imho no...
I Was Considering Active, Then I Watched This ...
173 responses Add your response
@duckworp Yeah, setting up a good sounding room curve is hard work. Lots of ARC systems out there and only a few IMHO get it right. Toole doesn't really like any of them, but I think a couple like Anthem and Dirac and JL Audio have come along in making better choices. People still don't understand that automatic room correction does what a human told it to do, and you might not like that. :) Best, Erik |
The eternal debate about active vs. passive speakers is exactly that, an eternal debate. The truth: Pros and cons are complicated. Only in the consumer land the raging debate tends to exist only because there just isn’t that much of a difference for us in terms of class of product. In the end, the quality of the sound we experience is really complicated and the final result is the only way to compare two choices, and for that you need to get very specific. I can imagine that there’s some future where two speakers sit in my living room, with no cables, no power supply, no amplifiers and are quantum linked directly to a performer’s recorded brainwaves. I’m literally going to buy a hologram of an integrated amplifier before I enjoy that experience. :) Best, Erik |
In Munich I was surprised how poor the Kii room sounded. They claimed that with DSP on board they were able to get them sounding room-perfect. But to my ears it was very dry and analytical. It did sound more like the studio monitors in the studios I sometimes work in. But pleasant to listen to? I don’t think so. |
Hmmmm... Gutenberg has lots of opinions but small amounts of understanding of current advances in speaker/amp designs, in my opinion...which may not be completely accurate either. Such is the nature of opinions. But, my ATC 50's, active, blow the socks off all the separates I have used over the last 50 years. And that wasn't junk either. The smoothness top to bottom, the realism, the dead-black background, the clean sound all sold me and continues to this day. As an extra, ATC does manufacture its own electronics as well as the drivers. It makes one hell of an active speaker. A few years ago when Steve Gutenburg began his dailies, I even joined his Patron (sp) program to support the effort. In a month I dropped out. I was learning very little. Couldn't justify the time. |
I have had passives in past and now use ATC Active 50 towers with upgraded anniversary amp pack. I agree that if you are interested in tweaking your system to get a particular sound then having separate amps seem to make sense. I immensely enjoy my active system and have tweaked it by having professionally designed acoustic wall treatment, buying the best power supplies and isolation transformers along with hi quality sources and electronics. I can’t see how anyone can say that having an active crossover designed specifically for the drivers is a great if not the best way to handle the speakers. I can’t speak for other speaker companies amps, but the ATC line are top notch and once again fully optimized for their drivers. |
Here’s some active speakers for the budget constrained. Insightful ramblings not needed. https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/BB6XBDA--pmc-bb6-xbd-a-twin-15-inch-3-way-reference-monitor-... https://almaaudio.com/products/kii-three-bxt-complete-system?variant=29324985073717¤cy=USD... There’s active speakers at all price points from very modest excellent monitors from JBL and Adam to systems in the 6 figures. |
A good compromise is what many Von Schweikert speakers do. They have many models with high quality 500 watt+ plate amps designed for them by by Chanel D. This allows the sound of the main amps to come through untouched and allows one to adjust base to the room +-6 db and allows one to use for example lower watt tube amps if desired. |
Steve is a veteran and is to be respected.Does that mean his motives can't be questioned? That someone can't disagree with him? He had a conclusion already developed and created his arguments to fit his conclusion. His conclusion was not based on his observation, but more on his reluctance to change. For ultimate results, outboard amplification is preferred.For ultimate performance, we are talking many tens of thousands of dollars, this is probably true. In the range of prices more people can afford, it is not true any more. The control and flexibility of the active systems as well as the ability to tailor the sound to my preference places the active system above any passive system I have owned. I didn't choose the amps and the sound is excellent. |
IMHO, the development of active speakers, particularly high-end actives, has resulted in the single greatest advance in speaker technology, design, and sound reproduction quality since the advent [sic] of the acoustic suspension speaker design some six and a half decades ago. Sorry if it spoils the "fun" of the gearheads who are more into trying to listen to an amp or some interconnects or whatever than to the music, but the quality of the sound reproduced — the music — is ALL I or any listener should care about. In my experience actives in the home, the studio, and in sound reinforcement have a very clear and very audible advantage over almost any passive setup at any given price point. I should note that I'm agnostic when it come to pure analog vs. DSP controlled speakers. I've used pure analog Swiss-built active PSI Audio monitors for mastering for the last ten years and I've no reason whatsoever to "upgrade." The PSIs disappear sonically; they add or subtract nothing perceptible of their own and have pinpoint imaging, speed, and transparency. They give me the sense that I'm listening past them down the wire to the source, to the original performance. And isn't THAT what anyone who is listening to the music wants? OTOH, I've heard (expensive!) DSP driven speakers in sound reinforcement settings that were likewise breathtakingly clean and transparent at high volumes with no perceptible fault or latency. I've no doubt it's the same in the studio or the home. Take your pick. |
