Are separates on borrowed time?

[bigblue235]

All that seems to be obvious is that Active versions can be better value than Passive versions of the same speakers, like the AE22, when all other factors are equal.

But it's clearly not the case that all Actives are better than all/most Passive and amp combinations at a similar price, as there are a lot of other factors which go into speaker manufacturing.

People seem to make assumptions that because a particular speaker sounds good it's because of one factor that they've picked out as being responsible, like the crossover. But unless you've heard a poorer sounding version of the same speaker which had a different crossover as its only difference, it's impossible to say.

I've done it myself. I heard a speaker with a ribbon tweeter that had a fantastic treble, so I was set on getting a speaker with a ribbon tweeter as I thought they were better. Then I heard another speaker with a dome tweeter that was better still.

I think you've just got to judge each thing on its own merits, rather than setting out with pre-determined notions. I fancy an Active system because I now live in a kinda minimalist flat, but if I hear a better passive system I'll buy that instead.

 

[Anonymous]

what specific engineering makes "purpose built amplification designed for a specific active speaker" any different from any other amp? I just don't get this statement. are there any hidden, magical technical qualities of such amps that are inaccessible for full range power amps? or what is it? please elaborate.

I do. I designed my tweeter amp differently than the mid and sub amps. And there's nothing magical about it.

A typical tweeter can only handle about 15W of continuous power. It doesn't need a big amp. And small amplifiers usually have better high frequency performance than high power amplifiers, due in part to the way transistors work. You can also bias a small amplifier deeper into class A because the power dissipation isn't so problematic. So it's easier to achieve wide bandwidth and low distortion with a small amp.

There are advantages to designing an amp for a specific application. Think of the way racecars are optimized for the type of track they run on.

Thomas

 

[steve_1979]

Now that I’m getting interested in hi-fi, it only makes sense for me to try and replicate the path that lead me to success in pro audio.

Hi Tom.

I'm intrigued by your interest in producing some new speakers aimed at the domestic hifi market and I wish you the best of luck. Curiosity has got the better of me though and I hope that you won't mind answering a few questions about these new speakers.

Do you have any ideas what these new speakers will be like yet?

What sort of price and size are you considering?

Will you use the dual opposing woofer design again?

Will they sound accurate like a studio monitor or will they be voiced to give them a 'sweeter' sound?

Will they have vaneers and grills to look pretty?

Will they have a built in DAC and preamp?

Thanks

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Now that I’m getting interested in hi-fi, it only makes sense for me to try and replicate the path that lead me to success in pro audio.

Hi Tom.

I'm intrigued by your interest in producing some new speakers aimed at the domestic hifi market and I wish you the best of luck. Curiosity has got the better of me though and I hope that you won't mind answering a few questions about these new speakers.

Do you have any ideas what these new speakers will be like yet?

What sort of price and size are you considering?

Will you use the dual opposing woofer design again?

Will they sound accurate like a studio monitor or will they be voiced to give them a 'sweeter' sound?

Will they have vaneers and grills to look pretty?

Will they have a built in DAC and preamp?

Thanks

+1

When I was looking for speakers recently I was disappointed to see that only a very limited choice of high performance active floorstanders in domestic styles was available: ATC, Adam... There is one or two more but very obscure and expensive. Now there is AVI ADM40. More to come?

 

[John Duncan]

Clicky...

 

[lindsayt]

Take two speakers that are the same apart from one being passive and one active, give them both sufficient amplification and, assuming they were both correctly designed, the active one will suffer less from distortion, or less colouration. If my understanding is correct.

And i never said active crossovers were magic either

No you never said that active crossovers were magic, but your claim that correctly designed active versions of the same speaker will have less distortion than the passive version does ignore the effect that active crossovers have.

