Stop it!

[Thompsonuxb]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

 

[davedotco]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

Hi Thompson, nice to speak to you, haven't done so in quite a while.

Pleased to see that you are continuing your tradition of making posts about things you have absolutely no knowledge or experience of.

As far back as the mid '70's I was demonstrating the advantages of active speakers to people who really knew what they were doing and what they were talking about.

Personally I had my first pair (of actives) about '77 and although the hi-fi world has spent most of the last 30 years making 'the active option' as difficult as possible they are, just slowly, beginning to catch up. Another 30 years and your good self may even be on board.

 

[nara]

You are of course welcome to your opinion, but do you seriously think you can stifle debate with a silly post?

Have you ever looked up the definition of the word "forum"?

 

[busb]

I'm more likely to give someone who's posted nearly 700 times more credence than someone who's posted 13 times who uses terms like "silly post"!

I suspect Thompsonubx is finding the somewhat tiresome evangelism of some a bit much - he is not alone! Some people take forums to mean that they can post more or less anything they like 'cos it's their damn right to do so. They are right in some repects but miss the point!

 

[nara]

I'm more likely to give someone who's posted nearly 700 times more credence than someone who's posted 13 times who uses terms like "silly post"!

You're obviously a quantity over quality kinda guy.

 

[hg]

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

What a curious post. Here is a link outlining some of the facts: http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

 

[Frank Harvey]

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong, and what is technically correct and what isn't, personal preference rules the roost - people will choose what they prefer the sound of.

If there was enough demand for the active option, it would be prevalent among modern retailers. Unfortunately, retailing isn't the same as it was 30 years ago...

 

[skippy]

From a VFM aspect, I think it's a valid point to mention actives.

All part of the forum to let people know, I would've thought?

 

[plastic penguin]

It seems personal opinions doesn't mean a jot on this forum. Do agree with the OP that some of the 'active' brigade do try and persuade a certain poster to totally change their set-up, when a wholesale change isn't needed. By contrast, I also think actives offer a very viable alternative to a traditional passive set-up.

That's (a forum) life.

 

[Freddy58]

TBH, I don't even know what 'actives' are (my bad). But, if someone thinks they have merit, is it not right for them to say so? If HiFi was an exact science, would we all be using the same equipment? If sound quality was based purely on digital readouts, would that be an end to it? No, because we all have our own opinion. This is after all a forum, where folks should feel they can express an opinion, yes? Take no notice, I'm probably talking nonsense anyway, wouldn't be the first time.....

 

[Frank Harvey]

Actives can be mentioned no problem, but as with passives, there's good and bad.

 

[abacus]

Passives are designed mainly for the domestic market as they are more suited to it; they are also engineered to give as a good performance as possible in a domestic environment.

Actives are used primarily in professional environments as they are more practical and better suited to it.

If you are allowed to have actives in your lounge then by all means have a listen, and then buy whichever speaker sounds best to you, and forget about what type it is.

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[cheeseboy]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

as somebody who likes to champion cable differences, I find it slighty odd that you're now bringing blind testing in to the equation to back up your own views when you've previously said that people should just trust their ears.... I hope you can apprecaite the irony/hypocrisy of your post.... Just sayin...

 

[Um]

I'm surprised you've all been sucked in by this,

TROLL POST !

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

Hi Thompson, nice to speak to you, haven't done so in quite a while.

Pleased to see that you are continuing your tradition of making posts about things you have absolutely no knowledge or experience of.

As far back as the mid '70's I was demonstrating the advantages of active speakers to people who really knew what they were doing and what they were talking about.

Personally I had my first pair (of actives) about '77 and although the hi-fi world has spent most of the last 30 years making 'the active option' as difficult as possible they are, just slowly, beginning to catch up. Another 30 years and your good self may even be on board.

+1

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong, and what is technically correct and what isn't, personal preference rules the roost - people will choose what they prefer the sound of.

Provided personal preference is based also on technically correct performance information.

 

[chebby]

To my mind the problem has been that the majority of discussions - surrounding active speaker technology and products - on this forum have been centred around one very small, specialist manufacturer of audiophile active speakers.

A handful of it's most determined followers have set the agenda. This has been happening every week (sometimes every day) for years and has resulted in an automatic association of any active speaker product being discussed with this company.

This is disproportionate, especially now that active technology products are being made by B&W, KEF, Focal, Quad, Linn, AE, Cambridge Audio (and a whole lot of other companies traditionally associated with the domestic hi-i scene).

I understand Thompsonuxb's frustration.

But he is not right and the post is rather redolent of King Canute demonstrating his powerlessness to reverse the tide by command. (Only without Canute's knowledge that he couldn't.)

 

[AlmaataKZ]

as with passives, there's good and bad.

True, however, all other things being equal, an active will perform significantly better.

 

[MakkaPakka]

Other internet forums are available without the zealotry. Some people have even tried both and gone back to passives, shock horror.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Here is some well-presented info from an acoustical engineer

http://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/2013/11/15/bo-tech-whats-so-great-about-active-loudspeakers/

 

[The_Lhc]

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong, and what is technically correct and what isn't, personal preference rules the roost - people will choose what they prefer the sound of.

Provided personal preference is based also on technically correct performance information.

Surely in terms of speakers personal preference is based solely on what you like the sound of? Whether the "performance information" (whatever the **** that is) is technically correct or not has no bearing on whether someone likes the sound of something.

 

[John Duncan]

as with passives, there's good and bad.

True, however, all other things being equal, an active will perform significantly better.

I look forward to seeing the ABX tests that prove this.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Regardless of who is right or who is wrong, and what is technically correct and what isn't, personal preference rules the roost - people will choose what they prefer the sound of.

Provided personal preference is based also on technically correct performance information.

Surely in terms of speakers personal preference is based solely on what you like the sound of? Whether the "performance information" (whatever the **** that is) is technically correct or not has no bearing on whether someone likes the sound of something.

of cause personal preference can be for whatever, what I mean is - better when preference is formed not only on 'oh, this sounds impressive!' but also on understaning of what that sound is made up - e.g. are you hearing a smily face EQ curve, DSP-controlled speaker, ruler-flat studio monitor etc.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

as with passives, there's good and bad.

True, however, all other things being equal, an active will perform significantly better.

I look forward to seeing the ABX tests that prove this.

no ABX test needed, design calculations and/or measurements would be enough to convince (a technicla person)

 

[MakkaPakka]

Would any of the active evangelists open up their listening room to other forumites to give them a chance to hear what they're missing?

If anyone did this I would be happy to go along with a totally open mind (and some baked goods) and write an honest write up. My experience of active speakers is very limited but they're definitely something I'd consider.