When should actives be recommended?

[Ajani]

There seems to be a bit of hostility on the forum about the recommendation of active speakers. So I wonder, when should active speakers be recommended? Is it only if the OP specifically asks for an active rec?

On the one hand some of the active fans are so overzealous in their recs, that I expect to see a thread like this:

OP: I'm looking for suggestions for a £250 turntable

1st poster: Sell your setup and buy some AVI ADM9RSS for just £1400

2nd poster: Better yet save a little more and get the ADM40 for £3250

On the other hand I too often see the anti-active crowd going to the other extreme; of jumping into a thread just to complain that the OP didn't ask for actives, yet not offering any suggestions for the OP.

Just my 2 cents, but I think the active cause would be aided by more suggestions of actives other than AVI. Dynaudio, Focal ADAM and Genelec all make some well regarded pro monitors. Not to mention the XEO and the soon to be released Focal wireless speakers.

But back to the main question:

When should active speakers be recommended?

 

[Overdose]

OP: I'm looking for suggestions for a £250 turntable

1st poster: Sell your setup and buy some AVI ADM9RSS for just £1400

2nd poster: Better yet save a little more and get the ADM40 for £3250

But back to the main question:

When should active speakers be recommended?

Hmm, those examples are a little bit silly, but I get your point. To answer your question directly, anyone can recomend any product on any thread. This is an open forum.

From my point of view I'd recommend them over passives and usually always offer them as a suggestion.

The reason for suggesting that the OPs maybe sell some of their existing equipment, is to fund the new purchase and in any case, if making an active speaker recommendation, then the existing amplifier arrangement would be surplus. With a product like the ADMs and Xeo range, the entire system would be redundant with the exception of the sources.

If one is to embark upon an upgrade, the surplus equipment needs to be disposed of somehow, usually selling it. I see no difference in swapping/selling a pair of speakers or an entire system if the brief is met, ie a real terms upgrade and within budget.

 

[Phileas]

I would say that (suitable) active speakers could reasonably be recommended in most cases where the OP has a suitable budget (this may include selling existing gear) and has asked for suggestions for a SQ upgrade.

The only exceptions would be where the OP is looking for turntable suggestions (there are no active speakers that can replace that) or where the OP has specifically excluded actives (but even here I might try sometimes).

The reason AVI are recommended so often is the massive SQ upgrade so many people have obtained with them, and if you believe the goal of HiFi is high fidelity and not fiddling and swapping boxes, then why should they not be? Also, AVI speakers look like home-audio speakers whereas most actives don't (yet).

Edit: I notice OD has beaten me to it and replied in a similar way. Great minds ...

 

[Phileas]

Also, it's impossible to predict if the OP is going to be one of those people who don't like the "active sound", i.e. who likes a bit of "boom and tizz".

Additionally, many people don't even realise there are such things as active speakers or why (all other things being equal) they are technically superior.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Any time, it's a freeish country, but the spamming for one brand (if that's the word) without bothering to read what the OP wants is a pain

 

[WishTree]

Also, it's impossible to predict if the OP is going to be one of those people who don't like the "active sound", i.e. who likes a bit of "boom and tizz".

Additionally, many people don't even realise there are such things as active speakers or why (all other things being equal) they are technically superior.

If OP likes his sound to be clinical, cold and disconnected from music then an AVI made active sound can be recommended

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Rightly or wrongly many here regard hifi as a hobby where additional.elements can be added or updated in order to make a perceived improvement often as funds allow. Actives give less options in this respect. Actives are also less suitable in a 5.1 or 7.1 setup unless you have a bery large budget. That said, I have no idea if pound for pound activea are 'better'. I would therefore suggest if u.want to go out and buy a system then consider all options but if u intend to join the loony hobbyist enthusiasts then join the club. No controversy intended. I would love to hear an equivelent active system to my own but probably never will.

 

[avexplorer]

There seems to be a bit of hostility on the forum about the recommendation of active speakers. So I wonder, when should active speakers be recommended? Is it only if the OP specifically asks for an active rec?

...

But back to the main question:

When should active speakers be recommended?

In my mind there are 3 definitive use cases for active speaker configurations at home:

1. Home theatres.

2a. Hi-Fi - constrained space setups.

2b. Hi-Fi - Build from scratch super-premium.

Now, before I go on to explain why, let me correct a common misconception that active speakers are always powered speakers. No, they need not be. The difference is as follows:

Passive Configuration:

In this configuration the amplification of the line-level signal happens before the frequency isolation (high-pass/band-pass/low-pass). So a passive chain looks somewhat like this:

Digital source -> DAC -> Analogue Pre-amp -> Amplifier -> Passive Cross-over -> Drivers (Low/Mid/High)

OR

Digital source -> Digital Pre-amp -> DAC -> Amplifier -> Passive Cross-over -> Drivers (Low/Mid/High)

OR

Analogue source -> Pre-amp -> Amplifier -> Passive Cross-over -> Drivers (Low/Mid/High)

The important aspect in all the above variations is that the amplification stage always precedes the cross over stage.

Active Configurations:

In this configuration the amplification is applied after the frequency isolation (high-pass/band-pass/low-pass). So each driver has its own amplification. Hence the active chain looks one of the following:

Digital source -> Digital Pre-amp -> DAC -> Active Cross-over -> Amplifier (Low/Mid/High) -> Drivers (Low/Mid/High)

OR

Digital source -> Digital Pre-amp -> Active Cross-over -> DAC(Low/Mid/High) -> Amplifier (Low/Mid/High) -> Drivers (Low/Mid/High)

Again the important aspect is in all the above variations the amplification stage is applied after the frequency isolation stage. In some configuration the active crossovers, the amplifiers, and occasionally the DACS (as in Meridian DSP products) are installed within the speakers, thereby requiring the speaker to be powered. But these components can as well be externalized as in the case in Linn Active configs, in which case the speakers need to be powered.

Performance implications:

1. Passive cross-overs introduce more noise and distortions than active ones. Removal of these need masking circuitry which as a side-effect introduce coloration. Hence a passive speaker can never be as accurate in rendition as the active ones.

2. Passive cross-overs are inherently less efficient in terms of voltage and current losses. Hence a passive speaker can never be as loud as an active speaker for the same degree of amplification.

3. Passive speakers need the amplified signals to travel between the amplification stage and frequency isolation stage. Amplified signals create a larger electromagnetic field around the conductor and so are more susceptible to inductive interference. Therefore amplified signals cannot be made to run efficiently over large lengths as is required in home-theatre setups. Drivers in actives configurations can therefore be installed much further away from the source provided the amplification takes place within the speaker itself. It’s even better if only the pure digital signal is carried right up to the speakers and the DA conversion takes place within it.

Coming to the justifications for the ideal use-cases of active speakers:

1. Home-theatres: predominantly implications 2 & 3

2a. Constrained space hi-fi: predominantly implication-1; lower noise allow better near field listening as the rendition is sans minute distortions which are noticeable when one sits closer

2b. Super premium hi-fi: predominantly implication 1 & 2; because at stratospheric levels of audiophile equipment, the most important objective is to make the sound as accurate and as loud as possible.

As a matter of fact, many passive speaker design geniuses are now appreciating the benefits of active loudspeaker design and have started offering such options for their flagship offerings. Take a look at this article:

Cheers AVEX

 

[Phileas]

many passive speaker design geniuses are now appreciating the benefits of active loudspeaker design

If they're such geniuses, why has it taken them so long to appreciate the benefits? :wall:

 

[Dan Turner]

For some reason the topic of actives and AVI actives in particular attracts a lot of hysteria. Some people find the very mention of them provocative, which seems a little irrational. Some active (and in particular AVI) owners probably haven't helped this situation by being rather relentless and indiscriminate in their recommendation of actives as a 'panacea' for all needs.

The bottom line is that most people on forum recommend the kit that they own, or have experienced and there' s no reason why active speaker owners should be expected to behave any differently. If AVIs are recommended disproportionately to other types of active speakers then it's probably not a conspiracy or anything untoward, the simplest and therefore most likely reason is that they have more advocates, because a lot of people have chosen them on their merits.

To avoid handbags at dawn I think everyone just has to try to be more tolerant and not take an irrational personal stake in what other people recommend or the opinions they express.

 

[abacus]

Ignore how the speakers are powered, just go along to your local dealer and listen to a few (Passive and Active) and purchase the combination that suits you, it’s as simple as that. (Don’t forget to try out your local music store as well)

The reason actives pop up is that 90% of live sound, studio and film production is done via active speakers, (Virtually everything you hear on your Hi Fi will have been mastered via active speakers) however unless you are building a home studio there is no need to go for exactly the same that they use, unless you find that sound combination suits you better.

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[atticus]

I swore I wouldn't comment on this thread.....

Go with whatever you want

Don't be too easily suckered by anyone

Informed decisions often aren't

Informed opinions often aren't

There is a large industry built up around the sale of multiple box systems

Repeat sales are difficult to achieve if you sell a product that 'does everything and does it very well'

The process can be fun, but it is often too easy to lose sight of where you were heading in the first place. Unless it is actually the process itself that you enjoy.

 

[shropshire lad]

For some reason the topic of actives and AVI actives in particular attracts a lot of hysteria. Some people find the very mention of them provocative, which seems a little irrational. Some active (and in particular AVI) owners probably haven't helped this situation by being rather relentless and indiscriminate in their recommendation of actives as a 'panacea' for all needs.

The bottom line is that most people on forum recommend the kit that they own, or have experienced and there' s no reason why active speaker owners should be expected to behave any differently. If AVIs are recommended disproportionately to other types of active speakers then it's probably not a conspiracy or anything untoward, the simplest and therefore most likely reason is that they have more advocates, because a lot of people have chosen them on their merits.

To avoid handbags at dawn I think everyone just has to try to be more tolerant and not take an irrational personal stake in what other people recommend or the opinions they express.

Well said that man .

Nice speakers you've got there , by the way . I hope to audition some soon !

 

[avexplorer]

many passive speaker design geniuses are now appreciating the benefits of active loudspeaker design

If they're such geniuses, why has it taken them so long to appreciate the benefits? :wall:

That is because these geniuses have to run their business as well which requires them to generate revenue. Offering passive speakers simply makes better business sense for a speaker manufacturer at the moment. If you as a Hi-Fi home audiophile speaker manufacturer, offer active speakers, you are essentially putting a whole lot of analog electronics manufacturers out of business. Naturally, the entire community would gang up against you and irrespective of the sound quality delivered would brand you as 'COLD', 'ANALYTICAL' 'UNENGAGING' and paint you with many more just negative adjectives that would make a customer really wonder if they are indeed buying the right speaker. How can a nascent company when starting out a business, take on the wrath of an entire industry. The obvious safer bet is to start with passive design and blend into the band wagon.

However, when the same designers have made a name and credibility of their own, can take calculated measures to offer select active variants. This is simple risk hedging. The other reason is it takes quite a bit of investment and maturity to get into manufacturing active configurations. Only large corporates can typically afford to have such multi-disciplinary engineering teams. Typically, many hi-fi speaker manufacturer are as tiny as a cottage industry when compared to their active counter parts. That's why you see only very few companies like Linn, Meridian, ATC etc taking that path. The smaller manufacturers just cannot assemble a team balanced in cabinetry design, amplifier design, digital cross-over design and worst of all, software!!! DSP code writing is complex and much sought after. When you are hiring a software developer potentially employable by the electronic industry behemoths, you need to be competitive with respect to remunerations. That increases cost. I guess that is asking a bit too much when your market is so small.

The Pro audio industry is not that way. There is a huge B2B market out there which can give you your volumes and hence the revenues. Therefore a manufacturer can scale quickly allowing you to offer actives. It's all business my friend

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Active speakers should be recommended if the OP is looking for objective high performance and speakers that change the sound the least.

By design, higher objective performance can be achieved in active configuration. Good active will always perform better than a good passive other things being equal.

If the OP is looking for a particular character of sound then recommendations can only be for something that has that character (active or passive).

Now, importantly, often when someone recommends actives what they really say is "you should not look for coloured sound, you should look for neutral sound and actives are best for that" and this is where the disconnect starts.

 

[Craig M.]

I nearly always recommend actives when someone is looking to improve sound quality, even if it means selling some of their kit that they initially want to keep. Why? Because in my experience selling all the old seperates for actives will give the biggest increase in sound quality, it's that simple. The op doesn't have to take my suggestion on board, but I'm not going to recommend what I think is a worse alternative. So actives it is then.

I also usually recommend AVI, even though I don't own them myself. Why? Because not everyone wants some ugly studio monitors in their room and, compared to the likes of Dyn Xeos for example, the AVIs are streets ahead on sound quality, in my opinion.

When the anti-active brigade are getting their knickers in a knot, they should stop and consider something. It's just a bloody stereo, get a grip!

 

[AlmaataKZ]

I nearly always recommend actives when someone is looking to improve sound quality, even if it means selling some of their kit that they initially want to keep. Why? Because in my experience selling all the old seperates for actives will give the biggest increase in sound quality, it's that simple. The op doesn't have to take my suggestion on board, but I'm not going to recommend what I think is a worse alternative. So actives it is then.

I also usually recommend AVI, even though I don't own them myself. Why? Because not everyone wants some ugly studio monitors in their room and, compared to the likes of Dyn Xeos for example, the AVIs are streets ahead on sound quality, in my opinion.

When the anti-active brigade are getting their knickers in a knot, they should stop and consider something. It's just a bloody stereo, get a grip!

+1

 

[Dan Turner]

Nice speakers you've got there , by the way . I hope to audition some soon !

Cheers, enjoy, you won't be disappointed!

 

[Dan Turner]

Sorry, duplicate post

 

[edplaysdrums42]

When should active speakers be recommended?

They can be recommended anytime, there doesn't have to be any specific rule on this unless someone states that they specifically don't want actives. Most hifi enthusiasts are a bit protective on the gear that they have got. Some even think that as far as anyone is concerned their gear cant be bettered!

I love the sound of my gear and is just about right for my listening requirements (and wallet). If there are actives out there that can provide the same presentation of the Croft/Harbeth combo i would very interested to hear them. Its all about personal taste.

Cheers, Ed

 

[chebby]

It is interesting that many people advocate AVI active products as a 'cure' or solution to 'box swapping'.

Not so sure about that.

BigH mentioned - on another thread - about some ADM9.1s that sold on ebay for £600 last week.

I looked them up. I couldn't help noticing that the same seller has also recently sold his original (2007) ADM9s for £435.

He said in the selling notes...

"They have been in storage since October 2009 when I got a pair of ADM9.1's."

He also sold an AVI amplifier for £435 yesterday. He said of that...

"...I'm switching over to a digital music streamer and I need to reduce my box count. I doubt whether I will ever be able to match the quality of this amp again." (Surely, the subsequent two pairs of ADM9s must have been better?)

Presumably, upgrading from the ADM9s then to the ADM9.1s and now upgrading to whatever he has just bought (or is just about to buy) is not 'box swapping'.

The ADM9s cost about £1000 at the time. The ADM9.1s cost about £1100. So he has lost at least £1000 plus ebay/Paypal fees in total.

Interesting that he seemed to have used a 'traditional' AVI amp for eleven years from 1996 until 2007 before the pace of 'box swapping' accelerated with two sets of ADM9s in two years.

 

[CnoEvil]

There have been good points made so far, and the wording of your question may allow sensible, objective evaluation of this conundrum.

I think that if someone is starting from scratch, or is looking for amp/speakers, then it is a very viable addition to the audition list....provided that it is reasonably within budget.

The secret is not to impose a viewpoint, or slag off anyone who disagrees with it....being polite and respectful costs nothing.

People like different things, that's just how it is (and always will be).

 

[the record spot]

Actives - mention them anytime you like folks - Yamaha, Roland, Genelec, M-Audio, Behringer, Adam, Mackie....plenty to choose from.

 

[relocated]

It is interesting that many people advocate AVI active products as a 'cure' or solution to 'box swapping'.

Not so sure about that.

BigH mentioned - on another thread - about some ADM9.1s that sold on ebay for £600 last week.

I looked them up. I couldn't help noticing that the same seller has also recently sold his original (2007) ADM9s for £435.

He said in the selling notes...

"They have been in storage since October 2009 when I got a pair of ADM9.1's."

He also sold an AVI amplifier for £435 yesterday. He said of that...

"...I'm switching over to a digital music streamer and I need to reduce my box count. I doubt whether I will ever be able to match the quality of this amp again." (Surely, the subsequent two pairs of ADM9s must have been better?)

Presumably, upgrading from the ADM9s then to the ADM9.1s and now upgrading to whatever he has just bought (or is just about to buy) is not 'box swapping'.

The ADM9s cost about £1000 at the time. The ADM9.1s cost about £1100. So he has lost at least £1000 plus ebay/Paypal fees in total.

Interesting that he seemed to have used a 'traditional' AVI amp for eleven years from 1996 until 2007 before the pace of 'box swapping' accelerated with two sets of ADM9s in two years.

Why on earth would you devote this amount of time to delving into someone elses life??? Unless this specific person proclaimed that AVI ADM 9 series were the end of box swapping then your post is somewhat pointless.

AVI stopped producing seperates because of the performance gain in the ADM 9 [yes I'm sure there were some other considerations]. If they had been less than honest about the situation they could have continued making the seperates, given the regard those products were held in.

Anyway congratulations Chebby, you have managed to steer this discussion, about when to recommend ACTIVES [not AVI actives], into an anti-AVI thing. What exactly is your problem??? Don't bother answering I can't imagine being interested in your reply.

:?

 

[Phileas]

It is interesting that many people advocate AVI active products as a 'cure' or solution to 'box swapping'...

...Interesting that he seemed to have used a 'traditional' AVI amp for eleven years from 1996 until 2007 before the pace of 'box swapping' accelerated with two sets of ADM9s in two years.

I think your post is a little off topic but anyhow, some people are incorrigible (I mean the AVI box-swapper).

I consider box swapping to be either chasing SQ improvements but never really getting there or just enjoying the whole process of chopping and changing. When I used the term above I really should have said "not everyone aspires to be a multi-box-owner".

People who've upgraded from one AVI model to a later one probably do it with confidence, knowing that AVI upgrades truly are upgrades.

Incidentally, I've just sold my ADM9Ts and sub and ordered a pair of Arses (ADM9RSS). :rofl: