crossovers are configured for your needs.

The question is sound quality? Is there any diff?

Nope. An active crossover is an incredibly simple circuit. The tough part
is actually in the power supply. Piggybacking on the amplifier's hefty
power supply saves space, adds simplicity, reduces noise, and is simply the
better option.

Obviously if I add an external xover I am introducing more cables and
that's not good but I would think that the Audiocontrol stuff would be
better sounding than the built in Xover which I can turn off. I also
like the idea of having it set w/ a chip rather than a know that may
move and is set by my ears and not to a knowing frequency.

You WANT to set it with your ears. The frequency markings on the amplifier
are inaccurate. That's good. You don't want it to sway your judgment.
Your ears should be the deciding factor. Anyway, the differences in sound
quality are nonexistent. The audiocontrol units use a state-variable scheme
versus the typical sallen-key design that just about every amp manufacturer
I know of uses. The difference? Fewer active components. That means
slightly lower statistical probability of failure, all else being equal. In
other words, it doesn't really matter!

Pardon my being so verbose. It's just that we have a few people in here
that insist there are differences, despite the fact that tey've never
designed or even constructed any of the components we're talking about here.

Pardon my being so verbose. It's just that we have a few people in here
that insist there are differences, despite the fact that tey've never
designed or even constructed any of the components we're talking about here.

That's why I am asking - I have heard both sides of the story but
never anything convincing from people that insist that there are
diffs. Thanks for your help, I will probably sell my Audiocontrol
pieces back then unless someone can convince me to keep them.

The built in xover will do what I need, all I want to do is set the
high pass on the separates to where they have midbass but not too much
so they blow. I have two fifteens in the trunk for that.

So let me ask you what is the big diff btwn a high end zapco type of
an amp and my MTX ? I looked at the specs and they are incredibly
underrated. THe amp comes with an actual test spec sheet with numbers
like 56w/channel x 4(4ohm) instead of the 25W it's rated at and THD at
..016 instead .1
I know it's hard to put SQ in numbers and I have heard high end audio
and it blows my mind but can it really be heard in a car? It seems
like you spend $1200 on an amp vs $300 and you get maybe a slight
increase in quality but there is so much road noise and other factors
I wonder if it's worth it.

The only problem I had with

So let me ask you what is the big diff btwn a high end zapco type of
an amp and my MTX ? I looked at the specs and they are incredibly
underrated. THe amp comes with an actual test spec sheet with numbers
like 56w/channel x 4(4ohm) instead of the 25W it's rated at and THD at
.016 instead .1

The difference in sound? Well, if we're talking about a Zapco with
equivalent output power, there is no difference. I don't have the data to
be able to tell you which is the more reliable amp in terms of repair rate.
I've always had good luck in that respect with both amps. Very good luck in
fact.

"Mark Zarella" wrote in message ...
So let me ask you what is the big diff btwn a high end zapco type of
an amp and my MTX ? I looked at the specs and they are incredibly
underrated. THe amp comes with an actual test spec sheet with numbers
like 56w/channel x 4(4ohm) instead of the 25W it's rated at and THD at
.016 instead .1

The difference in sound? Well, if we're talking about a Zapco with
equivalent output power, there is no difference. I don't have the data to
be able to tell you which is the more reliable amp in terms of repair rate.
I've always had good luck in that respect with both amps. Very good luck in
fact.

Thanks for the info Mark, it's funny how one always assumes that the
more money something costs the better it sounds. Only thing I don't
mind spending the money on is the Dyns as I have heard nothing that
sounds as good as them (doesn't mean there aren't spks that do). The
highs are not harsh like Focals or most others I've heard and they
sound just amazing. Some may say they don't like these Dyns but to me
they are worth every penny as I just love them.

I was under the impression that if I don't spend a grand on an amp I
am somehow "robbing" these speakers of their potential. Seems that I
am mistaken and that maybe I shoud invest in a good EQ and sound
deadening rather than a new amp or xovers.

Thanks for the info Mark, it's funny how one always assumes that the
more money something costs the better it sounds. Only thing I don't
mind spending the money on is the Dyns as I have heard nothing that
sounds as good as them (doesn't mean there aren't spks that do). The
highs are not harsh like Focals or most others I've heard and they
sound just amazing. Some may say they don't like these Dyns but to me
they are worth every penny as I just love them.

I'm with you on that.

I was under the impression that if I don't spend a grand on an amp I
am somehow "robbing" these speakers of their potential. Seems that I
am mistaken and that maybe I shoud invest in a good EQ and sound
deadening rather than a new amp or xovers.

A good EQ would probably be worthwhile. Sound deadening has its
applications, but usually isn't necessary - especially the way some people
coat their entire doors.