manicm
Well-known member
BenLaw said:
All academic when you're going to spend 800+ on either speaker - the truth is to get the best out of them you'll need electronics to match, and nothing less than 50w in either case.
-
CES Hands On - Samsung HW-Q990F review
All academic when you're going to spend 800+ on either speaker - the truth is to get the best out of them you'll need electronics to match, and nothing less than 50w in either case.
BenLaw
Well-known member
manicm said:
I agree. As I said, I only posted to correct someone else's unfounded assumption that the LS50s were easy to drive, when in fact they're not especially.
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
The tit for tat thing will go on and on. And even if it doesn't another thread will pop up in a few months and it'll start all over again.
The ADM's and the LS50's have more in common than people think. Many on here will be separating them both into active and passive, but lets ignore that for the moment.
Both speakers have been designed with technical excellence in mind. I'm assuming both have achieved that with what people are saying of ADM's and what I know of the LS50's. This brings them together in regard to dividing opinions. They're so different to the average speaker out there that many people don't like the sound of them, or prefer something a little more conventional in its sound - ie, warmer and coloured. Just as there will be people praising the ADM's, there will be people marking them down for their honesty - the same goes for the LS50's.
So why don't we stop with the passive/active thing and just talk about speakers that have been designed for neutrality and faithfulness, and try and get these qualities across to people in a calm, none forceful way?
It also doesn't help when a comparison is made between active and passive when the poster hasn't heard any passive speakers from the manufacturer they're using as an example in 5-6 years - or even worse, never even heard them at all.
The ADM's and the LS50's have more in common than people think. Many on here will be separating them both into active and passive, but lets ignore that for the moment.
Both speakers have been designed with technical excellence in mind. I'm assuming both have achieved that with what people are saying of ADM's and what I know of the LS50's. This brings them together in regard to dividing opinions. They're so different to the average speaker out there that many people don't like the sound of them, or prefer something a little more conventional in its sound - ie, warmer and coloured. Just as there will be people praising the ADM's, there will be people marking them down for their honesty - the same goes for the LS50's.
So why don't we stop with the passive/active thing and just talk about speakers that have been designed for neutrality and faithfulness, and try and get these qualities across to people in a calm, none forceful way?
It also doesn't help when a comparison is made between active and passive when the poster hasn't heard any passive speakers from the manufacturer they're using as an example in 5-6 years - or even worse, never even heard them at all.
Indeed; or you just get it rammed down your throat by a few folk who've only just bought a pair that - my God - this is the one true way. No ta. I'll acknowledge the technical excellence of both as you say David, but I'll pass up on the Kool Aid. 
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
I mean are we trying to sell AVI to everyone, or are we trying to sell the idea of accuracy to everyone?
(I was going to say "the idea of accuracy and therefore more enjoyable", but accuracy isn't necessarily enjoyable to many - hence the divided opinions)
(I was going to say "the idea of accuracy and therefore more enjoyable", but accuracy isn't necessarily enjoyable to many - hence the divided opinions)
FrankHarveyHiFi said:
That may be the case. The real difference is that for not so much more you get not just a speaker, a very well made one for that, but a whole system, with pre-amp, amplifier (mono blocks in essence), a DAC and remote control.
Add these to what you have to buy for the Kef and you can see why the ADM are a formidable choice. - I have not heard the new Kef but liked the brand for its unhyped designs such as the iQ's which forgoe the usual show room balance some others use in those price categories for a more neutral, even one.
I guess you could build a very nice system with the LS50 and perhaps something from Harman Kardon but it probably still would cost more. Then again, once you add the cost of a sub to the ADM's, which imo was necesseray with the 9.1, things are yet not that cheap anymore. That may have changed with the latest version which uses scanspeak drivers, I dont know but the Kef's are only small boxes too so that issue is not unique to the ADM's.
regards
regards
manicm
Well-known member
drummerman - that may be true about the ADMs, but some may prefer the additional flexibility and connectivity offered by a seperate DAC and pre-amp/integrated amp.
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
drummerman said:
As I've stated before, the LS50's with a Pioneer A50 is (I'm guessing, based on people's opinions) would be a good alternative as far as sound is concerned, and is very similar in price. For some digital inputs, the A70 can be used instead, at a total of £1600. So for that you have a standmount pair of speakers (with only one cable running to each of them), a pre-amp, a very capable Class D amplifier, a DAC with optical, coaxial, and USB inputs, and a remote control. It can drive a second pair, has a phono stage, has tone controls, and has a number of analogue inputs too. Maybe worth the extra for those wanting that flexibility.
Ethymotic, I know several folks over at AVI forum are monitoring this thread.
You should not be put off posting here, hostile reception or not. It is owners of the product that can give the best description short of being a dealer or manufacturer, biased or not. Just dismiss the jibes and try and be objective about things, including 'conventional' hifi.
FrOg is occasionally posting here, as is JC and a few others. All very interesting and mostly, fair and 'balanced' individuals. Join them.
regards
You should not be put off posting here, hostile reception or not. It is owners of the product that can give the best description short of being a dealer or manufacturer, biased or not. Just dismiss the jibes and try and be objective about things, including 'conventional' hifi.
FrOg is occasionally posting here, as is JC and a few others. All very interesting and mostly, fair and 'balanced' individuals. Join them.
regards
manicm said:
Agreed. And you have the possibility to improve or tune your 'passive' system by adding better amplification or sources.
That is not really the case with the ADM, With these you are limited by the quality of the internal amplifiers and DAC.
