There are many active speakers and studio monitors including from reputed speaker brands.Many amps use class D amplification some use class AB some use DSP some crossover. almost all of them hide amplifier specifications. My question is which audiophile active speakers have better amplifier specifications.
All active xover’d sound impressive at first, but then quickly always sounds sterile and thin to me in the end from the upper bass to treble, low bass is fine. I believe it’s because of too much electronics and opamps in the active xover that the signal has to go through Every time I’ve put my Martin Logan Monoliths (with Neolith panels) through any type of active xover that’s what happens to them. Best sound is always 3rd order passive xovers for the panels 150hz up, and 4th order active for the 12" bass unit 150hz down.
I know this OP if I couldn’t get the specs, I’d really REALLY doubt that I’d be buying their equipment. That being said. I don’t think active speakers or active crossovers are the best without some consideration.
Just like a passive XO requires GREAT parts and more than a little thought.
I use a First Watt Active XO that is chock-a-block full to the top with WiMa caps and Vishay copper resistors.. NO op amps in sight.. Has a switchable step baffle that is pretty cool for OB bass boost..
I also use 2496 actives from Behringer. 300 hz and down.. with 12K Class Ds directly coupled.. That is one of the reasons active speakers have better bass driver cone control..
Directly coupled to the drivers vs going through a passive OX. There is NO DAMPENING with a passive. An inductor or cap in the way. It can’t physically work.. Only the return springs on an active drivers.. Short internal leads and active XOs make for good bedfellows..
Again, parts quality, BUT the size of parts on the active side are MUCH less expensive because of the much smaller values..
Krell actives are 5-10k.. LOL they sound good..
See I pay attention George. I’m not just another pretty face :-)
It probably doesn't make much sense to give the amplifier specifications for an active speaker since you can't actually hook anything up to the amplifier's outputs. It does make sense to give the speaker specifications, just like you would for a passive speaker.
Right nekoaudio, the distortion of the speaker far exceeds that of any reasonably designed amplifier.
pldhvymec, absolutely, a subwoofer mandates that the amp be hooked up directly to the driver. However, in my experience high power AB amps with extremely low output impedances do a better job of driving subwoofers. But you have to use passive subwoofers as an AB amp driven hard will get hot, they are larger more complicated and require a larger power supply. Class D amps have become universal in powered subs because they run cool and can pack a lot of power in a small space. I have tried several plate amps and Crown class D's with rather discouraging results. There are many Class D amps I have not tried so I can not generalize. The QSC PLX 3602 amplifiers I currently use do a wonderful job and they are relatively inexpensive being commercial sound reinforcement amps. Their bass is every bit as good as my old Krell KMA 100s and current JC 1's. They also have individual level controls for each channel which is great to have in a subwoofer amp for matching levels. Their only significant problem is a rather noisy fan but mine are below the floor in the shop so it does not matter.
No, THD is THD, all amplifiers today have lower THD than the speakers they drive. The biggest improvement comes in the form of intermodulation distortion (IMD) which is virtually non-existent with active speakers.
Intermodulation distortion is what your ears dislike the most, some people may call it sterile or mechanical, I call it accurate. I prefer to do it with my own amplifier choices using a DSP or electronic crossover. This gives you so many more choices than an active speaker where the speaker manufacture get to decide what amps, crossover points and slopes to use. The biggest improvement will come in the way of much more defined midrange and high frequencies. I've been bi-amping and tri-amping for 42 years. Will only go back to passives when I need to downsize to move into a retirement community.
Their only significant problem is a rather noisy fan..
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Behringer NU12000 are the same way.. I have a few (:-)). I can find them for around 375-500. New or refurbished. They have 3 fans. I disconnect 2 of the 3 and put the third over the PS on a mini toggle.
Late night listening I flip the switch off. I have forgot several times and finally left it off. That was 2.5 years ago.. That is a bullet proof class d at 27 lbs.
...
My question is which audiophile active speakers have better amplifier specifications.
Active, bundled speakers are often claimed to have "matched" amp-to-driver implementation, but much of this is a gimmick, I find. With active configuration the amp matters less, or the same amp will be given much better conditions to perform at its fuller potential not seeing into a passive cross-over, and so the matched nature is really less important vs. matching amps to passive speakers. Not that matching amps in active configs can't bring advantages, but it's been a cloak for some time now that some active speaker manufacturers have worn to make their endeavors appear esoteric. Give me a break.
In any case active means better driver control, and it translates - in the combinations I've heard - into less smear, better resolution and transparency. Passive by comparison sounds thicker, duller, more restrained and less immediate, but to other ears that's likely warmer, fuller and more pleasing/laid-back.
Most audiophiles (like in >99%) have been accustomed to the sound of passive speakers for decades - typically via hideously insensitive, smaller speakers - but passive speakers qua passive speakers as such have a rather easily discernible character compared not least to larger, more sensitive and active speakers, and that's something that most may likely never experience or acknowledge as a negative because by and large it's the same (passive) meal they've been served for years. As long as people are happy, to each their own and all that jazz, but active for just named reasons haven't been given due credit where it very much should.
Good amplifiers tend to be the norm rather than the opposite. If you are buying active speakers from a reputable manufacturer, I'm sure it's a well measuring amplifier. You should listen to the combo and go by that more than specs.
But, how does it taste. I watch some posters banter about the ingredients and then recipe for perfect sound conjuring up concrete conclusions. Fact is, one could gather the same ingredients for a dish and come up with a completely different result. And that is what we do here, cook up aural dishes.
It's all in the execution. Recipe calls for salt. Kosher salt? Celtic smoked salt? Himalayan pink? Alton Brown would take the same recipe and crush us all. Execution will always radically change the end result.
When one has actually owned and operated 20K active speakers (studio monitors/floor standers) and compared them directly with 20K of amplification and passive speakers and states "I like passive with amplification better", well then fine. I can accept that, I've no real skin in the game. I've already played the game and decided for myself.
I simply do not read that out of the postings. I encourage more critical thought and an upscaling of information.
Just to add to my first answer, it’s not that active xovers seem to my ear to add any distortion, but more that they "seem" to strip the "harmonic structure" from the music in the mids and highs and leave just the (admittedly "clean" fundamentals). This is why I feel they sound thin from the mids and highs and leave things sounding too "sterile" for my liking
Naaa sorry not with massive ML Neolith paneled Monolith ESL’s from lower mids to highs, it says what right and what’s not to my ear. And a good passive xover sounds far better than any active I’ve tried I wanted to try the fully discrete Nelson Pass First Watt Active XO but none available any more, that "could" of changed my mind.
here here celtic66. I’m with you. Fiesta 75 -you get it! (Audiogoners, follow these guys! )
Who honestly thinks a speaker level crossover is an improvement over a line level one?
How is seen as a good thing to add a bunch of big lossy parts that are not flat response into the audio path (large inductors and capacitors)?
How is reducing control of the drivers an improvement (no level calibration) ?
How is lack of phase control over drivers a positive?
This is a bit extreme but trying to make a point-could it be the amplifier business has invested a lot of time and money to convince all of us that an ever more expensive amplifier hooked to an ever more expensive speaker cable is important to speaker performance? While it might be true we hear a difference in different parts, this is exactly the point, these parts all have a sound. A speaker engineer might say that the entire passive crossover thing will never change because its a racket to sell you very expensive things you don’t need.
TIM starts w negative feedback. Long ago in a banished galaxy people focused on THD Otalla, Thiel, Vandersteen, a few got time, phase, impulse response…even energy storage and release, perhaps a few…pistonic motion..
Question ; if the cone or a portion of the cone is out of phase to the input ( also known as music ), is that distortion ?
I am an investor in a recording studio. Powered speakers are popular at the console, not so much the mixer…editing workstation, even more rare at the mastering level and ATC dominant…at least in the circles i travel….
Our choice ? separate speakers and amps, for mastering biamped w speaker level to connections , about $ 130 range, so yes people do make other choices….I know a gal with a strad…made same choice. OF course those amplifiers are purpose built for the load and not some cheap plate amp. About time and phase, you do understand what a steep slope does beyond output ?
Heavy pop the hood on the Beringer, send me a picture…no Op amps ? ya sure ? My choice for active filters is Modjeski and the brilliant work he did for Beveridge….now those…..sound….good.
finally, i celebrate the diversity of opinion and experience in the thread…. thank God we have an amazing plethora of choice…including which subcult to join…
now, excuse me while i go listen to an ESL that approximates a point source….
Seems nobody understood the question, My question was active speakers and studio monitors have bi-amp, DSP/crossover designs but hide amp specifications except RMS powers. Are they truly audiophile grade or Just boom boxes from reputed Loudspeaker manufacturers? Examples Dynaudio Xeo series, LYD series, Adam audio studio monitors , JBL Kliptch powered speakers.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
