Active Speakers Better? No, per Michael Borresen

I second the spirit of Eric's post. In fact, I am waiting for glue to set as I type, on a set of passive loudspeakers in the shop. 

  It has been several years since I experienced the active loudspeaker idea. I was working with an engineer in Tucson who is brilliant with the technology of an active design, yet, in my application or use of such speakers, I still preferred the passive design that originally complimented these speakers (also designed by him).

 The active crossover chosen was made by a company that was popular but not impressive in build quality IMO. Bryston amps were used for power to all drivers. Balanced interconnects were used throughout, and I forget which AudioQuest speaker cable we chose.

 In a word, I found the result too dry for my taste. Again, the passive crossover was my preference, even though as stated before, they are rough in comparison of what can be accomplished with an active line level device.

kota1,

  If I were to start all over again, the total price wouldn't bother me so much. In fact, if this an item that spells out the answer for audio in the long run, likely money would have been saved. Really, just look at the total spent on audio over decades in our systems. And in the case of speakers, I have kept one pair (coincidently the one that I posted about here) for well over 10 years. It wasn't until I started to build speakers again that I sold these, of course at a loss, and tried new designs. 

   It is too late in the game to start again considering my age and hearing. In the end, I am glad to have the chance to have so many experiences with all audio, i.e., not just in stereo/music but the observation of it in daily life.