Are separates on borrowed time?

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go here.):

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go here.):

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

 

[Anonymous]

Cno, there's no such thing as a "house sound" when talking about amps, DACs or CD players, IMO. In the case of DACs, any differences between them are at best, extremely subtle, CD players the same, numerous blind tests have demonstrated this.

Yes, there are differences between amps, but these differences are a result of the the power of an amp in relation to the demands of the speakers, IMO, there's no magic to it, if a given amp can drive a speaker sufficiently then the sound coming from that speaker won't be any different from how it would sound being driven by an amp from another manufacturer, once it also had sufficient power and volumes were matched, IMO.

When people talk of "synergy" they're simply describing subtle differences in sound due to the varying levels of power different amps give to a set of speakers, IMO. With high powered actives, you're hearing the speaker as it should be heard, as it was designed to be heard, and at it's best. Amplifiers are not designed to "have a sound", they're a tool for a job and often the wrong tool, IMO..

Looks like I'm bowing in quicker than I intended, though to be fair, it's a different subject. Max, I couldn't agree less! ...and I'm not getting sucked into one of your "Max Specials"..... :wall:

Max specials?

It's how i see it, Cno, and i'm not alone, apparently

 

[Anonymous]

For you it's about "neutrality and accuracy" proved out by all sorts of measurements and figures (eg. distortion etc); for me (like MP and others), it's about being natural and close to what it's trying to sound like.

Where do i fit in to this? The last system i put together without hearing it , i'm now doing it again and i do find enjoyment in not knowing what the outcome will be.

I used to like doing it that way too

 

[Craig M.]

I think you argue your case well, and you have also heard a fair amount of kit with which to make a comparison.....but we will never really agree on what's "better", as we come at it from opposite poles. For you it's about "neutrality and accuracy" proved out by all sorts of measurements and figures (eg. distortion etc); for me (like MP and others), it's about being natural and close to what it's trying to sound like.

Anyway, since this has already been played out so many times in this thread, and as I've nothing more constructive to add, I'm gracefully bowing out.

not true at all. i couldn't care less about the figures if my ears didn't find them to be almost 'invisible', they are the most natural, organic listening experience i've had the pleasure to hear. that's what very low distortion sounds like, imo. the figures just seem to validate what i hear. unless i've mis-understood you. (actually, reading your post again, maybe i have)

but fair enough, i don't think i've much more to add to this thread (i wonder how long that will last).

 

[busb]

...I have to admit to being a little dismissive of active speakers but reading (some of) the posts in this thread has me wondering how much can be gained by removing the passive X'over. Food for thought.

There is no doubt there are advantages in removing the inefficiencies of a Passive Crossover, with its large Capacitors and Resistors etc, which can suck up as much as 20% of an amps power.

In theory a dedicated amp, tailored to each drive unit sounds great, but don't expect it to be done that cheaply....in the case of a three way design, you need three amps instead of one.

The other problem I have, is someone else has decided how the amp/speaker should sound, which usually conforms to the "house sound" of that manufacturer....so if you don't particularly like that sound, you don't have the option of combining it with another brand to compensate. I also like having the flexibility of being able to make a change to either amp or speaker, without having to change both.

If going Active was the ultimate solution, they would all sound the same, as they would all be true to the original recording (yes, I am being deliberately facetious).

My problem is that I haven't had that blinding light & the sound of trumpets with an active system moment yet! If it's that obvious...

My reason for going the separates route is probably very similar to everyone else's - I can mix & match with what's best sounding/looking or becomes a bargain & if something breaks or something new displaces most of what came before etc. If only all systems did sound the same I could just worry about what music to listen too or film/program to watch! HiFi to me maybe a hobby (for want of a better term) but I'm pretty clear it's simply a means to an end.

So if active is a good idea, why are there not more people selling power amps with variable gain & bandwidth so we can wire our speaker cones directly to the input terminals, remove the Xovers then bi/tri-amp? OK, it's easier to just buy active speakers but I rather like the idea of being able to choose my speakers. I don't think I'm going to get much agreement here!

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go here.):

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go to: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO.htm):

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go to: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO.htm):

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO_MEASUREMENTS_FILES/red-QUATTRO_dist-measurements_2.8V-5.6V_10pc.gif

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

P.S. I didn't paste a link and picture because my reply was always rejected/ didn't show up in the thread.

 

[CnoEvil]

It's how i see it, Cno, and i'm not alone, apparently

This calls for a bit of an unofficial pole - ie. Who thinks that Naim, Linn, Cyrus, Creek, MF etc don't have a house sound. :O

IMO It's this house sound that's the basis of most recommendations/choices.

 

[CnoEvil]

Where do i fit in to this? The last system i put together without hearing it , i'm now doing it again and i do find enjoyment in not knowing what the outcome will be.

You must get your kicks from the uncertainty that life throws at you (Karma).....I admire that (I'm not that brave!)

 

[Anonymous]

It's how i see it, Cno, and i'm not alone, apparently

This calls for a bit of an unofficial pole - ie. Who thinks that Naim, Linn, Cyrus, Creek, MF etc don't have a house sound. :O IMO It's this house sound that's the basis of most recommendations/choices.

A new thread perhaps?

Who thinks that Naim, Linn, Cyrus, Creek, MF etc don't have a house sound, and why?

 

[CnoEvil]

So if active is a good idea, why are there not more people selling power amps with variable gain & bandwidth so we can wire our speaker cones directly to the input terminals, remove the Xovers then bi/tri-amp? OK, it's easier to just buy active speakers but I rather like the idea of being able to choose my speakers. I don't think I'm going to get much agreement here!

I'm not sure whether people don't buy Actives because of the lack of choice/availability, or whether it's the other way round (either way, it's a matter of supply and demand).

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and even the cheapest ones will only have about 0.001% distortion.

A passive crossover has 1% distortion at its best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power.

http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=886

ok, I know this was posted a few pages ago but it really needs to be taken into spotlight.

I can accept that someone was measuring distortion level at crossover and got 1% distortion. this is possible, otherwise this would not be the result. but it's also worth noting that the passive xover in question was the worst case scenario possible for a passive xover. poorest quality coils were used. nothing was mentioned about caps but I'd guess they were comparable to coils. I wonder what the result would have been if they used quality components. but what am I asking for? you wouldn't be expecting fair or scientific comparison there. we're talking about marketing material.

I would also like to ask you Steve, where did you get this 10% figure from? it's definitely nothing I ever came across. why don't you show some empirical evidence. you are into scientific stuff and all, aren't you?

anyway, just to support my point here's a graph of distortion levels of a properly designed 2-way speakers. xover used was quite complicated 3rd and 2nd order but what's most important quality parts from Jantzen were used throughout (the cost of xover itself was so high that you'd be able to buy new mid-priced passive or active speakers. that's the biggest drawback of passive xover IMO. if you want to know more go to: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO.htm):

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/QUATTRO_MEASUREMENTS_FILES/red-QUATTRO_dist-measurements_2.8V-5.6V_10pc.gif

so, as you can clearly see distortion around xover point (about 2,7kHz) is very low - below 0,5%. overall, distortion rises to above 1% between quoted 200 - 20kHz but it's due to drivers themselves. nothing to do with xover. 1% distortion for a moving coil driver is nothing uncommon.

if the graph was extending beyond 200 Hz I'd be expecting further rise in distortion from the woofer. normal thing; small woofers don't like bass. I think, but I'm not sure yet, that if you used active woofer section you might lower distortion somewhat, but definitely not massively. I'm only guessing now, a reduction from about 6% - 7% to 3% - 4%?

P.S. I didn't paste a link and picture because my reply was always rejected/ didn't show up in the thread.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

if i remember correctly, odd order harmonics are the ones that sound the worst.

that's true. but it's just like saying that since SET amps produce predominantly 2nd order harmonics you shouldn't care much about THD and just enjoy beautiful sound of a SET amp.

my point is; I'd like to find out if active speakers can improve on intrinsic distortion of moving coil drivers. otherwise active and passive speakers will have very similar level of distortion. and if it's so the most audible strengths of actives lie elsewhere.

 

[Craig M.]

ah! but there are moving coil drivers, and there are...

mine have a 2 coils!! :dance: tadaah!

 

[Overdose]

The other problem I have, is someone else has decided how the amp/speaker should sound, which usually conforms to the "house sound" of that manufacturer....so if you don't particularly like that sound, you don't have the option of combining it with another brand to compensate. I also like having the flexibility of being able to make a change to either amp or speaker, without having to change both.

If we are talking about "Hi-Fidelity" then the speaker should represent exactly what is on the recording as near as possible surely?

It may suit some to have a little bass-emphasis or smoothed treble response, but surely there should be no "house sound" as such?

Personally I'd rather a speaker/system give me warts and all and I am perfectly happy to EQ it later if I disagree with the person who did the mastering...

The idea of fixing a speakers shortcomings with amplifiers or DACs that have shortcomings that counter them is to me...laughable.

Give me an engineer who knows what he's doing, producing a speaker and amplifier combination that delivers as close to what's on the recording as possible over one who decides to colour the sound to mimic valves or vinyl any day.

This pretty much sums up my thoughts regarding any hi-fi equipment, active or otherwise and if tweaking the sound to compensate for any perceived discrepencies, is your thing (and it appears to be in most cases) why not use an EQ? It seems to be that EQ is not regarded as true hi-fi, but then neither can using any other equipment to deliberately colour the sound. There is only one way to get close to hearing what the engineer that mixed the music heard and that is with as neutral equipment as possible and with as little distortion as possible. If you want any other result, regardless of your tastes and preferences, it is not hi-fi in the trueist sense of the term.

 

[steve_1979]

:dance: tadaah!

I did get the chance to hear the Event Opals once and I must say that I was quite taken back by the sound (and the looks :O ). They are one of the best speakers that I've ever heard at any price and IMO they are definitely better than every single passive speaker that I've ever heard.

£2200. What a bargin!

 

[the record spot]

For over £2k a pop, I'd expect them to sound good...!

 

[Overdose]

For over £2k a pop, I'd expect them to sound good...!

To be fair, if you were after a passive system with that much power, £2k for speakers and amp seems quite reasonable.

 

[steve_1979]

For over £2k a pop, I'd expect them to sound good...!

I did cringe at the price and the looks when I first saw them but once I'd heard them in action £2200 actually seems like good value.

 

[Anonymous]

ALRIGHT!!! I'll include some actives in any future auditions.

Moon answered the question posed by this thread adequately in reply number 1. I quote his considered response as follows:

"no".

Come back Moon, you're missed.

 

[matthewpiano]

Ultimately, if you enjoy what you hear, then you have the right kit.

If we really are getting into the semantics of what High Fidelity actually is then I suppose the highest possible fidelity to the original recording is the ultimate aim. It is obvious from some of the comments in this thread, that some people really do have that aim and that, for them, this fidelity is the most important thing. Nothing wrong with that, but don't pretend that it is about the music. It isn't. It is about science - more precisely it is about the science of recording sound and being able to accurately reproduce that recording.

Unfortunately the vast majority of recordings are inadequate and playing some of them on equipment which faithfully reproduces them down to the last detail can make them difficult to listen to whilst adding nothing to the musical experience.

For most of us, Hi-Fi is a broader term used to describe good quality equipment that plays music to a high standard and we want it to enable enjoyment of all the music we listen to, whatever the quality of the recording. This means that some degree of colouration, or distortion, is actually a positive for many listeners and what we do when we choose our equipment is choose the colouration that suits our listening requirements most successfully.

 

[the record spot]

For over £2k a pop, I'd expect them to sound good...!

To be fair, if you were after a passive system with that much power, £2k for speakers and amp seems quite reasonable.

Passive or active, it wouldn't bother me either way, I'd be expecting it to sound good!

 

[Craig M.]

Nothing wrong with that, but don't pretend that it is about the music. It isn't. It is about science - more precisely it is about the science of recording sound and being able to accurately reproduce that recording.

Unfortunately the vast majority of recordings are inadequate and playing some of them on equipment which faithfully reproduces them down to the last detail can make them difficult to listen to whilst adding nothing to the musical experience.

For most of us, Hi-Fi is a broader term used to describe good quality equipment that plays music to a high standard and we want it to enable enjoyment of all the music we listen to, whatever the quality of the recording. This means that some degree of colouration, or distortion, is actually a positive for many listeners and what we do when we choose our equipment is choose the colouration that suits our listening requirements most successfully.

i could not disagree with this total rot anymore if i tried. it's not about the music? why on earth do you think i listen to music, as some kind of experiment? an awful lot of my music is rock and pop, very little of it is well recorded, i love listening to it on my system. not about the music? i don't think you know what you are talking about. i have gone for the system that gives me more pleasure and enjoyment then any other i've heard when listening to music, no other reason. absolute, total and utter garbage.