The JR149 thread got me thinking... it has always bothered me that amplifier designers go to the trouble of producing low distortion output across the whole frequency range, only to have a large part of their efforts thrown away/strangled by a crossover positioned after the power amplifier.
When most domestic speakers had a single full-range driver this obviously wasn't an issue... but when more than one driver became the norm in high end domestic systems, why did it not also become the norm to split the signal prior to power amplification and allocate each driver its own power amplifier - one designed to excel in the frequency/impedance range over which output would be demanded of it?
Economics may have played a role, obviously... but I'm talking about fine (maybe single manufacturer) systems aimed at those with deep pockets and a taste for demanding music, not run-of-the-mill systems.
I think I would have stuck with single driver speakers (Voight corner horns, for example) in that era, had I been sufficiently well-heeled to afford hi-fi of that calibre.
When most domestic speakers had a single full-range driver this obviously wasn't an issue... but when more than one driver became the norm in high end domestic systems, why did it not also become the norm to split the signal prior to power amplification and allocate each driver its own power amplifier - one designed to excel in the frequency/impedance range over which output would be demanded of it?
Economics may have played a role, obviously... but I'm talking about fine (maybe single manufacturer) systems aimed at those with deep pockets and a taste for demanding music, not run-of-the-mill systems.
I think I would have stuck with single driver speakers (Voight corner horns, for example) in that era, had I been sufficiently well-heeled to afford hi-fi of that calibre.