I've taken 1 pair of speakers and listened to them passively and actively bi-amped. The active configuration gave me more midrange distortion. The reason I prefered the active configuration more, was because my amps were not quite sufficient for the task in passive configuration due to a slight lack of power / control / damping factor - ie distortion in the bass from a slight lack of damping factor and some non-linearity distortion at generous volumes with transient peaks. With music without a lot of bass content or dynamic drive - such as chamber music - I prefer them in passive form. With rock and pop or full orchestral works - I prefer them active.

If I were to repeat the test with less efficient and more difficult to drive speakers there's a good chance active configuration would be even more suitable. With more efficient and easier to drive speakers there's a high chance that passive would be better overall. These are generalisations and of course it all depends upon the exact model of speakers, amps, passive or active crossovers.

In other words there are speakers, especially towards the higher efficiency end of the scale where the correctly designed active version will have more distortion than the passive.

If you look at active speakers like ATC and AVI's, you'll see that the speakers themselves are quite inefficient and therefore just the type of speaker that are likely to gain the most from going active.

And then there's single driver speakers such as Lowthers which have a lot going for them: no active crossover, no passive crossover. Some people like this type of speaker a lot. I can understand why, even though they are compromised in the bass and treble.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Clicky...

Indeed, a recent addition. I hope to hear these tomorrow.

Unfortunately no wood finish option (looks like they are aimed for interiors much more modern than mine!) and the 16/48 spec for wirelss is a bit limiting, but not a show stopper.

 

[Coll]

Not for me I play CDs on an Audiolab 8200CD and listen to FM and DAB but my son thinks my system is old fashioned and talks only of Ipod players etc. My brother is the same but he just wants something small and neat, doesnt want stereo speakers and separates etc.

I have a subwoofer also, my system is worth about £ 3000 and my brothers wife is convinced that the bass is as good on their £ 300 Ipod player so what chance do you have.

 

[John Duncan]

the 16/48 spec for wireless is a bit limiting

No more so than, ooo, an Apple TV, say.

 

[steve_1979]

I've taken 1 pair of speakers and listened to them passively and actively bi-amped. The active configuration gave me more midrange distortion. The reason I prefered the active configuration more, was because my amps were not quite sufficient for the task in passive configuration due to a slight lack of power / control / damping factor - ie distortion in the bass from a slight lack of damping factor and some non-linearity distortion at generous volumes with transient peaks. With music without a lot of bass content or dynamic drive - such as chamber music - I prefer them in passive form. With rock and pop or full orchestral works - I prefer them active.

What you're discribing here isn't an active speaker it's just a passive speaker that's been bi-amped which is a totally different thing.

In a passive speaker the audio signal is amplified first before being sent to the speakers where the signal is split by a crossover and sent to the individual drivers. In an active speaker the audio signal is split by a crossover first before going to the amplifiers afterwards and then onto the drivers.

Have a look at these two diagrams and take note of where the crossovers are in relation to the amplifiers.

 

[The_Lhc]

I've taken 1 pair of speakers and listened to them passively and actively bi-amped. The active configuration gave me more midrange distortion. The reason I prefered the active configuration more, was because my amps were not quite sufficient for the task in passive configuration due to a slight lack of power / control / damping factor - ie distortion in the bass from a slight lack of damping factor and some non-linearity distortion at generous volumes with transient peaks. With music without a lot of bass content or dynamic drive - such as chamber music - I prefer them in passive form. With rock and pop or full orchestral works - I prefer them active.

What you're discribing here isn't an active speaker it's just a passive speaker that's been bi-amped which is a totally different thing.

Not if there's an external crossover BEFORE the external amplifiers, that is still classed as being an active setup (and I presume is why lindsayt used the expression "actively bi-amped").

 

[steve_1979]

Not if there's an external crossover BEFORE the external amplifiers, that is still classed as being an active setup (and I presume is why lindsayt used the expression "actively bi-amped").

Yes that's right. I was just editing my post then when you replyed to it. I was going to ask if he used a separate active crossover or if it was just a regular passive speaker that had been bi-amped and also if the passive crossover had been removed from the chain entirely?

 

[BenLaw]

I suspect Lindsay knows the difference between (passive) bi-amping and use of an active crossover. I also suspect you and he would be likely to reach different conclusions on the differences.

 

[relocated]

what specific engineering makes "purpose built amplification designed for a specific active speaker" any different from any other amp? I just don't get this statement. are there any hidden, magical technical qualities of such amps that are inaccessible for full range power amps? or what is it? please elaborate.

I do. I designed my tweeter amp differently than the mid and sub amps. And there's nothing magical about it.

A typical tweeter can only handle about 15W of continuous power. It doesn't need a big amp. And small amplifiers usually have better high frequency performance than high power amplifiers, due in part to the way transistors work. You can also bias a small amplifier deeper into class A because the power dissipation isn't so problematic. So it's easier to achieve wide bandwidth and low distortion with a small amp.

There are advantages to designing an amp for a specific application. Think of the way racecars are optimized for the type of track they run on.

Thomas

Oh huuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. No man-love intended, but thanks for getting to the nitty-gritty.

So much of this arg, sorry conversation, has matched apples with oranges or potatoes.

A reputable speaker manufacturer, who does not wish to ruin their reputation, builds an active and a passive version of one of their speakers. Everything is built to the same spec and uses the same drive units. The manufacturer builds the active version with amplification commensurate with the quality and specification of the rest of the product.

THE ACTIVE VERSION WILL HAVE LOWER DISTORTION THAN THE PASSIVE - WHATEVER QUALITY AMPLIFICATION DRIVES THE PASSIVE.

Is this something we can agree and move on from?

ray:

 

[lindsayt]

What you're discribing here isn't an active speaker it's just a passive speaker that's been bi-amped which is a totally different thing.

In a passive speaker the audio signal is amplified first before being sent to the speakers where the signal is split by a crossover and sent to the individual drivers. In an active speaker the audio signal is split by a crossover first before going to the amplifiers afterwards and then onto the drivers.

Have a look at these two diagrams and take note of where the crossovers are in relation to the amplifiers.

In my system when I actively bi-amped it I had:

Source connected to Ashly xr1001 active crossover to SET valve amp for the midrange and treble and solid state amp connected directly to the bass units. When the Ashly started getting a bit hummy I replaced it with an LDR volume control feeding a Pioneer SF-700 active crossover. So yes the audio signal was split first before hitting the power amps.

As far as the speaker drive units are concerned, they don't care if the power amps and active crossover are inside the speaker cabinets or outside in seperate boxes.

 

[lindsayt]

I suspect Lindsay knows the difference between (passive) bi-amping and use of an active crossover. I also suspect you and he would be likely to reach different conclusions on the differences.

Whenever I've attended bake-offs there has always been unanimous agreement on the sonic differences between different components - apart from when there has been commercial or ownership bias from less open minded listeners. I think there's a very high chance we'd reach the same conclusions if we sat together and did the same comparisons.

Passive bi-amping. I wouldn't bother with it myself. Active bi, tri or quad amping on the other hand is a different kettle of fish.

 

[Alec]

Is this something we can agree and move on from?

ray:

I shouldn't think so for a nanosecond, but some man love before we get back to disagreeing might make for an interesting diversion.

 

[BenLaw]

I suspect Lindsay knows the difference between (passive) bi-amping and use of an active crossover. I also suspect you and he would be likely to reach different conclusions on the differences.

Whenever I've attended bake-offs there has always been unanimous agreement on the sonic differences between different components - apart from when there has been commercial or ownership bias from less open minded listeners. I think there's a very high chance we'd reach the same conclusions if we sat together and did the same comparisons.

I would genuinely be interested to hear the results of the two of you doing that

 

[BenLaw]

In my system when I actively bi-amped it I had:

Source connected to Ashly xr1001 active crossover to SET valve amp for the midrange and treble and solid state amp connected directly to the bass units.

OOI on what basis do you choose the cross over frequencies, and is there any inherent difficult with using such different amplification for the different drivers?

(As an aside, this sort of active setup is the very antithesis of the thread title! )

 

[steve_1979]

What about distortions introduced by the active crossover? That electronic box of tricks that sits between the pre-amp / volume control and power amps? Is anyone seriously claiming that active crossovers introduce no distortions?

Apparently an active crossover only produces about 0.001% distortion. But a passive crossover produces about 1% distortion.

 

[steve_1979]

In my system when I actively bi-amped it I had:

Source connected to Ashly xr1001 active crossover to SET valve amp for the midrange and treble and solid state amp connected directly to the bass units. When the Ashly started getting a bit hummy I replaced it with an LDR volume control feeding a Pioneer SF-700 active crossover. So yes the audio signal was split first before hitting the power amps.

Thanks for the clarification lindsayt.

Could I also ask. Were the amps connected directly to the drivers or was there still a passive crossover in between the amps and the driver (even though the signal had already been split by the active crossover earlier in the chain)?

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

what specific engineering makes "purpose built amplification designed for a specific active speaker" any different from any other amp? I just don't get this statement. are there any hidden, magical technical qualities of such amps that are inaccessible for full range power amps? or what is it? please elaborate.

I do. I designed my tweeter amp differently than the mid and sub amps. And there's nothing magical about it.

A typical tweeter can only handle about 15W of continuous power. It doesn't need a big amp. And small amplifiers usually have better high frequency performance than high power amplifiers, due in part to the way transistors work. You can also bias a small amplifier deeper into class A because the power dissipation isn't so problematic. So it's easier to achieve wide bandwidth and low distortion with a small amp.

There are advantages to designing an amp for a specific application. Think of the way racecars are optimized for the type of track they run on.

Thomas

good point! wasn't aware of that. it's always nice to learn something new. but what do you mean by saying "small amplifiers usually have better high frequency performance"? what properties show it?

 

[bigblue235]

Apparently an active crossover only produces about 0.001% distortion. But a passive crossover produces about 1% distortion.

But although that may show up on a graph, how likely are we to hear it? And how much distortion/colouration can be introduced by other things: Cabinet, drivers, amps, etc.

(Genuine questions, BTW. I'm only too happy to say I know very little!).

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

Apparently an active crossover only produces about 0.001% distortion. But a passive crossover produces about 1% distortion.

But although that may show up on a graph, how likely are we to hear it? And how much distortion/colouration can be introduced by other things: Cabinet, drivers, amps, etc.

(Genuine questions, BTW. I'm only too happy to say I know very little!).

there is a very nice website dedicated to DIY community:

http://www.zaphaudio.com/

basically the guy over there measures various drivers (tweeters, mids, woofers...) so people thinking of using them new what they're buying. I guess it's always nice to have a some unrelated party measurements handy just for the sake of reliability.

so, if you like you can go there and see for yourself. quality drivers measure 2nd harmonic at -50dB which correlates to around 0,5% THD. very often it'll be -40dB which is about 1%.

 

[bigblue235]

There is a very nice website dedicated to DIY community:

http://www.zaphaudio.com/

basically the guy over there measures various drivers (tweeters, mids, woofers...) so people thinking of using them new what they're buying. I guess it's always nice to have a some unrelated party measurements handy just for the sake of reliability.

so, if you like you can go there and see for yourself. quality drivers measure 2nd harmonic at -50dB which correlates to around 0,5% THD. very often it'll be -40dB which is about 1%.

Thanks, oldric_naubhoff. I suspect most of it will be beyond my level of understanding, but I'll have a looky!

So, it's possible that drive units can introduce as much distortion as the much-maligned passive crossover? I'm just curious as I'm always skeptical when people people put so much importance on one element of construction.