advertisement


Why have actives not made bigger inroads in to HiFi?

1 vote for the Kef ls50 wireless shockingly good and better than a good few setups I've owned costing a good few quid more. They also fill my 5/4 room,
even the wife loves them! or maybe the fact that there isnt any hifi rack etc.. in the room. I totally get the hobby thing! but its sure nice just to enjoy the music for a change instead of looking for that new dac and them shiny new interconects, I must be getting old lol
 
I used to have a 3 way active speaker system, but it was all too complex for my wife. But I still have the crossover (Ben Duncan design from 1982, continually upgraded, EL84 PP amp for HF, 845 SE for MF and big Parasound for LF.) I do miss it. All analogue, of course.
 
Have had ATC actives and preamp for the past 14 years. Been through numerous DACs along the way but yet to hear something that makes me feel like I'm missing something and have reason to change preamp or speakers. Having listened to many exotic systems over the years I think there's real merit in buying what you really like rather than chasing the monkey. Up front the layout hurts, but in the medium to long term its a hell of a lot cheaper than constant replacing (unless you're chasing 2nd hand bargains).
 
Scan a few lists of the best speakers ever and see how many actives you can find. Anyone actually know of a good sounding active speaker they might want to live with outside a studio? No, I don’t mean active versions which manage to sound a bit better than passive versions of speakers which are poor anyway (Naim, Linn et al). Cul de sac.
 
Around 25 years ago i had a system comprising a Wadia CD Player (can’t remember which model), an Audio Synthesis Passive Pre-amp & ATC 50A active monitors. The sound was absolutely stunning and I don’t think I’ve ever really got back to that level. Why I changed the kit is now lost on me but a move to a smaller property probably had something to do with it.
 
abbydog said:
Scan a few lists of the best speakers ever and see how many actives you can find. Anyone actually know of a good sounding active speaker they might want to live with outside a studio? No, I don’t mean active versions which manage to sound a bit better than passive versions of speakers which are poor anyway (Naim, Linn et al). Cul de sac.
Click to expand...
If you look at the finest measuring speakers available now they are active, completely full range ,cardioid,response, sophisticated boundary and output filters, wide even dispersion, DSP used for crossovers and to correct driver anomalies , built in bass/treble boost/cut even EQ.
Passive speakers despite the marketing haven’t really changed for years.
Keith
 
Hifi companies are in the business of selling products for profit.
They will sell what sells, either way, make of that what you will.

My take, 'Active' speakers are not exclusive, you get certain advantages but as with all loudspeaker design, its down the the implementation.
I believe its probably more difficult to integrate the various technologies into a single package for most smaller 'niche' manufacturers and keep a reasonable profit margin.
That and keeping up with the latest input/connections/technologies that move so fast (Wireless protocols for example).
If its not down to the integrated route, such as Naim, Linn or the new Bryston System for example, having lots of boxes (DSP Crossover, Power Amps etc) all separate then it adds a lot of expense and takes up room, probably not what a lot of people want.

I've had both, an integrated DSP based 2-way bookshelf as well as a 3-way Horn DSP based separates system, the latter is certainly a lot more flexible and 'upgrade-able'. Although, saying that both were DIY so not quite in the mass market style.
I think that one of the best speakers I have heard, was the ATC SCM50ASL, pretty much perfect for reasonable sized rooms, and just an excellent loudspeaker!

I think when people think 'Active' they think of a bookshelf/monitor 2-way with integrated amplifiers, crossover and connections as born out of the studio market, in reality there are a lot more products out there using the same idea but with different implementations.

There is also the cost issue, a good comparison is to electric cars, they have actually been around for quite a while, and in design, should be better than traditional petrol/diesel cars.
However, a lot of people have reservations about long terms serviceability, reliability and flexibility (filling up, charging etc). I see the same with a lot of Integrated Hifi Systems, Active or not, when you start putting everything into a single box, you have a single point of failure, although your speakers being broken is negligible compared to having your main mode of transport of the road.

We could say, 'why are Single Driver speakers, active with built in amplification and DSP not more popular', that would be a more specific question that would raise a reasonable and varied discussion.
 
Interesting thoughts!
""We could say, 'why are Single Driver speakers, active with built in amplification and DSP not more popular', that would be a more specific question that would raise a reasonable and varied discussion.""
 
I’ve had analogue and dsp actives. I’m an inveterate box swapper like many in this hobby and hence moved back to passive speakers. Manufacturers classically like to sell on ‘features’- the theoretical advantages of active cross overs, short signal paths, ‘all in one box”. You still need two cables into each active box unless you’re using Bluetooth or some other lossy protocol.
I get it that Active can be a nice solution now, particularly with tiny, cool running Class D amp technology and we are seeing lots of good affordable products spilling over from the Pro sector. If I was a student again in the iPhone era, they’d be a no brainier.
I find the half way house implementation attractive- like Martin Logan where internal class D does the heavy lifting, leaving your choice of amps for the mid/ highs. Cabasse had a monster floor stander with this- a dealer was selling a demo pair off at a very attractive price on eBay and boy was I tempted.
 
Hoopsontoast said:
We could say, 'why are Single Driver speakers, active with built in amplification and DSP not more popular', that would be a more specific question that would raise a reasonable and varied discussion.
Click to expand...
Hadn't thought of single driver actives - that’d be interesting.
 
evand said:
Have had ATC actives and preamp for the past 14 years. Been through numerous DACs along the way but yet to hear something that makes me feel like I'm missing something and have reason to change preamp or speakers. Having listened to many exotic systems over the years I think there's real merit in buying what you really like rather than chasing the monkey. Up front the layout hurts, but in the medium to long term its a hell of a lot cheaper than constant replacing (unless you're chasing 2nd hand bargains).
Click to expand...
I am in a similar place. I have had ATC actives for about 7-8 years and see no reason to change.....
 
I've owned both Genelec and Adam Audio active speakers in recent times. Despite the theory that they provide superior performance, my ears told me otherwise. Since then I've stuck with passive speakers - not because of a desire to continually box swap, just because I haven't yet heard an active system that sounded that good. The nearest I've got to one that did is B&O's newest model, but it was out of my price range at circa £22k.
 
Arkless Electronics said:
Some may remember A.L.S.O from the early to mid 80's. Active Loudspeaker Standards Organisation. Some did try to make them more popular and IIRC ARC, Linn, BLQ, A&R and a few others were members. Some made "plug in brick" passive crossovers that could be simply unplugged when the owner was ready to upgrade to active.

It will generally be more expensive to make a decent active system simply because there is more than one power amplifier required, plus an active crossover. One cannot/should not try to save money in other areas because quality drive units and well braced, properly designed cabinets etc are just as important in an active speaker as in a passive one.

Power amps may/can be a bit cheaper than expected as the losses from passive crossovers are gone and so amps for an active system rated at 100W in total (one amp per drive unit remember) will often give the same max SPL as a 200W+ amp used passively. Also in an active system the amps can be tailored to their application and so one may use 100W for the bass driver, 50W for the mid range driver and only 15W for the tweeter. If the 100W bass amp clips it doesn't effect the other two amps and so A/ will be much less noticeable and B/ won't damage the mid or tweeter drivers.

Provided you know what you are dong in terms of matching gains, input impedances and phases of amps (or can engage someone like myself or a helpful DIYer to assist) then yes you can use say a big SS amp on the bass with a class A SS amp on the mid and a SET on the tweeter... a tweakers paradise in that way! As the bass amp would only be working up to say 600Hz in such a set up, it should not matter if you choose an amp known for incredible slam and bass control but normally let down by a rough top end... it's not driving the mid or tweeter.

Just a few of the many "hidden" advantages of active above there;) Some more? OK then...

Each amp being directly connected to an individual driver sans passive crossover means it can control and grip that driver much better than in a passive set up.

Not only that but it can control it outside its passband i.e. if a bass amp is electronically crossed over at 600Hz to the mid driver then although the output of the bass amp is rolled off above 600Hz it is still giving its full damping factor and "grip" at say 1100Hz, where there may be a resonance of the bass driver. The same applies to the other drivers of course.

Steeper slope crossovers can much more easily be designed and built using active techniques and with much tighter tolerances. The higher the order of a filter the more sensitive to component tolerances it gets and with the 10-20% type tolerances common in parts for passive crossovers it can be difficult and expensive to even approach the accuracy easily achievable with active crossovers.

Time alignment is much easier and this plus similar techniques can be used to help control the dispersion pattern of the speaker, or even make it adjustable I guess...

It's a wonder passive crossovers are even used in hi fi of any real quality pretensions... is the (correct) conclusion you will see in many or most treatise on the subject...
Click to expand...

I never knew about A.L.S.O. this seems a great idea, its a shame it didn't catch on.

I wish manufacturers would offer a range of active crossover boxes which can either be manually (with knobs) or if digital with software be easily tailored to use with various amps and speakers. I guess Linn have this with the Exaxtbox which can tailor for a wide variety of speakers. The cables were also addressed by Linn with K600 which is large but neater than 3 separate ones.

Speakers should be offered in passive or active mode, perhaps user configurable would be best....oh dear, I seem to have swallowed the Linn philosophy book....oops!
 
1
littleaudioco said:
Hadn't thought of single driver actives - that’d be interesting.
Click to expand...

Most of us have one ... our headphones, no?

Wouldn't half of the benefits of an active speaker, the absence of an intrusive and lossy Xover be lossed with a 'single driver speaker with built in amplification'?
 
The law of supply and demand, assuming we are talking about integrated solutions rather than active crossovers/multiple power amps, there are plenty of options there in the price brackets where there is demand. I think there is a big gap in the middle as it were, and the reason is how customers in that price territory buy. If you look at the equivalent products from the same manufacturers today you might put the new replacement cost of my system at £20k or something which buys you a very nice active set up, but the reality is I have spent nothing like that and the most I have ever spent in one go is about £1800. Integrated active speakers are a great way to go if you're older, with a fair amount of capital accumulated and are able to buy something you see as an end point. For a younger person with less capital and/or on a modest income it just doesn't seem a viable way to make, what is after all, a discretionary purchase!
 
Ive had lots of active , dsp active and passive .. being active does NOT mean better sound .. my system these days is passive with DSP room correction and it beats the pants off any actives I have had
However I will concede that an oem active version of the same passive speaker could and perhaps should sound better.

My actives were meridian (m series , 5000, 5500, 6000, 8000)
Countless studio type monitors (krk , genelec , mackie , dynaudio , quad etc)
ATC (50, 100)
I have also done a lot of my own "active conversion" to passive speakers using dsp crossover and external amps .. and found it really difficult to get right and pretty complex in terms of cabling and boxes.
 
Hoopsontoast said:
We could say, 'why are Single Driver speakers, active with built in amplification and DSP not more popular', that would be a more specific question that would raise a reasonable and varied discussion.
Click to expand...
Active speakers means active crossovers. Single drivers have no crossover!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top