One damning truth for me is that in 15 years of shows I don’t recall any active speaker (Legacy audio being the exception; hybrid) making my top 3 of show, ever. Until they actually DO outperform they are for me a waste of my time. The AXPONA 2019 demo of active/passive did nothing to change that opinion. It was actually a fairly good demo of why one does NOT have to go active. :( I will add this; In order to confirm or falsify my impressions from the show, I sought a set of larger active/passive speakers from a big name company, high profile. They were on board - until they saw the shipping cost. They balked, and the community lost a potentially very insightful article about pro/con of active/passive. It seems people can’t interpret "reviewer speak" all that well, so I will for you. Steve said the active did a few things better; translated, UNIMPRESSIVE. Precisely. My conclusion as well. Active speakers in use for smallish rigs, space constrained, budget constrained. Sure. For more serious, big rigs? I’ll leave that to someone else. :) |
Didn't miss Steve's points at all. He actually said there were things he liked better about the LS-50 wireless sound wise, but wanted the passives instead so he can choose his own amp. He said he liked the Elacs, but would not buy them because they are active. He is completely dismissing them because of preconceived notions about them and not how they perform against the competition within their price range. Keep in mind, comparable price for passive includes preamp, amp, and cables in addition to the speakers. I have a treated listening room and the sound is hands down better with room correction engaged. I have had many combinations of passive systems and the active one I have now is better. |
A person whose livelihood relies on reviewing systems/components done the traditional way certainly has a conflict of interest. Many are willing to adjust the sound of their system with a different amp, preamp, cable, etc. Doing all of that in the digital domain, plus controlling phase and driver out of band behavior before the signal gets to the amplifier makes perfect sense. You want a little more midbass, dial it in, without messing up phase. The biggest plus is getting rid of the crappy passive crossover, which is without a doubt the worst component in any system. |
And about amps failing... I do agree that the original ls50w’s had a horrible app and electronics (ie amp, dac...) that weren’t the most reliable. The dynaudio xeos that I had felt like they’d last for a long time. How many of us are using old amps that we bought used? I bet quite a few. People are selling 30 year old Classe or Bryston amps... I’ve owned at least 15 different amps, all bought used, all of them anywhere between 5-15 years old whenI bought them. I’ve not had one fail on me. And dacs are to the point now where improvements from here are going to be minimal. The Schiit gungir multibit I use is 4-5 years old I believe. So give me a dsp speaker or even analogue and give me well built, solid, reliable electronics... I’d take any class amplifier with any amount of dsp with electronics inside the speaker IF it sounds better... wouldn’t you? |
ATC, Dynaudio, Dutch & Dutch 8c, Kii Audio, Focal, Genelec, PMC, Meridian, Grimm, Avantgarde, Devialet, KEF... The difference between dinosaur audiophiles like Guttenberg and tomorrows audiophiles is that Guttenberg would take a more expensive passive ls50 setup that has more gear than a better sounding active ls50 wireless for less $ just because he put it together. 90% of people out there can and do make strong cases why the LS50W’s are better than the passive ls50’s. Its funny that he thinks a company that pours theIr heart and soul out to build speakers, like ATC, is then going to skimp on the amplification or that there won’t be oversight in that area. I think that most of the time, the people actually engineering and building the speaker can pair the amplification better than you can. Also, opposite of what Steve said, the speaker designer can put out a finished product that achieves the sound they were actually trying to achieve. I believe that active speakers with dsp are the future. True audiophiles are first and foremost after exceptional sound. People who make gear a priority over sound are not tomorrows audiophiles. Once this technology is a little more ironed out, I don’t think there will be a question as to which way things will go. Oh, and even though MBL (my favorite that I’ve heard) doesn’t do active (yet) they make all of the front end components too. So there ya go Steve, some of the if not the most incredible speaker manufacturer actually does know about amps and dacs too. |
djones51 Point well taken. There seems to be a flurry of interest in active speakers of late, especially with all the reviews of the Buchardt A400. The industry seems to be changing and people don't like change. |
I wouldn't worry to much this guy has no idea what he's blabbering about. The amp doesn't "rattle" around in the speaker, dsp is upgraded all the time with software. Not all active speakers have the electronics in the speaker, Genelec has been making actives for a long time and still service 20 year old speakers, most studios use active for a reason, they're more accurate and less trouble. |