Why are hi-end active monitors not more popular?


I was just curious why more home systems don't utilize active monitors from hi-end manufacturers. Dynaudio, Focal, PMC and Genelec to name a few seem to have very high value offerings that, on the surface, appear taylor made for a simple system. Just add a cd player with volume and balanced outs or a hi-end dac connected to a music server. Pros and cons are appreciated. A home consumer version seems to have already made it to market in the NHT XDs system. I haven't heard the NHT system and would appreciate your comments.
ghasley
Cgh1,

Thanks for the post and the inquiry. I still have the PMC AML-1 monitors connected and have been listening to them exclusively since my last post. I am torn whether to sell the Genelecs (only 100 hours or so) and take a hit on what I paid for them or simply to keep them and set up another system in another room. I will likely sell them as my experience with 2nd and 3rd systems indicates that I have to be kicked out of my main room to consider the other rooms.

I am also experimenting with different dacs right now which is why I have not followed up with this thread....sorry if I left anyone hanging.

The PMC monitors are simply amazing. Listen to them if you have the chance. They are fairly rare so you will have to do some searching but they are well worth the search. One bit of information for all of us is I am beginning to see some price increases on foreign made gear due to the extraordinarily low value of the US dollar. Anyone else? If AML1s end up exceeding $10,000 US per pair due to the exchange rate, that would really make them hard to find.

Good luck to all.
there is some basic psychology that is being overlooked.

people do not liked to be told what to do or have their options restricted. thus, someone may like a speaker but not the amp that comes with it. perhaps the designer supplies a ss amp and the buyer wants tubes.

i think manufacturers do not offer powered speakers because they may be speaker designers and realize that audiophiles already have amplifiers or do not want to restrict the performance of a speaker to what would be achieved by one amp.

the powered speakers are the exception for good reason.
it is rare to find a powered panel speaker.
Other things being equal, active speakers do have advantages. If designed properly, the amplifiers are optimized for the speakers and active crossovers have various advantages over passive crossovers: in particular better control over the woofer and superior dynamic range.

But other things are rarely equal; that is, there's not many models with the identical drivers and cabinets that come in active and passive versions. And that means when we compare active and passive speakers, we are rarely just judging the difference between active and passive; we're almost always also judging different drivers and cabinets as well.

Plus most active monitors only accept balanced inputs, which, again, restricts the types of preamp you can use with them; this alone reduces their attractiveness to listeners.

Having said that, I've got a pair of active Tannoy monitors (AMS-12A) with which I'm very satisfied: 12-inch dual concentric driver, electronic crossover and two 180 W rms amplifiers in each 70 L cabinet. They're certainly an order of magnitude better than the passive version (System 12 DMT II).

But, again, even in this case, the active version uses slightly different drivers and cabinets, so it's still, to some degree, a case of comparing apples and oranges.

The best way to do a fair comparison between active and passive speakers is to listen to a pair of speakers passively and actively biamped. But that has its own complications: few off-the-rack active crossovers, even expensive ones, offer the same topology as the manufacturer's passive crossovers.

Cheers,

Joel.
Hi Joel,
I agree completely with what you are saying when our aim is to compare methodologies or design philosophy (i.e. active vs. passive) against one another.

At the same time, I think it's important to note that we make larger decisions on an ultimate solution based on the overall presentation/effectiveness of the whole package - (i.e. Duntech Sovereigns vs. Quested HQ210-As, B&Ws vs. Von Schweikerts, or even Polks vs. Definitives) which, of course includes such sub-choices & evaluations as design philosophy & implementation.

Now, all that is just a fancy-schmancy way of saying there's no 'right' answer and in the end, we'll pick what sounds (and for some measures) the best to us for our application.

Cheers & Be Well,
C
Active "done right" would be an option to turn whatever passive speaker you like into an active version.
Any theoretical advantages of active mean nothing if you do not like the basic sound quality.