advertisement


Pros and cons of active speakers

@matfff But earlier in this thread you said you didn't try any setting other than were the retailer had pre set them too?!
Yes, he did a load of measurements and set them up as per. He even got on the blower on the 2nd day and had a discussion with the D&D head honcho to further refine the settings. What else are you supposed to do, other than go with the expert whose selling them?
 
Back in the '80's there was an attempt to make active mainstream and various manufacturer's formed a group called "ALSO" Active Loudspeaker Standards Organisation. Several had external modules for the passive crossover which could be removed allowing active use.
How interesting... I don't remember that organisation. Would you happen to know which manufacturers signed up? ... Just out of interest.
 
I have a problem with putting a vibrating transformer based amplifier in a vibrating loudspeaker.
 
How interesting... I don't remember that organisation. Would you happen to know which manufacturers signed up? ... Just out of interest.

ARC which were frequently partnered with Nytech are the only ones I can think of. Their 101 speaker was well regarded for a while. Another of those 80s brands that vanished without trace pretty rapidly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GT
Yes, he did a load of measurements and set them up as per. He even got on the blower on the 2nd day and had a discussion with the D&D head honcho to further refine the settings. What else are you supposed to do, other than go with the expert whose selling them?

You've missed the whole point of the 8c's then...
I had Lee @SS set mine up, and at first didn't like what we were hearing. Then I was given a crash course in REW and the Harmon Curve research papers. From this we probably made 5/6 curves which were getting close. Then I spent a day or two fine tuning, and finally found what I like. IF I were to simply accept how they were initially setup, I'd not have bought them.
 
My experience with DSP a few years was not good. I went down that rabbit hole with Dirac and then Deqx for about a year.

My conclusion : it robs the music of its soul. If you think about it, it's goal is to make all speakers/systems sound the same. In trying to do so it over or under drives speaker units in an unnatural way.

After about a year of phaphing around with microphones and software settings I had a moment of clarity helped on with a single malt and discarded it all. My mojo for music was almost instantly restored.

What I now better understand is that the colouration in my system is what I liked about it and it should be celebrated not removed to get blandness. All systems and rooms sound different, a cause for celebration not for DSP.
 
How interesting... I don't remember that organisation. Would you happen to know which manufacturers signed up? ... Just out of interest.

Very IIRC!!.... ARC, Nytech, Linn, Naim, A&R (Arcam) and Swallow Acoustics, possibly one or two more. It fizzled out after a year or two...

Edit: nb A&R made speakers as well as electronics at the time. In fact... I'm gonna go out on a no googling limb and rely on grey cells of having been there etc at the UK launch show and say that the first time they were known as Arcam was the speakers, which were "Arcam 2"

Anyone else remember "Questar" active speakers which had the amps and crossovers built into the speaker in modern style and from early 80's?

Edit: Oh and there was the Griffin Studio 85 Electronic as well! Prob like hens teeth!
 
Last edited:
My experience with DSP a few years was not good. I went down that rabbit hole with Dirac and then Deqx for about a year.

My conclusion : it robs the music of its soul. If you think about it, it's goal is to make all speakers/systems sound the same. In trying to do so it over or under drives speaker units in an unnatural way.

After about a year of phaphing around with microphones and software settings I had a moment of clarity helped on with a single malt and discarded it all. My mojo for music was almost instantly restored.

What I now better understand is that the colouration in my system is what I liked about it and it should be celebrated not removed to get blandness. All systems and rooms sound different, a cause for celebration not for DSP.

I do agree with you, I've had a few systems with room correction and what became apparent was it cannot and should not be overly implemented. In fact it should be used mildly below 250Hz only.
 
Sure you don’t mean Quested?

No. Questar. Small UK company. Demonstrated at UK hi fi shows in early 80's for a couple of years and had a couple of reasonable reviews then I never heard of them again. They sounded good to me:) A review opened them up and the drive units and amp modules were no great shakes once I'd seen what they were (not crap either!). This kinda explained the seemingly lowish price.... IIRC their two way model of similar dimensions to the Mission 770 (a then rival), with built in amps and active crossovers, was only about £70 - 100 more than the passive Missions!

I will almost certainly have spec sheets/bumph I picked up back then stashed somewhere.... :rolleyes:
 
You've missed the whole point of the 8c's then...
I had Lee @SS set mine up, and at first didn't like what we were hearing. Then I was given a crash course in REW and the Harmon Curve research papers. From this we probably made 5/6 curves which were getting close. Then I spent a day or two fine tuning, and finally found what I like. IF I were to simply accept how they were initially setup, I'd not have bought them.
Oh well, I miss the point of a lot of things, so no change there. Glad they work for you.
 
I do agree with you, I've had a few systems with room correction and what became apparent was it cannot and should not be overly implemented. In fact it should be used mildly below 250Hz only.

I have buggered around with DSP for while with various devices (due to my 4.0 speaker setup .. noting all material is 2 channel) and I have never read a manual that doesnt state that its foolish to EQ above ~250Hz. So I agree and wonder what would convince someone to try it

My experience with DSP a few years was not good. I went down that rabbit hole with Dirac and then Deqx for about a year.

My conclusion : it robs the music of its soul. If you think about it, it's goal is to make all speakers/systems sound the same. In trying to do so it over or under drives speaker units in an unnatural way.

After about a year of phaphing around with microphones and software settings I had a moment of clarity helped on with a single malt and discarded it all. My mojo for music was almost instantly restored.

What I now better understand is that the colouration in my system is what I liked about it and it should be celebrated not removed to get blandness. All systems and rooms sound different, a cause for celebration not for DSP.

I currently use a DEQX device and with the ability to setup a passthru profile, its easy to see if any "robbery" is going on.

Curious to know if you listened extensively in passthru mode and just didnt like the intrinsic sound of the DEQX?

I will however agree that having a drink, in this case BEFORE phaphing around with microphones and software settings, is recommended... its a real pain and you can get lead down rabbit holes if your not careful.

But saving your latest and greatest as a new profile allows for easy comparison between different iterations.

Peter
 
It's a good point. The case for active is often presented as obvious and the simplicity certainly has something going for it. Yet passive systems still dominate and it can't all be put down to cost, as ATC and others offer some systems that are very competitive alongside exotic passive set ups.

I have yet to hear one that I find compelling for my own purposes, however much I've enjoyed them.

I am not knocking ATC here but it will probably be taken as such but can't be helped. Over on the Steve Hoffman forum - Steve has been using ATC in the recording and mastering studio for decades (And he's mastered or recorded for major artists not garage bands - like Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Eva Cassidy, Pink Floyd, The Eagles and hundreds more). Yet he bought Audio Note E speakers - and a second pair for his mastering studio and runs an "exotic" Ongaku 211 SET. He said the speakers are the best he's heard in 40 years. I owned the same speakers although he has gone up to a higher-level version now. It's not that it is a "better speaker" - they sound different and since no speaker is perfect it just comes down to the weaknesses you can live with.

The ATC SCM 150 I preferred to the active version - it was being run with a Line Magnetic 219IA (a 24-watt SET). I recently heard active ATC as well as them being run with Parasound JC1 monoblocks and Bricasti amplifiers. Regardless, for me, the ATC pulls the music apart more than I ultimately would want to live with long term. Ie; they were tiring with SS or run active. With the 219IA I enjoyed them much more. Even though this is a combination most ATC people would not recommend. I think the passive option gives you more opportunities to change the sound to suit your needs.

gbfQl66T4mApcvTX8Yo2_rfXvuLCyLZ1Tv6wV-8VvXrBRu9aK74gyxcr_qYBvv5yFvNvgfLmiBhw1c8JBfyHJg


It really is about the kind of sound you prefer - The ATC is a fine speaker but I found it was only really enjoyable with the 219IA - at the other dealer with the SS or run active made some of my recordings really hard on the ears - they were not the greatest recordings mind you but I need a system where most of my recordings remain listenable and not just the audiophile-grade ones.
 
Yes, [the retailer] did a load of measurements and set them up as per. He even got on the blower on the 2nd day and had a discussion with the D&D head honcho to further refine the settings. What else are you supposed to do, other than go with the expert whose selling them?
It seems to me that a loudspeaker that's too complex for the user to set up properly, and thus demands retailer and manufacturer intervention in the user's listening room is not an advantage for the active genre if you aren't into the tweaking side of the hobby.

I liked the D&D 8c sonically when I heard them. That was at the last Wam show (they were @Knipester's I think - my thanks for providing the opportunity). During my stay in the room they didn't put a foot wrong, although it was too busy for me to even think of requesting the music I would use to see if they might be good enough for purchase. However, they remain on the "consider these" list should there ever be a reason to change what I currently have. I will audition them properly and think about set-up issues etc. then, should the event arise.
 
Interestingly during beta testing the roonready firmwares Martijn Mensink from D&D came over to see me in our new apartment whist on a business trip to London. He showed me different ways of using REW and target settings etc. funnily enough the end result was nearly identical to where I had my presets and target curve. He also doesn’t recommend room correction above 200Hz. And ruler flat from 250Hz up.

@John Phillips i wouldn’t say they are complex to setup at all, just requires some learning. Yes it’s a little techy/geeky, you have to do a few trials, errors and resets to find the optimal setting for your preconceptions, music tastes and preferred listening/SPL levels but once dialled in they performer superbly.
 
I have a problem with putting a vibrating transformer based amplifier in a vibrating loudspeaker.

That had been at the back of my mind ... I've always had boxes separate from each other, isolated on cones, on isolating racks. Mounting an amp on a speaker does worry me ... but the pros may outweigh the cons.

As it stands I think I'll try and get an ATC demo where they also sell rega CD players (reflecting my own), and I'll take my little passive pre. At the moment, I'm not convinced a move to active will be right for me (and I really don't want to go down the route of DSP etc).
 
My experience with DSP a few years was not good. I went down that rabbit hole with Dirac and then Deqx for about a year.

My conclusion : it robs the music of its soul. If you think about it, it's goal is to make all speakers/systems sound the same. In trying to do so it over or under drives speaker units in an unnatural way.

After about a year of phaphing around with microphones and software settings I had a moment of clarity helped on with a single malt and discarded it all. My mojo for music was almost instantly restored.

What I now better understand is that the colouration in my system is what I liked about it and it should be celebrated not removed to get blandness. All systems and rooms sound different, a cause for celebration not for DSP.

I have been using ATC50ASls and room correction for about 15 years now, first with a TacT2.2x and now with a Trinnov Amethyst. A few observations:

1. You can set the Trinnov just to deal with the discrepancies between right and left channels if you prefer to retain the core sound of your system/room. It surely must be better to avoid a (in my case, in a pretty symmetrical room) a 8db variation between left and right channels below 200hz. My ears tell me it is

2. Not all room EQ is created equal. The Trinnov 3D mic which (I have been told) allows it to determine direct versus reflected sound produces much better results than TacT ever did.
Rodney Gold (RIP) tried many room correction devices and until he heard Trinnov said ‘they are all the same’

3. After I bought a PSA Directstream DAC to partner with the Trinnov and PSA memory transport I thought I might as well test direct I2S transport-dac versus Trinnov in the chain. The latter is miles ahead and I may sell the DAC. In fact the DAC in the Trinnov is pretty good

in my case Trinnov support has been amazing. No stiff drink required to psych myself up (unlike with TacT where you’d need a whole bottle to hand!)

Salman
 
You've missed the whole point of the 8c's then...

I think the OP has been using an omni-directional speaker (although he hasn't confirmed this?) which, if well implemented and installed (I am not familiar with what I think the OP is using), is about as different from the D&D as a speaker can be while retaining technical credibility. I would expect the reduction in spaciousness and change in timbre to be significant with the increase in clarity and imaging not necessarily being enough to compensate depending on the OPs preferences and what he has adapted to.
 


advertisement


Back
Top