advertisement


Why have actives not made bigger inroads in to HiFi?

drummerman said:
I can' t see much difficulty in removing an amp plate from the back of the speakers.
Click to expand...

No one said its difficult to remove an amp plate... try adjusting stuff with the back off.. or replacing just the tweeter amp in such an integrated unit;) Aesthetics and convenience are of zero importance to me though so I couldn't care less how big/ugly/trail of wires etc it has...
 
SteveH said:
Who gives a toss?
Why abrogate my listening pleasure now for something inferior simply because it is repairable in 20 years? I may not be around in 20 years myself.
Do you still use a cathode ray TV?
Click to expand...

I still use 80s DAC technology, pretty sure my amp design dates back from then too. I don’t buy into the actives are superior argument, it’s one of many routes to achieve high fidelity.
 
Yomanze said:
I still use 80s DAC technology, pretty sure my amp design dates back from then too. I don’t buy into the actives are superior argument, it’s one of many routes to achieve high fidelity.
Click to expand...

I can assure you they are superior. That's a fact. If you disagree you are simply wrong. No I don't use actives myself at present. Further back in the thread I gave a long, but not exhaustive, list of all the areas in which actives are superior.

Remember that in the context of domestic hi fi there are probably 100 different passive designs out there for every active one that's been offered for sale... Actives will sound just as different from one another as passives do and still rely on the type/quality/implementation of drive units, cabinets etc just as much as a passive speaker... Unfortunately some of the cheaper active speakers do try to hit a price point by cutting back on the money spent on drive units, cabinet bracing etc so it can be spent on the amps.
No doubt if someone hears an active speaker they don't like they will immediately blame the fact that it's active! It's highly unlikely that a passive speaker would be criticised for being passive by someone who didn't like it, as the whole passive/active thang probably wouldn't occur to them;)
 
SteveH said:
Why abrogate my listening pleasure now for something inferior simply because it is repairable in 20 years? I may not be around in 20 years myself.
Click to expand...

I don’t feel I am in the slightest. I can’t think of any active equivalent to things like proper big Tannoy studio monitors, Quad ESLs etc that doesn’t cost a hell of a lot more assuming it it even exists in the first place. In fact almost all active speakers discussed here are variants on small-driver ported stand-mounts or slim floorstanders, which is simply not a point I’d start off from if I wanted to spend a lot of money on a loudspeaker. To be honest the only active speakers I can think of that actually interest me are the MEG RL-901K as they do the large driver point-source thing I’m a big fan of. I’d very much like to spend some time with a pair of those.
 
Tony L said:
I don’t feel I am in the slightest. I can’t think of any active equivalent to things like proper big Tannoy studio monitors, Quad ESLs etc that doesn’t cost a hell of a lot more assuming it it even exists in the first place. In fact almost all active speakers discussed here are variants on small-driver ported stand-mounts or slim floorstanders, which is simply not a point I’d start off from if I wanted to spend a lot of money on a loudspeaker. To be honest the only active speakers I can think of that actually interest me are the MEG RL-901K as they do the large driver point-source thing I’m a big fan of. I’d very much like to spend some time with a pair of those.
Click to expand...

You could make your big Tannoy's active.... There is a design on the interweb thingy for an active crossover for Tannoys. I've no idea which Tannoy drive unit it's optimised for... 306 on bass and Stereo 20 on treble maybe? If you didn't like it then just reconnect the original passive crossover.
 
There are hundreds of active speakers that are not at all expensive and all you need is a source and a dac either of which has a volume control. I cannot speak as to quality except that I swapped a naim CD, amp, power supply for a pair of active speakers, a "cheap" cd player and a "cheap" dac/volume control at a third of the cost and was delighted.

Size, in price or dimension is no guarantee of anything.
 
FWIW if I was forced to buy my hi-fi new I would definitely go active under about £1500 or so. I can’t think of anything at that price I’d take over say a pair of Neumann KH120, whatever the largest Genlec is at the price etc. Double that budget and I’d want to listen very hard to say a Sugden/ProAc or whatever combo against a £3k active and I’m not sure which way I’d jump (nearly all actives have metal dome tweeters and I’m just not a fan!).

