market research.. yay or nay?

[Olli1324]

Remember that when you actively power your speakers, the power perceived by the speakers is vastly greater than the same speaker would see from the same amp in a passive set up.

so what. you only get bigger dynamic range. do you really enjoy listening to music at home at 120dB volume level. if so then active set up is the way to go indeed

many people listen to music from low power class A amps and they don't complain for lack of "ooomph". it's not the watts that really counts.

Dynamic range is very important for good sounding speakers, so it should not be dismissed. Removing the resitors, capacitors and inductors of a passive xo and plugging the drive units directly into their own amplifiers offers, on paper, much better control.

The dramatically reduced intermodulation distortion is another bonus for active.

For those interested, have a read of the following article:

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

 

[Craig M.]

Monstrous and PP are perfect examples as to why the active market will never take over. Many people like what they have, and enjoy the journey getting there. Others feel the amplifier choice is made for them, and want that choice to make for themselves. It matters not if active IS better or not - it's down to personal preference. Many people will more than likely hear an active version of what they have and not like it.

why's that david?

EDITED BY MODS - please don't attack other members

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

Dynamic range is very important for good sounding speakers, so it should not be dismissed. Removing the resitors, capacitors and inductors of a passive xo and plugging the drive units directly into their own amplifiers offers, on paper, much better control.

you're probably refering to damping factor of the amp on drivers. it's true that it looks better with drivers connected directly to a power amp. but it's also true that an amp with damping factor of 50 is as good as one with damping factor reaching 1000s (provided we want to maintain Q of the system around 0.7, which provides PRAT and does not overdamp the bass notes). damping factor is definitely not meaningless but certainly often overrated (just like contrast ratio of TVs sometimes). you just simply can't go much further after reaching certain point.

The dramatically reduced intermodulation distortion is another bonus for active.

dramatically?? show me well designed amp which TIM would audibly affect freqencies lower than 17 - 18k HZ. which themselves are hardly audible anyway...

 

[plastic penguin]

I think there's a lot of 'tosh' written in this thread.

It'll always be "Active are better because..." and likewise, they'll be those that say: "Passives are better, and the reason is..."

Can I make it clear I have NO problem with the concept of 'active' monitors. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, if I was starting all over again I would persue the possibility. However, I'm not so I won't.

Although I can't recommend 'actives' I (we) can suggest that if they want minimal wires and boxes, go and listen to two or three different makes and decide from there.

Give me knobs and boxes or "boys toys" anyday.

 

[Olli1324]

Dynamic range is very important for good sounding speakers, so it should not be dismissed. Removing the resitors, capacitors and inductors of a passive xo and plugging the drive units directly into their own amplifiers offers, on paper, much better control.

you're probably refering to damping factor of the amp on drivers. it's true that it looks better with drivers connected directly to a power amp. but it's also true that an amp with damping factor of 50 is as good as one with damping factor reaching 1000s (provided we want to maintain Q of the system around 0.7, which provides PRAT and does not overdamp the bass notes). damping factor is definitely not meaningless but certainly often overrated (just like contrast ratio of TVs sometimes). you just simply can't go much further after reaching certain point.

The dramatically reduced intermodulation distortion is another bonus for active.

dramatically?? show me well designed amp which TIM would audibly affect freqencies lower than 17 - 18k HZ. which themselves are hardly audible anyway...

Before I try the ProAc clones in active, I'm going to try them passive with the new amplification I'm building. From that I'll be able to decide which is better/if there is a difference. Then I'll be better able to say whether all of the technical advantages of active add up to better sound quality or not.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[plastic penguin]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Is the preamp a separate box?

 

[Anonymous]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

as I said, yet to hear a pair of ATC's seriously. I'd love to though, especially the models we've both mentioned. Shouldn't be long till I'm auditioning them. If I see when i'm searching for speakers, I'll make absolutely sure I give them a good listening to!

Cheers .

 

[Anonymous]

well, there's alot of differing opinions in hifi, but one thing has struck me, almost everyone on here that has listened to a decent set of actives, and posted their opinion, has been very impressed.

not just hifi novices like me either, craig, the RS, igglebert, etc, guys that have heard many setups over the years, as i'm sure many others that have been so impressed with actives have too.

has anyone actually listened to a decent pair of active speakers and not been impressed?

 

[matthewpiano]

I think there is too much of a tendency to look for absolutes in all of this. I know from experience that actives can sound incredibly good, but so can passive speakers which have been carefully matched to the right amplifier.

Hi-Fi is as personal as the music that plays on it and trying to 'prove' that one thing is 'better' than another is futile. 'Better' in one man's eyes, is 'worse' in the eyes of another.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Is the preamp a separate box?

Hi plastic penguin

Yes, the Reference SCA2 is a separate unit

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[plastic penguin]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Is the preamp a separate box?

Hi plastic penguin

Yes, the Reference SCA2 is a separate unit

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

Doesn't that negate the objectives of the 'active' speaker? minimal boxes...

 

[MUSICRAFT]

The actives I've heard previously have been very well balanced with good extension, however I've felt that the ones I've heard, even the best ones I've listened to, the Linn Klimax 350as, lacked the image I experienced through the B&W 802D's with Classe powering them. That said they had a distinct naturalness to them, acoustic guitars did sound impressive. I've yet to 'seriously' audition any ATC's so I've not fully made my mind up yet if I'll get a pair of 802D's this year, or the ATC SCM50A's, I'll see how the listening tests go.

Hi Darren

I use ATC's SCM100ASL Professional monitors driven by their reference SCA2 pre amplifier and i've yet to hear a passive system better this

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

as I said, yet to hear a pair of ATC's seriously. I'd love to though, especially the models we've both mentioned. Shouldn't be long till I'm auditioning them. If I see when i'm searching for speakers, I'll make absolutely sure I give them a good listening to!

Cheers .

Hi Darren

Your welcome.

ATC's active monitors (SCM50's and above) particularly when driven with their Reference SCA2 and fed by fully balanced source/s reproduce stunning levels of performance J)

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Olli1324]

Doesn't that negate the objectives of the 'active' speaker? minimal boxes...

I don't think that is necessarily an objective of active speakers. If I wanted, I could have over 10 boxes if I split up the power amps, power supplies, crossover and preamp. I'm sure some find it appealing to have fewer boxes but there it no reason for that to be a requirement.

 

[manicm]

I personally wouldn't want my ProAc's to be made active. I can't see the majority of people wanting their current speakers made active either. One thing you need to remember here is that speakesr are optimised for how much air is in the cabinet behind them, if you alter that at all, you're chaning the sound of that driver (If you were thinking of making a go of converting speakers for a bit of pocket change).

The reason I wouldn't like it is that I wouldn't want someone to choose my amplifier for me. For example, I can run my ProAc's very well off of my A3 integrated. If I want the extra control and slam, I can hook up the A370 power amp and give the ProAc's a good hammering with that, though on occasion the A370 is a little harsh with them. I wouldn't like it if someone were to choose my amplifier for me and say "Right, you're stuck with it.". Unless the amplifiers you put into the speaker were incredibly good with absolutely teriffic current output, I would always rather have the passive verson. Changing the source (between current models anyway) doesn't hold a great deal of variability in the sound of your system whereas the speaker and amplifier pairing does. If you're going to straight up accuracy then active may be an option but if it's for enjoyment, I believe amplifier and passive speaker is the winner.

You're obviously referring to speakers that weren't designed to be active and ignore those that are. If I had to start again, and funds allowing I would definitely choose an active speaker and spend a fair sum on a good pre-amplifier. I certainly don't get your last statement - why would a good active speaker be less enjoyable??

 

[Olli1324]

Changing the source (between current models anyway) doesn't hold a great deal of variability in the sound of your system whereas the speaker and amplifier pairing does. If you're going to straight up accuracy then active may be an option but if it's for enjoyment, I believe amplifier and passive speaker is the winner.

Depends on where you get your enjoyment from. Good active speakers can provide as much enjoyment as a good passive system. I do understand your point about being able to mix and match components in a passive system to suit your taste though.

 

[plastic penguin]

Doesn't that negate the objectives of the 'active' speaker? minimal boxes...

I don't think that is necessarily an objective of active speakers. If I wanted, I could have over 10 boxes if I split up the power amps, power supplies, crossover and preamp. I'm sure some find it appealing to have fewer boxes but there it no reason for that to be a requirement.

Thought that was the aim of active monitors: to save space and boxes and wires.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

Thought that was the aim of active monitors: to save space and boxes and wires.

far from that. it's just a byproduct of stuffing power amps into speaker enclosure.

 

[Olli1324]

For me, the aim is better sound quality. Number of boxes is irrelevant to me; I don't mind either way.

