Back in the mid nineties I bought new, an all Naim system - 72/Hi-Cap/180/SBL's - which is where I had my first introduction to the aural advantages of active operation.
The SBL's passive, and then active with the addition of Naim's active crossover and another 180 completely transformed the SBL's and took them to another level of greatly improved performance, and at once, became 'on the shopping' list for an later upgrade as and when the budget would allow.
In the event, going active with separate boxes for everything was and remains a significant hurdle, and meantime AV came along and diverted the active budget in that direction instead.
And in going AV, eventually the Naim electronics were all sold off in favour of Sony 9000ES, which also happened to outperform the Naim electronics on critical music listening via the SBL's as well.
Some years later it was time for a new telly, and in part because I'd always liked them, ended up after careful thought and audition, with a B&O TV.
This has a fully active speaker array - a 4" bass/mid and two 1" tweeters - each with it's own 32watts ICE power amp.
What really blew my mind was doing some level matched (measured) listening comparing the Active speaker array in the TV, with the SBL's driven by the 9000ES digital amp.
Source was ALAC CD rips in iTunes streamed to either the B&O or the TA-DA9000ES/SBL's.
Naturally enough, no speaker array on a flat 40" wide 'baffle' is going to have the stereo imaging and separation of a proper Hifi setup, nor is there ever going to be the bass out of a single 4" driver that would compete with a pair of SBL's.
And yet, on transient response, dynamics on every level (macro and micro) and out and out resolution, which translated to everything from previously unheard footfalls in a recording, to hearing much more timbral colour, the 'chuff' of organ pipes, and the 'knock' of a pianos hammers hitting strings, the B&O TV sound system was the more musically involving and satisfying listen - overall.
And in that sense it proved to be something of Trojan horse buy, as I found it extremely pleasing to live with and listen to music on, as well as watch movies, and within a few months I purchased new a pair of Beolab 9's.
The engineering arguments are in - provided all other things are equal, active operation is always better than passive.
I don't think active operation will advance much in the consumer hobbyist market - as Keith aptly points out, if you just want to hear what is on the CD, then active is the way to go, but if you prefer to try and create your own 'sound' or mix and match a lot of kit, then probably not.
However, time poor millennials as they start flexing their financial muscle, will most likely want to listen to music, watch movies, and other media in the home, but will almost certainly not do it by emulating the setups of their fathers and grandfathers.
Increased population density means ever smaller dwellings for most, and the room for large multi-boxed separates system is becoming harder to find.
Separates systems, and the methods of building them, are arguably a legacy of the 1950's, and whilst they may remain a niche for the hardcore audiophile hobbyist, the new age Hifi enthusiast and music/film lover is farm more likely to turn to active systems on performance, space, and aesthetic grounds.
I did, and I doubt that I'd ever go back to a passive system - the advantages of active for me are to great speaking personally.
Cheers
