For a living room, where supposedly you want to have occasionally just a background music, I would go for active speakers. Indeed, this is what I have done for my living room - active Dynaudio. It is much more practical, saves space and you can tune the sound better for low level listening. If you get more pricy option it may even be suitable for critical listening when in the mood to do so.
Passive vs Active...Again!
My wife and I have made the rounds and have listened to numerous speakers now, not as many as we'd like, but as many as we could within a 3-hour drive. We liked some both active and passive, but it seems most of the active speakers we saw are not that pleasing to the eye (eg: Genelecs).
Not having a dedicated listening room, our room itself is a big problem. We have lots of hard surfaces to deal with.
If we go with passive speakers and the associated gear to go with it, we will need to spend a whole bunch of money on acoustic treatments.
We have a ton of artwork as well and with already limited wall space, we would rather look at the art than a bunch of sound-absorbing panels.
So here's my question: Will active speakers, that may come in cheaper, with room correction software (DSP) be able to tame the sound to a pleasing level in my lively room, or do I go with passives and break out the Rockwool!
Just a side note, I had some Martin Logan Spires in a very similar style room, that was much larger with little acoustic treatments and they sounded pretty good. But in this house I don't have the room to pull the speakers 3 feet of the back wall.
I know there is no perfect answer here, but appreciate any feedback, thanks.