Things start getting real interesting for me at about £7-10k as I’d expect the new Tannoy Ardens at £6.5k to give something very similar to the sound and presentation I take for granted and miss so much when I listen to other smaller kit. I imagine I could be very happy with a pair of those driven by say whatever the entry Sugden A21 is these days. That would certainly be the system I’d make a beeline for in today’s market, that or a full new Quad ESL rig (speakers and amps), which would come in rather more expensive. At that price there is little in the active realm that is of much interest to me, most seem variations on small ported boxes or have multiple drivers spread over large areas of baffle (I like point-sources!), or are far more expensive again (Kii, MEG RL-901K etc).

As such I think I view active as not that interesting at this stage. After a certain price point the actual speaker technology itself becomes far more interesting than class of crossover design and I would choose other priorities (big dual concentrics, panels, horns etc) to what is available in the active market.

PS I know one could take any existing speaker active with some not inconsiderable effort, but why bother when they sound so good as-is? I just don’t feel the need.
 
I can assure you they are superior. That's a fact.
Click to expand...

Pity they are not more popular then. Go look at a list of the best speakers of all time and see how many are active - and actives have been around for a long time. It is difficult to replicate the coherence of a well designed passive speaker, or indeed an electrostatic. I don’t know of any active that can do what my preferred speakers do. Actives are perhaps best left in the studio where their precision and accuracy may be an advantage and the ATC tweeter may be preferred to the NS10 maybe... :)
 
Tony L said:
FWIW if I was forced to buy my hi-fi new I would definitely go active under about £1500 or so. I can’t think of anything at that price I’d take over say a pair of Neumann KH120, whatever the largest Genlec is at the price etc. Double that budget and I’d want to listen very hard to say a Sugden/ProAc or whatever combo against a £3k active and I’m not sure which way I’d jump (nearly all actives have metal dome tweeters and I’m just not a fan!).

Things start getting real interesting for me at about £7-10k as I’d expect the new Tannoy Ardens at £6.5k to give something very similar to the sound and presentation I take for granted and miss so much when I listen to other smaller kit. I imagine I could be very happy with a pair of those driven by say whatever the entry Sugden A21 is these days. That would certainly be the system I’d make a beeline for in today’s market, that or a full new Quad ESL rig (speakers and amps), which would come in rather more expensive. At that price there is little in the active realm that is of much interest to me, most seem variations on small ported boxes or have multiple drivers spread over large areas of baffle (I like point-sources!), or are far more expensive again (Kii, MEG RL-901K etc).

As such I think I view active as not that interesting at this stage. After a certain price point the actual speaker technology itself becomes far more interesting than class of crossover design and I would choose other priorities (big dual concentrics, panels, horns etc) to what is available in the active market.

PS I know one could take any existing speaker active with some not inconsiderable effort, but why bother when they sound so good as-is? I just don’t feel the need.
Click to expand...

Tannoys would seem an interesting one to activate to me cos they are point source and shouldn't need any time alignment, plus they are big full range speakers with only two units so only one crossover point... all in all should be far easier than most speakers with any full range potential to activate;)
 
adamdea said:
That pleasure used to be spoilt by the constant nagging worry that it would be ruined at a stroke by the delivery of the dac. I’m much more relaxed about that now
Click to expand...

News is that among the many new features of MDAC2 (all of which has of course contributed to the delays), there’ll be a PDOP (permanent deferral of pleasure). Exciting!
 
abbydog said:
Pity they are not more popular then. Go look at a list of the best speakers of all time and see how many are active - and actives have been around for a long time. It is difficult to replicate the coherence of a well designed passive speaker, or indeed an electrostatic. I don’t know of any active that can do what my preferred speakers do. Actives are perhaps best left in the studio where their precision and accuracy may be an advantage and the ATC tweeter may be preferred to the NS10 maybe... :)
Click to expand...
I am intrigued what can your speakers do?
Keith
 
Arkless Electronics said:
Tannoys would seem an interesting one to activate to me cos they are point source and shouldn't need any time alignment, plus they are big full range speakers with only two units so only one crossover point... all in all should be far easier than most speakers with any full range potential to activate;)
Click to expand...
Err, aren't the tweeters behind the cones?
 
Tony L said:
PS I know one could take any existing speaker active with some not inconsiderable effort, but why bother when they sound so good as-is? I just don’t feel the need.
Click to expand...
Because in my (admittedly limited) experience removing all the reactive crossover components gives more life to the sound. Rather like the difference between direct cut LPs and those made from a master tape. As the ALSO brigade said, it removes mud.
Whether you can implement it well is another matter.
 
Has anyone heard any of the new(ish) Genelcs with the concealed woofers? Bit pricey but they look interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top