@cd318 wrote:
... but there must be some who have bravely ventured into the realm of active studio monitors in pursuit of greater sonic accuracy as promised by the likes of Genelec, Neumann, Yamaha, JBL, Mackie, Kali Audio ect.
It could be of interest to the rest of us if they are willing to share their experiences of how they found this transition into the world of Pro Audio.
I came from "traditional" hi-fi, which is to say the lower to moderately efficient segment of direct radiating, coned (and planar magnetic tweeter hybrids) speakers to waveguide-based designs (with both dome tweeters and compression drivers), and eventually horn designs; all-horns as well as horn hybrids with large format compression drivers and horns (i.e.: 2" exit) and 15" paper-coned lower to central midrange/midbass drives and horn-loaded 15" woofers for subs duties. All high efficiency, which is to say 97 to 111dB's, and outboard actively configured.
The drivers used in the speakers I've owned have been pro segment for about 15 years now, but it wasn't until some 4 years ago where a bought a pair of used cinema speakers from Electro-Voice that they became pro segment through and through, and with large format mids/tweeter horns to boot. That stuff is rugged with duratex finish and built for high intensity use in cinemas for years, day in day out.
I've had an inkling towards horn-based, high efficiency speakers for years really. Up through the late 80's and early 90's I developed a keen interest in larger JBL designs, the likes of which count the 250Ti's, 4430/4435, Everest DD55000 and K2 S9500's (they had a retailer in my local area), the latter two of which (especially the S9500's) were my favorites of the bunch. They were also rather expensive for a young man, and instead I veered off into the more traditional fare of inefficient, smaller to medium sized and direct radiating speaker designs over a period of years.
There's no doubt though that I'd been driving home with those large JBL's had finances (and space) allowed at the time. Not to say the JBL's did everything "the one and only way"; I also very much liked the Snell A's and Quad ESL 63 with assisted open baffle Gradiant subs (2x12" Peerless woofers per cab) that were designed for use with the Quad's in mind, placed underneath each of them and thereby lifting them to proper listening height. I remember thinking if only those segments of speakers had shared traits into a single design that more or less had it all (and that fruition is looking to be achievable down the road). At the end of the day I feel that goal is better approximated with large, high eff. designs than the other way 'round.
Anyways, the years through university I scaled down to smaller speakers to finally end up where I am now with more fully flexed and large horn-based speakers, but with the important addition of now running them outboard actively and assisted with horn variant subs. Also, the amps used over the entire frequency range (incl. the subs) are virtually similar, and this is not trivial when subs are used.
I can't imagine going back to domestically aimed horn speakers, as they're typically too expensive for reasons that really has nothing to do with sound but rather aesthetics and trying to comply with interior decoration demands and spousal approval, and moreover they're mostly restricted physically/size-wise and run passively, none of which serve horn-based designs and actually keeps them from performing at their best, as I see it.
I've come to focus more on the broader, physical-acoustical aspects of speakers vs. trying to cultivate a physical package that's too compromised as an outset. I've had enough of running after that holy cow of audiophilia train with its dubious and (to me) insignificant areas of attention into gadgets, brand appraisal, looks, snobbery and vanity even. There are bigger and more important fish to fry.