BTW, speaker sound quality is not 100% determined by the used crossover technology. The drive units and cabinet construction are at least as important, probably more important.
drummerman said:
Discussions about active/passive speakers are very old and have been there many, many times the last 20 years.
I would say that both solutions have their advantages and disadvantages. I just find it a bit strange that most of the time the 'followers' of active speakers try to convince the others that active speakers are THE solution.
BTW, i owned active 3-way speakers with 3 amplifiers and active crossover in the past and own passive speakers now.
ErwinC said:
Agreed. And you have the possibility to colour your 'passive' system by adding underpowered amplification or analogue / badly made sources.
That is not really the case with the ADM, With these you are limited by the quality of the internal amplifiers and DAC, which are in the case of the amps, made to be completely compatible with each driver, and in the case of the DAC, a well implemented, state of the art unit.
BTW, speaker sound quality is not 100% determined by the used crossover technology. The drive units and cabinet construction are at least as important, probably more important, but of course taking that which is best in each category, such as an active crossover will in turn give you the best sound...
- There, fixed it for you, You're welcome.
fr0g said:
Never seen a post with more fallacies as this one. Pitty ....
I will not say anything more about this topic as it seems some active followers are getting angry, again.
drummerman said:
Agreed. I have no issue with Etymotic enjoying his new stereo, I hope he has a great time with them as I would anyone who's treated themselves to some new gear. I have issues with some of the attitudes and behaviour of some of that crowd. Enthusiasm is welcomed, which appears to have escaped some elsewhere, but seeing as those self-same sorts encourage this behaviour and attitude, I wouldn't expect that to have been picked up.
Etymotic, this is a friendly place, despite appearances, and the crowd here is accepting and welcoming of all manner of folks, newbies and old heads. If you want to hang around great, if you've jumped ship already, enjoy the swim.
ErwinC said:I would say that both solutions have their advantages and disadvantages. I just find it a bit strange that most of the time the 'followers' of active speakers try to convince the others that active speakers are THE solution.
Oh yes, this too. I like actives, have heard plenty over the last few years. It's another way of doing things in audio. "Better" is in the ear of the beholder and preference is down to each of our respective needs. Hence why one size doesn't fit all and non-active systems are just as good as their active brethren.
the record spot said:Etymotic, this is a friendly place, despite appearances, and the crowd here is accepting and welcoming of all manner of folks, newbies and old heads. If you want to hang around great, if you've jumped ship already, enjoy the swim.
I second this, and hope the friendly, helpful side of the forum can come across more.
Seems to me the issue isn't with active speakers, but with one brand. They seem to be targetting the forum here - you only have to mention the words advice plus system and there they go!
Seriously, ADM/AVI are just one of many actives these days, some of which are probably better, and others more advanced. They still suffer from the same as everything else - voicing primarily - so you're not going to like speakers just because they are active. Me, I like my Magnepans.
Seriously, ADM/AVI are just one of many actives these days, some of which are probably better, and others more advanced. They still suffer from the same as everything else - voicing primarily - so you're not going to like speakers just because they are active. Me, I like my Magnepans.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
the record spot said:
Unless they're wrong about something, obviously!
Oh, right, I see the problem now...
If you want to hang around great, if you've jumped ship already, enjoy the swim.
Did I miss the post where he said he wasn't coming back or something? :?
Overdose
Well-known member
altruistic.lemon said:
The thing is, the advice is usually given when a budget at or around the cost of the ADMs is mentioned. Then the ADMs are usually advised on a complete system basis (certainly from my perspective), with all the benefits that active speakers offer and lets not beat around the bush, there are definite advantages to active speakers and with all else about a speaker being equal, the active will be the better of the two due to the crossover design. Wether or not you like the difference in sound presentation is entirely subjective, but that's a different issue.
Now as far as arguments go, the argy bargy usually begins once the ADMs have been advised and then someone chips in with a snippy comment against the ADMs and the 'blue touch paper' is lit.
You don't have to even get to the end of the second page (actually it can start a lot earlier sometimes) before the negativity starts and the OP has long gone, probably wondering what on earth is wrong with people on here.
And altruistic.lemon, point me in the direction of the more advanced/better actives than the ADMs (that also offer the complete package including preamp, DAC and remote) and at around a similar price, because I'd quite honestly be very interested.
Xeos.
By the way, why are users on the AVI forum monitoring this, and presumably other threads?
By the way, why are users on the AVI forum monitoring this, and presumably other threads?
Overdose
Well-known member
altruistic.lemon said:
Thanks for that.
I've seen the Xeos, quite a bit down on power than the ADMs though and this would be an issue in a larger room. They wouldn't really give me anything over what I already have.
As for the monitoring, not a clue. Why anyway? Has some sort of paranoia crept in?
Wireless. Floorstanders, too.
If you have the room I'd go Magnepan or Martin Logan, they are really so much better than active and passive equivalents.
I have no idea why the AVI forum would be paranoid. The challenge from Dynaudio, ATC, Linn etc perhaps?
If you have the room I'd go Magnepan or Martin Logan, they are really so much better than active and passive equivalents.
I have no idea why the AVI forum would be paranoid. The challenge from Dynaudio, ATC, Linn etc perhaps?
chebby
Well-known member
Overdose said:
Not paranoia.
Just that Drummerman mentioned it earlier...
drummerman said:
Hardly paranoia inducing.
Thousands of people read these forums every day.
Your funny.
Ive asked on here a couple of times if anybody had heard the Martin Logan hybrids. If I'd known about them 12 months ago I may have given them a try.
Ive asked on here a couple of times if anybody had heard the Martin Logan hybrids. If I'd known about them 12 months ago I may have given them a try.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram