SL2 passive x-over on SBL's

If the SBL cross-over was correctly designed in the first place, how could one designed for a different speaker possibly be an improvement?

Different Crossovers. At least the casing is different. dunno about the insides.
SL2 sounds a little bit different too

On the basis that my SNAXO needed no adjustment when I tried SL2's against my SBL's.

Interesting proposition. The new SL2 passive crossover ought to be better, or is it exactly the same?

Come on boys; let us know.

Rockingdoc

The SL2 looks very much like an improved SBL. If everything else about the SBL can be improved why not the x-over. The SBL was released in 1986, it is difficult to believe that Naim has not learnt something about x-over design since then.

The SL2 can use the same SNAXO with the same settings as the SBL. It therefore seemed likely to me that the passive SL2 x-over can be used on the SBL.

So I think my questions are valid. Can it be done? Is it an improvement?

Maybe not. The SL2 may not be an improvement over the SBL. Some people prefer the CDS1 over the CDS2, others the NAIT2 over the NAIT3.

I am hoping for an answer from someone who knows.

Hans

... the Credos? Did they use the same passive XO as SBLs or the 'CXO' like the Allae?

Best Regards,
Mark DunnÄ

not sure about the SL2 cross-over, but a dealer i went to in reading reckoned they heard an improvement using the SBL cross-over on the allaes.

cheers

matt