• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

ALK Universal Reimagined: A Hybrid PCB Crossover

FastlaneDave

Tractrix Advantage
Subscriber
I’ve been working on a modern two-piece layout for the ALK Universal crossover. The design combines a centrally mounted printed circuit board for the smaller capacitors, resistor, terminal blocks, and electrical routing with a 3D-printed carrier that supports the large inductors, main capacitor, and 3619-ET autoformer.

The assembled crossover shown in the first photograph is a physical mockup built with leftover parts, so most of the components are not the final values. Its purpose was to evaluate component spacing, lead reach, magnetic separation, mounting methods, zip-tie locations, and service access before assembling the finished network.

The mockup has already done its job. It revealed several useful changes, including correcting the carrier orientation, improving support beneath the PCB terminal blocks, and revising the connection points for the large axial capacitor so its original leads can reach the board without extensions.

The second image shows the current two-piece design in Fusion 360. The green section represents the circuit board, while the dark 250 × 200 mm carrier provides mounting and restraint for the larger external components.

Positioning the PCB near the center of the major components keeps the high-current connections short and direct. Wide traces and heavy copper carry the crossover paths across the board, while the surrounding inductors, main capacitor, and autoformer connect at nearby edge locations. This minimizes unnecessary lead length, series resistance, and connection complexity without requiring the PCB to support the large, heavy components.

The approach combines the electrical consistency and repeatability of a routed circuit board with the mechanical flexibility of a traditional point-to-point crossover. The PCB carries the smaller components and preserves the electrical topology, while the printed carrier bears the weight of the large components and provides independent mechanical restraint.

Because those larger parts remain external to the PCB, the carrier can be revised without redesigning the circuit board. This makes it possible to accommodate different capacitor packages and various inductor constructions—including laminated iron-core, conventional air-core, and Litz-wire coils—while retaining the same central PCB and electrical connection scheme.

The carrier also provides alternate mounting and zip-tie options. Traditional barrier-style terminal blocks provide familiar screw-down connections, with support beneath the terminal areas so screwdriver pressure is transferred into the carrier rather than flexing the PCB.

The goal is not to create an unrelated crossover or casually alter the established ALK topology. The objective is to package it in a form that is easier to assemble, secure, service, reproduce, and adapt.

This remains a prototype project. I’ll update the thread as the manufactured circuit boards and correct-value components arrive, followed by assembly, continuity checks, electrica measurements, and listening tests.

At this stage, this is strictly a personal development and learning project—not an announcement that I am manufacturing or selling crossovers. I’m pursuing it because the design process is enjoyable, informative, and useful for exploring better ways to package and assemble the network. It may eventually develop into something more, but there are no current production plans. Before manufacturing could even be considered, the design would need to complete physical assembly, electrical verification, listening evaluation, long-term testing, and any necessary review or permissions associated with offering a finished product. For now, the goal is simply to build, test, document, and share what I learn along the way.

IMG_5425.jpegScreenshot 2026-08-27 082225.png
 
Register to hide this ad
The circuit board itself will not be 3D printed. It is a conventional, professionally manufactured, heavy-copper PCB. The larger dark board shown in the rendering is the 3D-printed carrier that supports the PCB, inductors, capacitor, and autoformer.

I may eventually offer the PCB, printed carrier, autoformers, or possibly a coordinated package, but selling anything is not the current objective. The design first needs to be assembled with the correct components, electrically verified, measured, listened to, and refined where necessary.

Al is aware of and supportive of the project, and he is interested in seeing how the completed version performs. Once everything is working properly, I will likely send him a finished sample for evaluation. Since he designed the network and built these crossovers for many years, his review will carry considerable weight before I consider offering anything for sale.
 
I've experimented with off-the-shelf crossover pcb's with some success.

0bf56ee0-5d09-4477-b8a3-a4e12204f6d0.jpg

The problem is fitting the different sizes/types of components into a fixed area.

I like the fact that you placed most of the components outside the pcb. I wonder if a better approach would be to design the pcb with only via's and traces. Maybe allow a place for a swamping resistor 'cause it can get a little warm. No other component would be mounted on the pcb itself.

The surrounding "frame" could be customized for the desired components. Screw terminal, autoformer, inductors, capacitors. Via's for unneeded components would be left unconnected or jumped.

With this approach, the pcb could be designed for a two-way or three-way crossover. For a two-way, leave the woofer via's unpopulated and print a smaller frame.

Hmmmmm
 
I like the fact that you placed most of the components outside the pcb. I wonder if a better approach would be to design the pcb with only via's and traces. Maybe allow a place for a swamping resistor 'cause it can get a little warm. No other component would be mounted on the pcb itself.

A PCB containing only traces and connection points is certainly possible. If the routing were planned properly, jumpers could configure the same board for either a two-way or three-way network by connecting or bypassing the appropriate sections. The 3D-printable carrier provides the remaining flexibility, accommodating different inductors, capacitors, resistors, autoformers, and terminal arrangements while keeping the overall assembly clean.

As for the barrier blocks, I set up my board to be compatible with these.

Screenshot 2026-08-27 213755.png
 
It’s admirable.

Some things to consider:

I thought the 4500d had a nice aesthetic for a PCB, and while there was interest in the concept, I had difficulty moving it. Almost every person wanted to know when I was doing a PtP version.

Crites spent years poisoning the well. The entire business is built on replacing PCBs with PtP builds.

If the idea is to see how inexpensive you can make it - I don’t think that will work. People investing in “upgrades” expect them to look like it.

I realize you’re prototyping. Maybe the end result will “pop” a bit.

Yeah yeah. Not for sale. ;-) ;-)
 
Last edited:
Those are fair points. The objective wasn’t to see how cheaply I could build a crossover. It was to simplify the assembly process and develop a clean, repeatable platform that could be adapted by changing component values and the component carrier. At this stage, I’m mainly interested in seeing how well the concept works.
 
The circuit boards arrived, and overall they turned out pretty good. I’ve got a couple of small adjustments I want to make, but they seem to do the trick and everything fits together as intended.

Here are a couple of photos of the boards, along with the board installed in the carrier.

I’m still waiting on the rest of the parts to arrive. Once I have everything here and can get one assembled and tested, I’ll post another update.
PCB1.jpg
 

Attachments

  • PCB+CARRIER.jpg
    PCB+CARRIER.jpg
    84.8 KB · Views: 14
On the ALK universal, my "focus" would be making sure a respectable quality resistor is used for the swamp. This will get you more "clean" in terms of overall board sonics than what might be lost re: PCB, IMO. Avoid sand cast here....really like Mills here although that's not free....

I did a bunch of testing around the 4500 PCB boards, where you have to strap a "placeholder" resistor to the tweeter tap on the main crossover (because the tweeter now gets attached to the 4500 board, leaving the main crossover tweeter tap open, so we give it a "placeholder"). That placeholder was initially a sand cast.....and curiosity got the better of me so I started swapping different brands. Mills and Path demonstrated a marked difference in that perceived "loss" of the addition of the 4500 boards to the base crossover( in this case, the B2). I also sampled three differing base crossovers attached to those 4500 daughterboards, OG Westcaps, Multicap RTX, and Crites Sonicaps......and the "bigger" issue" was always the placeholder resistor. The 4500 boards didn't "suffer" from an issue of loss, it just made the driver sets and speakers sound in character and balance that the base crossovers assigned to the signature.

Conclusion is that the parts used are more important than the loss in PCB. "Especially" the overlooked resistor. Otherwise decent audio grade caps are fine, don't have to get too esoteric here.

I also experimented with swamping resistors on universal variants and that resistor matters bigly. More than the caps even. Almost like a "main artery". As an extensive listener of high end versions of Klipsch "all P2P" schematics (built mostly by Dean), I know full well how "direct/connected/not lossy" those networks are, the introduction of PCB into this scheme isn't something I view as problematic IF the associated parts are up to par. If someone didn't know better, the "sample" of the 4500 daughterboards might attribute the "percieved loss" as a result of the PCB, when the reality was once a rock solid audio grade resistor was put in the "placeholder" spot, seemingly a "whatevah works" part in start, turns out to be the weakest link in the whole scheme, assuring that I not only didn't blame the boards for the issue but even adopted the boards as "plenty good enough". And Dean will vouch that I'm a bit of a painindeazz when it comes to details/finish characteristics.

So for THIS "ask" - PCBs being OK for good results, I'm here to say I don't think you need to be afraid of this here. n a hot piece of gear/preamp/etc it's another thing, but in this app, I think even my anal ears would be OK with it. What's soldered between the print matters more, although P2P would have an advantage, the other stuff matters more on balance. You can minimize the "loss".
 
Fortunately, my boards provide approximately 2.8 inches of clearance for the swamping resistor, accommodating both reliable standard resistors and most boutique options. Builders may install their preferred resistor, provided its resistance and power ratings meet the circuit requirements.

This part may have been missed in my original post.

"The assembled crossover shown in the first photograph is a physical mockup built with leftover parts, so most of the components are not the final values. Its purpose was to evaluate component spacing, lead reach, magnetic separation, mounting methods, zip-tie locations, and service access before assembling the finished network."
 
Still waiting for a few parts, so I’ve been working on the component layout in the meantime.

One of the considerations is minimizing interaction between the inductors. I’m leaning toward mounting the large woofer inductor flat, with the midrange and tweeter inductors vertical. This also makes for a pretty clean and compact layout.

IMG_5508.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I’m also working on a new board layout that can be configured as either the ALK Universal or CSW crossover.

The Universal uses a first-order woofer filter, while the CSW uses a second-order woofer filter. The midrange and tweeter sections remain second- and third-order, respectively. By adding just a few components, the same board can accommodate either configuration.

Still working through the layout, but it’s coming together nicelyCSW_Universal board.png
 
Last edited:
The Universal is 1st order, 2nd order and 3rd order.

The CSW is the same. The CSW-450 (for the La Scala) is 2nd order, 2nd order, and 3rd order.
 
Yes, technically the original Cornscala-wall Universal is a 1st-order, 2nd-order, 3rd-order network, similar to the Universal.

The newer CSW-400 and CSW-450 are both 2nd-order, 2nd-order, 3rd-order networks.

Al told me just yesterday he should have used a different name designation for the CSW networks.

I edited my earlier post for technical accuracy.
 
Got the first version of my ALK Universal Hybrid crossover finished and tested. So far, it works quite well, and I’m pretty pleased with how the component carrier and circuit board turned out.

I’ve already got a couple more revisions in mind, so I may play with the design a little further before I call it finished.

I’d also be curious to know how Justin Weber’s PCB-based Universal project is coming along. He had some really interesting ideas, particularly integrating the autoformer directly into the circuit board and using jumpers to select the attenuation. That’s a pretty clever way of doing it.

I know there doesn’t seem to be a tremendous amount of enthusiasm for circuit-board-based crossovers in this community, but I wanted to try it and see how it worked. At the very least, I’m pleased with how this first one turned out.



ALKUNI.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom