Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

@donavabdear Idaho is not conservative if you live in Blaine County.  Quite the opposite, and many California transplants here.

OP, go to your profile you want “your Virtual Systems”. Click around, you’ll find it.

steakster
I’ve been doing sound for 40+ years at the highest level, sorry I didn’t know I needed to bow down and kiss your ass, you are a bitch.

Wow.

There is zero need for you to be so nasty. Absolutely overreactive, unacceptable post. Whatever respect you may have garnered in your brief posting time here, is gone.

There is no useful purpose for posts like that on this forum or for the people who post them.

kota1

I have a fireplace where the cc tweeter should be and because that stupid stand was almost $1000 I had to use it. I did aim the tweeter to hit me at my listening position, I was very careful with the measurements very good note. If you do a recording with microphones at the tweeters of each speaker you can see the exact time alignment difference for each speaker, of course you have to do this with the equipment on to test latency also, this is the only way I know to know for sure to test what the time alignment is on each speaker.

Thanks for the nice comment about my room.

Why are you listening? To hear the mistakes the engineers made or to enjoy the music? I have a pair of unforgiving loudspeakers coupled to an excellent Sophia A/B amp. Listening to re-mastered Hot 5s & Diana Krall is bliss. There's a lot else, any Little Feat CD for instance, that hurts my ears.

tkhill
I’m not sure if you were talking about me but I’ll answer. The reason I started this post was because it seems like many of the people on Audiogon are searching for magical sessions with music. As technology gets better the closer we’ll get to musicians being in our listening rooms, It’s not even close now not by a long shot. Apple has created convenient music that sounds bad but young people now prefer it. I mentioned powered speakers (speakers and amps designed for each other) that no one here should have 1 seconds hesitation as to the fact that is a much better way to get to high sound quality. Then I mentioned the irrational cult like beliefs many audiophiles have toward sound like vibration dampening and hugely expensive AC cables. I spoke to one of the top people at Apple about how his company was causing the quality of music and all the ancillary industries around music to have the quality sucked out of them, he seemed surprisingly interested about what I had to say I hope it made a difference. Audiophiles are about the only group that can make a difference in the sound industry by demanding better sound quality but not snake oil. You should see the presser on sound engineers to do a crapy job the pressure isn’t to make great recordings it’s usually do it faster and cheeper.

Communities can make a difference and we have lots of money that can definitely make a difference.

I have never used an Apple product so can’t comment on the SQ. I have a thread here on Atmos music and posted a video where Steve Wilson states that when Apple began offering spatial audio the demand for mixes in Atmos went through the roof overnight. My system is setup for Atmos as well as 2 CH, 5.1, 7.1, Auro 3d, etc. Atmos doesn’t compete with two channel, its a companion, not a divorce. Where some music fans lose it is they think it is an either or proposition, either 2 ch or atmos. Atmos is backward compatible, you can listen to an atmos mix on headphones, 2 CH, 5.1, or 9.2.7, or whatever. I think that innovation moves the industry forward and like it or not, Atmos music is innovation. So for this reason I give Apple Music props. We have already moved from lossy to lossless (except spotify users) and some streaming services are doing "hirez". When you talk about hirez Tomlinson Holman (THX)made an interesting observation. He said:

"Any audio engineer confronted with the question, “what do you want to do with a higher bitrate?”; will always ask for more frequency range and more dynamic range because they don’t know what to do with more channels. "It’s a new paradigm." "Just to go to 192 KHz sampling rate to satisfy passing bats instead of human beings is pretty crazy, but adding channels is of very great value."

I still use the codec he developed at USC with Audyssey-DSX where the focus is wide channels, then height, and finally rear channels. When atmos came along with object based audio it kind of left the channel based approach behind. Well any way I give Apple props for championing spatial audio.

steakster

Ok I did overreact I shouldn't have taken your note so personal.

I apologize for my reaction.

@donavabdear , I think this thread is spot on, you asked an obvious question and I don't know there is an obvious answer. As an active speaker user myself I agree with all the benefits. 

Can’t win this religious battle on rationality alone. "Powered speakers will fail and then what will I do" is the most idiotic refrain I’ve ever heard.

My Dynaudio Focus 20XD are still perfectly fine with daily use for both music and TV after nearly 8 years. Simple setup, and incredible sound -- something unbeaten by Hegel 190 + LS 50 + Paradigm subwoofer when I had that itch.. many cables later, the Focus 20 remain while the other paraphernalia has gone.

People who want separates should get them, knock yourself out, but stop with the argument of "if my powered speaker breaks"..

@mglik

"Surprised no mention of ATC.

Some of the best sound I have ever had was with ATC Anniversary 50s...."

Absolutely! Perhaps the best sound is provided by ATC speakers - which is why so many studio engineers use them.

And... of course... Legacy Audio speakers are among the very best available!

You can’t discount the "synergy" provided by the engineer’s work to match the electronics to the drivers and enclosure - it makes a for superb sounding systems.

Though - I would agree with the concern that if you have an issue with the internal electronics (the amps)... it’s going to be a real "pain in the arse" to get them repaired. I recently canceled my order for Legacy Audio Aeris (one of the best sounding speakers available)... because... they weigh so much and are very difficult to move... and... I didn’t want to risk having to service the internal amp(s). On the other hand... if... you’re young and can "bench 300+ lbs" you may be delighted with the Aeris - I would have been!

Of course... if you listen to the electronics recommendations of the designer of the speakers... the results can be about as good... as if the designer also designs the electronics. Harbeth’s sound amazing with the amps suggested by the designer (e.g. Hegel, etc.) ... but... they can also sound amazing with selected other amps (e.g. such as the HL5’s with the Finalle Sesto Elemento tube amp - see You Tube video). If you’re up for the search for the right "synergy," then go for it!

I agree, you can have an incredible system creating synergy with amps and speakers. You just can’t do it for the same budget.

A pair of these for $600? (on sale currently 50% off) This isn’t a just a pair of speakers, it is an entire system, all you need is to plug them in, download a free app and you are streaming. If you got a sub, a CDP, a turntable, just plug it into the speaker:

Soundstage Review:

Configured as a stereo pair, the PW 600s sounded outstanding, easily rivaling separate speakers and electronics costing many times their $1198/pair price.

Spending $7000 on these speakers (that are really an entire system) you are getting 1400 watts of bespoke class A/B and D amps, the preamp that can connect anything, even a turntable or HDMI, plus high resolution dac (and saving money on speaker cables) is a good investment. I doubt you could better with separates on the same budget:

What HiFi-

"If you're thinking the driver set-up looks a little familiar, it’s because KEF’s flagship Blade Meta loudspeakers use something very similar. Given those speakers cost a cool £30,000 ($35,000), it’s a signal of intent that KEF’s decided to trickle this technology down to the LS60 Wireless."

The big advantage of powered speakers is when they are active, when there are separate amps for each driver. The crossover is before the amp and uses way smaller parts. But most importantly the load on each amp is way easier partly since each amp covers a smaller bandwidth but mainly because the load on each amp is way less reactive(just a voice coil instead of a hard to drive crossover) which allows the amp to work more like it was designed(mainly with easier resistive loads).

kota1

I've worked with wireless mics in film for many years, the cost of a single transmitter and receiver is about $4000 for the best units (Zaxcom). Knowing this price range means that there is no way KEF can put a state of the art wireless system in 2x $7000 speakers. Wireless speakers have a long way to go, it's the FCC fault really they don't allow enough frequency bandwidth to support high fidelity consumer wireless products yet and probably never will.

You don't have to use the wireless feature. You can connect the speakers with the included 8 meter inter-speaker cable (manual pg 18) and then connect your front end components and a sub like you would a preamp using the inputs on the back of the speaker (pg 21-22 manual):

Very nice.

For me I don’t care for the control room sound that monitors like Genelec produce. I respect what they do but don’t enjoy music through them….the sound is too edgy and analytical. 

@donavabdear I’ve been listening to studio monitors and hi-fi speakers for probably 40 years. 1. Your Genis are not very good in the grand scheme. The Geni Sheen is not accuracy it’s massive distortion from DA and DSP and cheap amps.  Yet ... If you’re happy ? Great.
2. A Studio engineer needs no more than three pair to do great work, why do you have so many?
3. Speakers are in their infancy in terms of development. Amps are more evolved  

4. The last 30 years of powered studio monitors have taught us that cheaper and cheaper amplifiers are what ends up happening with these pieces as they become more popular.

5. You mentioned :

Audiophile systems that are jaw dropping are not accurate they’re extra flavored and sound amazing but I needed the most accurate system I could get, money was not a problem,

So money is not a problem, humble brag noted, but you didn’t really buy a very revealing system. Not the most refined taste it seems

6. I’m from Ohio and I live in Los Angeles, please define "political refugee"? You mean you’re a Trump supporter? There’s a lot of Republicans in California.

If you want to combine the best components then you do it yourself. If you’re interested in the creative experience of making your own "playback instrument", as many people are, then you do it yourself. Simple

when it comes to a multi channel Atmos system, it’s certainly one option to do what you’ve done, however, my speakers are all passive, and they work extremely well, because I can use more advanced software on the way to the DA conversion. And there is far superior DA conversion then what comes in your speakers

what’s funny to me is you have a very high opinion of your rig, but you live in the world of Mid Fi

@brianlucey

Your idea of being qualified is you have ears and are over 41? Right.

2. A studio engineer needs 3 pair? Not if they mix Atmos.

3. Speakers are in their infancy? Are you shopping at Best Buy? As for amps, some feel we are going backward, look at how much classic tube amps sell for today.

4. The last 30 years powered monitors use cheap amps? Wrong. Cheap powered monitors use cheap amps. If you want powered monitors with good amps call Sweetwater, they’ll sell em to you by the dozen.

5. Why do you care if someone has budget? Do you think if you close your eyes and wish Santa will bring you something LOL.

6. Your from Ohio? Like, is that an ID? So where are your mythical "best components" or are you waiting for Santa. If you want to be all that you gotta bring it, post your virtual system, otherwise it is just another month to Christmas LOL.

Your advanced software? That explains everything, you got software, Bill Gates watch out. LAMO

@brianlucey

These setups use the same specs I do (see my profile), 9 bed channels, front and rear heights, center height, and VOG. THIS is why we ALL need 17+ speakers, SPECS.

Abbey Road using Neumann ACTIVE monitors (with cheap amps inside LOL) mixing Pink Floyd in immersive audio.

Sony’s Mixstage:

Floyd Tooles home system

Grammy winner Jeff Balding with those crappy amp Genelecs in his Nashville studio and MORE than six speakers, let him know you will take away his Grammys for breaking the 6 speaker rule LOL

,

@brianlucey

Super cool you worked with Pink Floyd, so much creative engineering on those albums. I really didn’t mean to brag about budget I just meant I didn’t worry about the money and I could have gotten more expensive monitors but my room is not really that big and larger monitors were not needed. I didn’t actually like hearing Genelec monitors in the past I made my decision to buy them because of the design philosophy of Genelec and the physical point source design of the speakers. Originally my mixing room was going to be in a smaller space that sounded awful, the acoustic changes that I would have had to make were more expensive than simply moving buildings. I thought well I love my room at home so why not. I was never a fan of Tannoy and Uri when they had their concentric tweeter and midrange drivers but when I heard these Genelecs I knew they got it right. It’s very interesting to listen to the mixing system then the home theater system there is no comparison as to which one sounds better the home theater is a different world but it’s super flavored ice cream and as you know through Pink Floyd the technology changes over the years. It is best to mix flat and accurately without the loudness button pushed because that may be the flavor of the listening public of the day.

The drawings that you provided are turning out to be changing, I have my Atmos system in my listening room 90 degrees from my music system this was really strange acoustically but it worked surprising well (I actually have some more dialing in to finish) but originally I bought all the hardware to put the speakers in the exact proper positions and angles then I read a few cutting edge articles and decided to put the speakers up in a non symmetric configuration because my head position can’t tell the difference between a front surround or a rear surround coming at the same opposite angle on the same side. The problem with this philosophy is that it’s not flat and may not be reproducible in other mixing rooms which is the original reason why I bought a flat system in the first place. Love to hear some stories about mixing Pink Floyd.

@brianlucey 

Oops I guess you didn't work with Pink Floyd I misread your post. Their team to me may be some of the greatest music mixers ever. 

You definitely need lots of speaker to mix Dolby Atmos you can do 5.1 but 7.1.4 is probably best. It is only a matter of time before 2 channel systems are changed to surround systems for music, it's already happening. At an AES convention a few years ago there was a vendor with software that let you use however many speakers you wanted in a surround configuration there was no limit because the outcome is object based and speakers equal resolution In that case. In real life all sounds are point sources but we hear nearly as much information from the first reflections as the original point source this is why acoustic is more important than most people think. 

@donavabdear I’m happy to see that you’re excited about the new format, I work in every week.I have a very high-end atmos and stereo room, and the only analog hardware focused, mastering Atmos room in the world at the moment.

Going back to your point it just doesn’t make any sense, the speakers you’re using are not anything special. If you think those are amazing, you’re not in any position to criticize any audiophiles for doing anything. I’m certainly not criticizing your speakers I’m saying that our evolution with understanding what’s possible or desired from a speaker is very personal and we always think we know everything at the moment we are in, and then things evolve.

Atmos doesn’t need special speakers what it needs most is cohesion. That can come from a balance of measurements and DSP, all depending on the hardware you’re using to run the system. And it needs good headphones. The beauty of Atmos is that it is the evolution of headphones. Atmos done well is superior to stereo and headphones, it’s a very rare bird right now, but overtime there will be more and more of it. The speaker component is fun and exciting and it’s a bonus, but it’s not the main benefit to Atmos, that would be headphones.

Am headed back into the studio right now to work on the biggest song of one of the decades last century :) ... enjoy your speakers, but try not to put people down, it really doesn’t make sense at all.

@kota1 you seem like someone who’s not in the music making profession, but someone who is very passionate and I appreciate your passion. A few things that you need to understand. 1. posting pictures of studios means nothing. Everything is done in the commercial world on a budget. Yamaha NS-10 mixed much of the best music of past decades 2. As I said to you in a private message, just now, Atmos needs cohesion ... more than it needs high-quality speakers. When I mentioned, DSP previously, that’s what I was talking about.

Those Genis are good not great speakers.  Yet.  Anything set up well can do atmos well. It’s easy to get so excited about the emotions from the format that we lose track of what makes a great speaker. The best speaker test is in stereo. Dynamics, phase distortion, amplitude, group delay, imaging, excursion, etc. Then when applied to atmos it’s even more amazing

As far as my credentials they are numerous, but for now let’s say I mastered 4 records this year nominated for a Grammy, and I have the only analog Atmos mastering room in the world at the moment. I’ve sent you a longer reply in private, so that if you want to fight with me, we can keep that off of the board.

here’s a link to an article about my room:

brianlucey Thanks for the article I really enjoyed it. As I was reading your equipment list I thought wow how can you time align all those eclectic parts then you mentioned the Trinnov, very good choice. Interesting to hear you are combining tube amps in your system. My question is are you making your system sound flat or sound good?

I would like to hear your thoughts this question, my system is as simple as possible Protools, S4, HDX, MTRX Studio and the powered Genelecs I did this because anyone even me can mix on it and there are no surprises everything is industry standard, I understand your clients can take in the cool equipment and speakers but are you adding extra flavor to your system that is dangerous in a mastering studio. Real question I really don't want to sound mean or put anyone down that is the last thing I want to do, honest question. Also in my time in the movie industry I did have some very special equipment that was eye and ear candy and made producers appreciate my rig it definitely helped my career, do you feel the same way?

@brianlucey , if you go back and look at your first post in this thread I think my reply was in a similar spirit. You have the OP who posted not one, but two systems. His work rig and his home rig. I look at your profile before I posted anything and I see nada. In this context your post seemed like a rant about the OP. Calling his gear midfi??? IDK what your definition of hifi is but those Paradigms are their flagship speaker and his electronics are PS Audio and I have never seen anyone call their signature BHK line midfi. Those comments came with nothing to back up your opinion.

Now, if you say you need 3 pairs of speakers fine. YOU need 3 pairs, don’t make it like everyone can do what you do with the same 3 pairs. You also never provided any kind of substance for your claim in your post so in my view it was misinformation. As for posting pics of studios it was meant to support my claim that many recognized professionals use about the same number of speakers as the OP (including myself),

Now that you have established some creds fine. In the future maybe lead with that before you start insulting someones gear (crappy amps, midfi, etc). You did NOT need to go there, especially with a new member coming out swinging in his first thread for this community. I like the topic of the thread, there was good back and forth, and then you come in like throwing mud at the OP? No, you didn’t need to do that and I simply responded.

I started two thread here on atmos, one on atmos music and one on how to setup your room in atmos. It would be nice to continue a discussion re: atmos in either thread but let’s focus here on the topic at hand, powered/active speakers.

So, do you prefer active or passive speakers? Why?

I own two pairs of Dynaudio powered speakers. The warranty period after registering on the website satisfied my concerns regarding longevity.  

They sound great (to me) and the simplicity is good for my OCD. These actives are as good or better than conventional systems I’ve assembled for near the same money, but I don’t fancy myself a wizard, haha.

I’d like to hear Kef’s new wireless tower.. 

@uncledemp , are you using Dynaudio studio monitors or their Focus XD line? 

@brianlucey thank you for sharing your link and paper on your studio. Big Black Keys fan (Ohio Boys too). Clearly you are a subject matter expert in this field.

Go Blue!

@kota1 

I have a pair of Focus XD (living room) and a pair of Xeo (bedroom)  both home audio vs studio.
 

I stream to both pair through a central box, Dynaudio Connect, and control them through each pair’s remote, or my phone. 

HI Brian

So fun to read your posts!  

Brad

moonwatcher

Well, I guess a good engineer could put drivers and an amp inside a concrete block that weighs about 300 pounds. Doubt it would sell very well. And Vibration dampening systems ARE important under turntables at the very least, regardless of what you are playing said turntable through.

If and audiophile spends 50k on his turntable that weighs 300lb we could probably guess that this same audiophile will have some massive subs that would be equally impressive in putting out bass, why doesn’t all that bass energy affect the fidelity of the needle in the record groves? Sorry if this is a dumb question I don’t have much experience with turntables.

@lonemountain happy to participate today, glad you're enjoying.   @kota1 This thread is a relative newbies insult at the whole forum, so I have no problem with responding in kind. All of his equipment is (to me obviously) mid fi. There is nothing more to say. You love Genelecs? Great ! That is the whole point.   To me?  The whole line has always been mostly hype with a sound that lacks natural tonality, very processed. 1031's to present, same family sound. And yet if you love them that is all that matters. Speakers are like a romantic partner: if you’re happy, that’s all that matters and the rest of us should not critique another person’s place in the journey.  I am not critiquing anyone personally when I say "mid fi" as my journey is way down the rabbit hole. Speakers are a tool, for listening or for working, they are not an objective fact.  Arguing quality from specs or awards is very naive.

I guess I must have missed the perceived insult in the OP’s original question. I agree that there is a fundamental misunderstanding about active speakers. I think that if active speakers (or their benefits) were understood it would be useful when setting up budgets and rooms. I didn’t perceive the post that members here are inferior for not using them, YMMV. The OP even apologized for coming at a member, that was a standup reply, respectful I thought.

As for midfi I guess it all depends on your definition. I wish I had more midfi gear if we are talking about $35,000 Paradigm 9H (not to mention the matching CC and surrounds). I just can’t comprehend how this could be midfi, even if you have unlimited budget???
Let’s be clear, I love Paradigms (see my system), never used or heard a genelec so can’t comment.

As for your setup it is interesting and unfamiliar. I know you need to mix to a standard that sounds good on everything from $35K Paradigms to $35 ear buds.
I give you props for blazing the trail in unfamiliar territory going analog in mastering that will likely be replayed on digital systems. I do like a lot of the recordings mastered in analog in the fifties and sixties and I will look forward to "hearing" your content, literally, in my HT. If you have any playlists posted on tidal please share a link, thanks.

Love Genelec. Spent allot of time in studios and they were some of my favorites.

Ray Kurzweil was right…

If someone makes a statement about massive distortion of DA and DSP while they are using tube amplifiers I don't put much faith in their opinion (or knowledge) of this topic.

If someone also uses said tube amplifiers, talks about massive distortion of DA and DSP and then talks at length about the virtues of Trinnov, which fortunately fixes a lot of the flaws of their amp and speakers, then again I don't place much faith in their ability to talk with expertise on this topic. I may get them to master a record because they have a good ear for what people like but that's not the same thing as what we are talking about.

I will also note they talked about the superiority of digital capture but disregard the DAC and DSP in those powered speakers which could very well be at an equal or superior level. 

Sorry to pick on one person but it's the clearest case of expertise in one closely related area clearly not being portable. My doctor probably doesn't know the first thing about making an MRI machine either.

What are speakers? Frequency response, distortion of various types and dispersion and the interaction of those 3 over volume. Even cabinet resonances and waterfall ultimately can map onto those simple things. No audiophile buzzwords changes that.

So the question is, can making an active speaker give control over system variables such that you can improve one of those 3 things in ways no separates ever could?

The answer is yes. A rather resounding yes.  If your opinion is that the answer is no then I suggest learning more about how speakers works till you understand the answer must be yes.

We will now return the thread to the pointless arguing.

And no @kota1 those Paradigm are not mid-fi, though some would consider that vaunted tube amp mentioned in the article very much mid-fi. 

Oddioboy
You seem very interesting, that was a more insightful post than you may realize.

LA is about keeping your job and making your clients happy, eclectic mastering labs are great if you can hold up your end and put out great work. But mastering labs are not where you make the sound of the record, that’s done in recording and mixing mastering needs to be done so the original vision of the musician, producer, and the record company are all happy while not forgetting to be very exact on all the specs you have to keep up with. I had a nice career and got a great rate for my equipment because I did a good job and stood behind the people who hired me, but it always brought a smile to the producers face when my equipment did things others couldn’t, that is key in LA. I have worked for people who were very successful and couldn’t mix there way out of a paper bag but had a good personality. Being successful doesn’t alway mean you really know what your doing in LA.

Well, if you like tube amps, active speakers will not work. Some are already saying active speakers will outperform anything and if you do not agree you are 10 years behind the times.. 

@oddioboy , welcome to the forum. I think you articulated what I was thinking much better than I could:

"So the question is, can making an active speaker give control over system variables such that you can improve one of those 3 things in ways no separates ever could? The answer is yes. A rather resounding yes."

This is not to say passives are a resounding no, just a different approach with a different set of tradeoffs. My system started with a pair of Active 40’s which are internally biamped. Then it went to 5.1, 7.1 and then when I added wide channels for 9.1. Then when Atmos came along I figured out how to get 4 more active speakers mounted on tall stands. I never had to buy more amps, buy more racks, buy more speaker wire. I did have to buy additional power conditioners for all the outlets needed but active speakers let me grow my system just easy as buying a new speaker and it was very space and cost effective.

Now you take the benefits of active and put them in a stereo system and you are grooving. When you take 7.2.4 (or more) and put them in an atmos system it is radical. The entire room comes alive watching a movie like Dune or a ZZ Top concert. @brianlucey made a very astute observation when he said good atmos needs cohesion. A good active speaker has cohesion designed into it with the amps, drivers, crossovers and cabinet designed as one cohesive system, Multiply that same cohesion across 11+ active speakers in a carefully treated and calibrated room and it sounds incredible to my ears.

If you have time would you post your virtual system and maybe a few pics?

In the context of what I wrote passive speakers are a no. It is not a different approach, it is a handicapped approach.

Thank you for the welcome but I don't intend to engage enough here to where I would feel the need to detail out my system and post pictures. 

@oddioboy , I agree with you, do you have a link you can post to an article or reference that kind of summarizes the active and passive comparison? How did you manage to come to your conclusion? Remember, the topic of this thread is about confusion re: active. Anything you can post that would address that issue (which I also agree with) would be helpful. Thanks.

I am not here to be an encyclopedia @kota1 and looking at other topics I could post a thousand articles and it would not sway some people. I will give you a nibble. You can work from there. This is but one simplistic technique in active drive: 

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01103598

@kota1  what does a Grammy winner have anything to do with sound quality, the Grammys are usually a joke.

invalid please do not question " the narrative ". 

@cindyment is back.