 

[Craig M.]

Doesn't that negate the objectives of the 'active' speaker? minimal boxes...

I don't think that is necessarily an objective of active speakers. If I wanted, I could have over 10 boxes if I split up the power amps, power supplies, crossover and preamp. I'm sure some find it appealing to have fewer boxes but there it no reason for that to be a requirement.

Thought that was the aim of active monitors: to save space and boxes and wires.

like olli, i consider the aim of an active to be better sq. more or less boxes was irrelevant to me, but since switching i have one less box and the one i still have is pretty small, and i actually prefer having less 'hifi' on show.

 

[plastic penguin]

Doesn't that negate the objectives of the 'active' speaker? minimal boxes...

I don't think that is necessarily an objective of active speakers. If I wanted, I could have over 10 boxes if I split up the power amps, power supplies, crossover and preamp. I'm sure some find it appealing to have fewer boxes but there it no reason for that to be a requirement.

Thought that was the aim of active monitors: to save space and boxes and wires.

like olli, i consider the aim of an active to be better sq. more or less boxes was irrelevant to me, but since switching i have one less box and the one i still have is pretty small, and i actually prefer having less 'hifi' on show.

Okay, right...

 

[Overdose]

There's a lot of talk about 'matching' separates to obtain the sound that the individual likes, as if that's some sort of reason for not going active. The reasons for using active speakers are mainly the lack of distortion.

If tailoring the sound of your system to match your taste by changing boxes is your bag and it certainly seems to be what a lot of hifi enthusiasts go for, then just go get an equalizer and have done with.

Job done, even gives you an extra box with the associated wiring/interconnect options, No?

 

[Craig M.]

hmmm, reading your response i see that part of my post has disappeared. pesky internet.

i will presume it is ok to mention that you could try googling are active speakers better then passive.

edit: reply was to pp.

 

[matthewpiano]

'Better' is subjective.

 

[Craig M.]

'Better' is subjective.

not really - not if you think a hifi speaker should do as good a job as it can replaying the signal as faithfully as possible. if you want to hear the speaker distorting the signal, that is a different matter. that is a preference.

here, AEJim makes a pretty startling comment about an active version of their speakers compared to the passive ones on a supernait. at a 1/5th of the price.

We were just having a discussion about active speakers in the office. We're bemused why more manufacturers aren't offering them as an option - and I mean living-room friendly designs (like the AVIs), rather than more tweaky, pro-audio models.

We're trying to put together a test, and are struggling to find enough (relatively) mainstream options to add! (Eg widely available to demo/buy).

As a manufacturer we'd love to make more active speakers - it takes some of the variables of system matching out of the chain as well as the design being superior (if done correctly) to the conventional passive crossover/amplification route. In the current climate of growing usage of MP3 player sources it makes more sense than ever.

The problem is market acceptance (Worldwide, not just UK), it seems many members of the general public simply don't "get it". This isn't a criticism but more a case of active speakers being very new to people used to having a traditional stacking Hi-Fi system.

We had planned an active version of the new Compact 1 model (due in June) and in testing it sounds better than the passive version on the end of our Naim Supernait amplifier! The cost would rise from around £150 for the passive to nearer £400-500 for the active pair, while being a considerable saving over using even a very high quality amplifier it seems a large psychological jump.

What has put the project on hold for us, bearing in mind considerable developement time and cost is involved, is that in talking to various dealers who sell other active models it seems they don't really sell in any quantity. This could be down to the dealers not pushing and educating customers, that those models simply aren't that great, too expensive or indeed something else altogether. Either way that feedback mixed with the need to source and test many new components that we don't produce ourselves leaves a fair amount of risk involved.

It's something I'd certainly like to do but we'll need more demand and market maturity in that area before we can really go full-steam ahead. We do have the active Pro products because they are the norm in that market, the domestic Hi-Fi market has always been a little slower to embrace new things though... Not that active speakers are particularly new! This of course means some companies need to lead the way but we already tried that with Bluetooth speakers and WiFi Internet Radios, while they sold well enough they never set the world alight and we don't have the marketing budgets of a Bose or Sony to really do that!

It's a shame because I think the active Compact 1 prototypes we have are pretty special little speakers, it's a little bit of a chicken/egg situation I guess - manufacturers need press and dealers help to promote these kinds of technologies but you guys also need us to be making them to do so!