When should actives be recommended?

[Sospri]

There is a third group.....those who simply put the love of music first and work back from there. They don't give a fiddler's f**k about the technology that allows this, as long as the music is realistic, emotional, passionate, believable, and with the intention of the musicians coming across as intact as possible.

A box swop is never "just for the sake of it", but a very considered decision, where an immediately noticable, worthwhile improvement to the portrayal of the music is the result. This bit of kit is then likely to remain in-situ for many years.

Most sensible post in the whole thread.......................

+1 :clap:

 

[fr0g]

... just because a product uses a supposedly technologically superior approach, it doesn't mean that it is superior full stop.

This is 100% true, and 100% irrelevant.

If you want to produce a "best of kind" product, it always makes sense to use the acknowledged best way to do something and the best components where necessary and/or cost effective. Just because bad examples of active speakers exist doesn't mean they aren't the best solution to the problem of how to get a signal to 2 or more speaker drivers that produce different frequency ranges.Of course there are great passive speakers around and of course there are bad actives. But the fact is, that any one of those great passive designs could be improved on in active form.

Whenever I see someone use this argument these days, I think of grandmothers and egg-sucking school.

And to the OS. I think give that people come here asking for advice on Hi-Fi, active speakers are justifiably recommended and endorsed in all cases where they could make a positive difference or save some money.

And as people do start to realise the benefits, and more buy them, there will be more and more people suggesting them. The silly arguments are annoying but then that's life.

 

[Frank Harvey]

1. As they get more mature a lot of them will want better sound than what is available from an all in one dock/speaker system.

Not necessarily.

1a. Even if they don't sound a lot better, speakers will still be marketed as such and 90% of the population will still be taken in by the marketing hype.

BS

2. Stereo separation?

Not the highest priority on people's agendas when buying convenient audio nowadays.

3. There is still the possibility for the (predominantly) male trait of upgrading.

I do find it funny how the active brigade class upgrading as some sort of disease that is only cure able by buying AVI. And apparently people do it only once they've bought a separates system, and they then do it regularly and constantly until death.

4. Closely linked to reason 3; bragging rights to your mates. This also applies to bikes, cars, jet skis, computers, pit bulls... anything really; and usually boils down to a "mine's bigger than yours" thing.

Those that willy wave are hardly likely to buy a one box dock in the first place, and they're not likely to buy a pair of active speakers either. Not unless they're 7 feet tall.

5. You can't make a dock part of a surround sound system for movies/games.

Only a matter of time. Sonos have already moved in that direction. Again, those that are after something surround sound for games won't be buying iPod docks or high quality active stereo speakers.

 

[Covenanter]

As for any theoretical advantage of actives I'm sorry bit I don't buy that; that's all a one with the looney cable posters to this forum - the "my ears can't be wrong" brigade.

Chris

Chris, the advantages of an active crossover are very real. A bit of time with google will find you all the info you need.

This will get you off to a start. Clicky and clicky and clicky

I understand the theory.

Chris

 

[daytona600]

some info on active speakers

http://www.ultraaudio.com/index.php/features-menu/general-interest-interviews-menu/343-active-loudspeaker-systems-on-the-rise-peter-roth-talks-with-andy-payor-laurence-dickie-and-richard-vandersteen

cheapest pair of actives that actually work are vanatoo transparent one

http://www.vanatoo.com/

active speakers start sounding really , really good once you get into the £5000 + bracket

use active sanders electrostatics myself

 

[the record spot]

apparent issues with some Apple gear.

Really? If so, that's brilliant and very funny indeed!

Now, do go and calm down, dear.

Not in a tizz about it at all Alec, but some users are having a bit of bother. Not just Apple as one user appears to have issues with a series of bits of kit going into the ADMs. Maybe his wife just keeps sneakily turning them off. But I suspect not. ;-)

 

[Frank Harvey]

And when retailers actually give the punter an opportunity to audition active products. Unlike the last 40 years that I have been going to retailers anyway. Please don't roll out the exhausted, 'well there's never been a call for them'.

So were you trawling hi-fi retailers in the 80's (pre AVI active era) asking dealers to audition active speakers?

I think people need to accept that once hi-fi boomed (70's/80's), passive was the direction that it naturally took (obviously, much to the annoyance of active based companies and recently converted active fans). It could so easily have taken the active route had there been a decent choice of active speakers at the time, but it didn't. Having said that, Linn and Naim were doing active systems back then, and Meridian followed.

And yes, the "exhausted" phrase is relevant. Once there's enough demand (and product) to make it worthwhile keeping ranges of active speakers, you will see dealers keeping them. You cant stock a £2k product that only sells once a year, or even five times a year. A dealer will stock up on products that is going to keep him in business - space taken up by products that dont sell well or dont even get listened to will sooner or later get replaced by products that do. As it stands, there's not enough product out there, and there's not enough people asking to hear them as options. Maybe that's down to marketing, I don't know, but you don't see many manufacturers marketing their active speakers. It is up to manufacturers to create demand, and then for dealers to fulfill it.

I'm not being anti active here, just saying it as I see it from a dealer point of view.

 

[Ajani]

I've taken some time to determine when (and frankly, if) to respond in my own thread. Having read all the responses so far I do see some good points being made and generally being ignored as well.

First off, I've used pro audio gear for several years: Benchmark DAC1/M-Audio USB Transit/AKG K701/M-Audio BX-5 as my desktop system. I'm a big fan of actives and I find AVI products interesting.

All that said, let me post my thoughts on when to recommend actives:

I believe they can be recommended anytime an active option would potentially fit the OP's budget and needs. BUT, I don't think they should be recommended in the way they usually are! Talking about AudioFoo and generally deriding passive systems, their manufacturers and users is not the way to make a recommendation.

Are actives technically superior? Yes.

Does that mean for any given budget the active options will be better than the passive ones? Nope.

I think the most important question when dealing with all the marketing claims is this:

Is the use of an active crossover the only/most important part of designing a good HiFi system?

If not, then it is quite probable that non-active manfacturers have prioritised other aspects of the design process.

Let me use a car analogy (since those seem to be popular in HiFi):

In designing a sports coupe, is a more powerful engine superior to a weaker one? Yes. We want our sports coupe to be as fast as possible.

Is having a more powerful engine the only/most important part of designing a good sports coupe?

NO! A car with a weaker engine but phenomenal handling, maybe a better driving experience for most persons.

Too often persons get too focused on just one meaure to evaluate the quality of a product.

 

[Frank Harvey]

... just because a product uses a supposedly technologically superior approach, it doesn't mean that it is superior full stop.

This is 100% true, and 100% irrelevant.

If you want to produce a "best of kind" product, it always makes sense to use the acknowledged best way to do something and the best components where necessary and/or cost effective. Just because bad examples of active speakers exist doesn't mean they aren't the best solution to the problem of how to get a signal to 2 or more speaker drivers that produce different frequency ranges.Of course there are great passive speakers around and of course there are bad actives. But the fact is, that any one of those great passive designs could be improved on in active form.

Whenever I see someone use this argument these days, I think of grandmothers and egg-sucking school.

I'm not using any argument, just stating a fact, which you have acknowledged to be so.

Whether a passive design can be improved by being made active is down to the manufacturer. If they don't have the know how, then that great passive design will be better off a passive design.

When there are numerous manufacturers producing basically the same product, they have to make themselves stand out. To do this, they need to do something different, but they have to do it well as standing out just isn't enough. Look at the amount of different types of speaker there are - if an active speaker was the best way to do things, and ALL manufacturers thought that way, the market now would be full to the brim of active speakers. There'd be no coincident or concentric designs, no electrostatic or ribbon speakers, no sub/sat systems, and no subwoofers.

 

[richardw42]

I think all good hi Fi has a part to play.

It really does seem a pretty unstoppable tide, that actives will become the norm. (Sooner or later). Now more regular manufacturers seem to be introducing more wallet friendly design, it may happen a bit quicker. There will always be a population of Canutes but there's nothing wrong with that.

I personally can't see any situation where Actives shouldn't be recommended. Whatever they may be.

 

[richardw42]

I don't think upgrading & box swapping are necessarily the same thing.

I see upgrading as a conscious path towards improved audio. Be that a cash thing or not. Will I definitely not swap my speakers ? If something better comes along, probably.

PI see box swappers as people dissatisfied and changing things hoping for it to go click. Eg shopping a £ 500 CDP for another £500 CDP and so on. And I can count myself among those. If I'd bitten the bullet and gone for a trues upgrade rather than fiddling about at the mid range level, I might not have the sig I've got.

 

[drummerman]

I think all good hi Fi has a part to play.

It really does seem a pretty unstoppable tide, that actives will become the norm. (Sooner or later).

Not sure where you got that idea from but this is imo a long way off and will probably never happen.

Don't forget, actives have been around for ages. They are niche products and probably account for little in the greater scheme of hifi or what the majority of people want/need. - AVI makes big waves, mostly through controversy but their sales are probably minute even compared to the likes of rega and Naim etc etc.

Little streaming micro systems, docks and the likes are an other story. Thats most likely where the demand is probably closely followed by headphones for phones.

However, there are actives around at most price levels so why not recommending them if they are good and pose a genuine alternative to a separates system, as AVI's offerings do for example.

All imo

regards

 

[Alec]

apparent issues with some Apple gear.

Really? If so, that's brilliant and very funny indeed!

Now, do go and calm down, dear.

Not just Apple

Blast!

EDIT ROFL etc...

 

[jiggyjoe]

Interesting from one of the designers of what could be one of the best loudspeakers around.

Laurence Dickie seems ready to take up the “ultimate loudspeaker” gauntlet laid down by Payor by developing Vivid Audio’s Giya into a quad-amplified, fully active, four-driver loudspeaker system. In any event, and for now, Andy Payor concluded that, “the best available architecture is a combination of active and passive crossovers within a biamplified, multi-driver loudspeaker system.

 

[atticus]

As it stands, there's not enough product out there, and there's not enough people asking to hear them as options. Maybe that's down to marketing, I don't know, but you don't see many manufacturers marketing their active speakers. It is up to manufacturers to create demand, and then for dealers to fulfill it.

I'm not being anti active here, just saying it as I see it from a dealer point of view.

Speaking as someone who now does marketing for a living, I think we are moving away from the business model where you make something; give it to the marketing dept to create a need for it, then pass it onto the sales team. Consumers are far too picky and there are too many products vying for competition and the customer's dollar these days.

An awful lot of current marketing revolves around listening to what people want and then creating a product to fulfil that need. Less top down and more bottom up as the priest used to say to the altar boy.

 

[richardw42]

It may take a while, which is why I said sooner or later. Probably should add other applications such as docks and soundbars. And probably powered speakers too, which manufacturers like to describe as active.

There will be a place for conventional amp/speaker systems for a long time. But the scales will tip.

Heck, I can't say for sure that I'll never go passive again

 

[SunnyCyprus]

" Once there's enough demand (and product) to make it worthwhile keeping ranges of active speakers, you will see dealers keeping them. You cant stock a £2k product that only sells once a year, or even five times a year. "

Dealers do just happens that they're predominantly pro-audio dealers.

 

[ebentjerodt]

As I mentioned I will most porbably upgrade my ATC 19 for the 50. I am have not decide 100% if I will go for the active or passive.

here you have a concert example. waht will you recomend to me?

some info.

1. it is for a big living room

2. I hear mainly CD and Flac from my Olive 06

3. I hear mainly Canterburian rock, jazz and staring to enjoy some songriters like Allan Taylor and woman singers like Diana Krall, Patricia barber and others.

4. if I go for the Active I will save USD 2.000 but giving my Gryphon Diablo away and recieving a Chord pre amp or a Cary tube pre amp.

waht will you recomend?

Eduardo

 

[relocated]

And when retailers actually give the punter an opportunity to audition active products. Unlike the last 40 years that I have been going to retailers anyway. Please don't roll out the exhausted, 'well there's never been a call for them'.

So were you trawling hi-fi retailers in the 80's (pre AVI active era) asking dealers to audition active speakers?

I think people need to accept that once hi-fi boomed (70's/80's), passive was the direction that it naturally took (obviously, much to the annoyance of active based companies and recently converted active fans). It could so easily have taken the active route had there been a decent choice of active speakers at the time, but it didn't. Having said that, Linn and Naim were doing active systems back then, and Meridian followed.

And yes, the "exhausted" phrase is relevant. Once there's enough demand (and product) to make it worthwhile keeping ranges of active speakers, you will see dealers keeping them. You cant stock a £2k product that only sells once a year, or even five times a year. A dealer will stock up on products that is going to keep him in business - space taken up by products that dont sell well or dont even get listened to will sooner or later get replaced by products that do. As it stands, there's not enough product out there, and there's not enough people asking to hear them as options. Maybe that's down to marketing, I don't know, but you don't see many manufacturers marketing their active speakers. It is up to manufacturers to create demand, and then for dealers to fulfill it.

I'm not being anti active here, just saying it as I see it from a dealer point of view.

Congratulations David, you have dressed the exhausted model answer up in new words. Do you suppose for one minute that this enhances your reputation? :wall:

 

[relocated]

" Once there's enough demand (and product) to make it worthwhile keeping ranges of active speakers, you will see dealers keeping them. You cant stock a £2k product that only sells once a year, or even five times a year. "

Dealers do just happens that they're predominantly pro-audio dealers.

A point that I have completely missed. Well said.

 

[Covenanter]

And when retailers actually give the punter an opportunity to audition active products. Unlike the last 40 years that I have been going to retailers anyway. Please don't roll out the exhausted, 'well there's never been a call for them'.

So were you trawling hi-fi retailers in the 80's (pre AVI active era) asking dealers to audition active speakers?

I think people need to accept that once hi-fi boomed (70's/80's), passive was the direction that it naturally took (obviously, much to the annoyance of active based companies and recently converted active fans). It could so easily have taken the active route had there been a decent choice of active speakers at the time, but it didn't. Having said that, Linn and Naim were doing active systems back then, and Meridian followed.

And yes, the "exhausted" phrase is relevant. Once there's enough demand (and product) to make it worthwhile keeping ranges of active speakers, you will see dealers keeping them. You cant stock a £2k product that only sells once a year, or even five times a year. A dealer will stock up on products that is going to keep him in business - space taken up by products that dont sell well or dont even get listened to will sooner or later get replaced by products that do. As it stands, there's not enough product out there, and there's not enough people asking to hear them as options. Maybe that's down to marketing, I don't know, but you don't see many manufacturers marketing their active speakers. It is up to manufacturers to create demand, and then for dealers to fulfill it.

I'm not being anti active here, just saying it as I see it from a dealer point of view.

Congratulations David, you have dressed the exhausted model answer up in new words. Do you suppose for one minute that this enhances your reputation? :wall:

I'm not a dealer but I was in business for a long time and David's argument looks sound to me.

Chris

 

[the record spot]

Count me in on that one Chris. Seemed like a reasoned reply to me too.

 

[richardw42]

Retailers are here to give the customer what they wwant. It's up to manufacturers marketing etc to make a product and increase awareness.

If or when things change, I'd expect them to adapt.

It would be very noble for them to fall on their swords and only stock what they think people should buy, but not good for business.

 

[char_lotte]

Relocated , your posts towards David are getting a bit unpleasant to be honest.

 

[pauln]

4. Closely linked to reason 3; bragging rights to your mates. This also applies to bikes, cars, jet skis, computers, pit bulls... anything really; and usually boils down to a "mine's bigger than yours" thing.

Those that willy wave are hardly likely to buy a one box dock in the first place, and they're not likely to buy a pair of active speakers either. Not unless they're 7 feet tall.

You missed the point completely.