Why do most audiophile prefer passive speakers?

[4est]

10 hours ago, jcbenten said:

Nowadays the active systems are obtainable.  While the Kiis and D&Ds are a bit rich for me, but if my system crashed tomorrow, I would look at the Dynaudio Xeo line.  May not have all the DSP the higher cost alternatives but I think I would be just fine.

As for myself, I am not convinced that the DSP applied to a lot of these speakers can overcome the small drivers that often accompany the actives.

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, 4est said:

As for myself, I am not convinced that the DSP applied to a lot of these speakers can overcome the small drivers that often accompany the actives.

Have you heard/used them? You would be convinced if you did.  It is not possible to do so on paper.

[BlueDL]

5 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Have you heard/used them? You would be convinced if you did.  It is not possible to do so on paper.

That’s got me intrigued (although, surely the laws of physics will kick in eventually?).

[Kal Rubinson]

9 hours ago, GregWormald said:

SGR CX4F

No DSP.  Old school.  Not what I would associate with modern acoustic design.

[Richard Dale]

1 hour ago, 4est said:

As for myself, I am not convinced that the DSP applied to a lot of these speakers can overcome the small drivers that often accompany the actives.

My LS50 Wireless speakers have a subwoofer output with filters you can customise with the KEF control app, and I use them with a pair of subs. That works very well. 

 

The question 'Why do most audiophiles prefer not to use subwoofers?' seems to be related to the question that is the subject of this thread. Logically it makes more sense to put the bass units in separate boxes, but most audiophiles don't want to do that. Subs are seen as a home theatre thing.

[asdf1000]

22 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Tread carefully.  Most of audiophilia is about preference (which is indisputable) and not about accuracy. 🙃

 

There is also a lot of difference preference about accuracy in the pro audio world... So many preferences for different sounding interfaces (including DACs) and monitors (speakers)...

 

Different sounding according to the pro users themselves subjectively, not measurements.

 

[firedog]

2 hours ago, 4est said:

As for myself, I am not convinced that the DSP applied to a lot of these speakers can overcome the small drivers that often accompany the actives.

No one claims they will match the physical slam of the bass output of a 12 inch or 15 inch sub-woofer powered by a big amp.

 

But if you think they are in any way "lacking" in bass output, you are quite mistaken. More than enough to convincingly portray either a symphony or modern electronic music for the vast majority of listeners. One of the advantages of such a system is it allows the designer to maximize the output of the woofers without pushing them into distortion. So the same woofer in such a speaker can output significantly more bass (sometimes as even going 10 or20 hz lower) than the same woofer in a conventional setup. 

[beetlemania]

The list of manufacturers who know how to make top shelf speakers *and* electronics is pretty short. Charles Hansen might have been in this category but he did these with different companies. Richard Vandersteen, perhaps, but I suspect he had help with his amp (Jim White?). Linn makes good gear but, IMO, not quite top shelf. Maybe MBL but I’ve only heard their gear once at RMAF. I’m probably forgetting somebody but, again, not many have “mastered” both. I am curious to hear Dutch and Dutch - rave reviews and outstanding measurements. 

[firedog]

2 hours ago, beetlemania said:

The list of manufacturers who know how to make top shelf speakers *and* electronics is pretty short. Charles Hansen might have been in this category but he did these with different companies. Richard Vandersteen, perhaps, but I suspect he had help with his amp (Jim White?). Linn makes good gear but, IMO, not quite top shelf. Maybe MBL but I’ve only heard their gear once at RMAF. I’m probably forgetting somebody but, again, not many have “mastered” both. I am curious to hear Dutch and Dutch - rave reviews and outstanding measurements. 

Not sure these days a manufacturer has to perfectly know both. A speaker manufacturer can order amp modules that match the characteristics needed for the speaker drivers.

[sandyk]

9 hours ago, Richard Dale said:

My LS50 Wireless speakers have a subwoofer output with filters you can customise with the KEF control app, and I use them with a pair of subs. That works very well. 

 

The question 'Why do most audiophiles prefer not to use subwoofers?' seems to be related to the question that is the subject of this thread. Logically it makes more sense to put the bass units in separate boxes, but most audiophiles don't want to do that. Subs are seen as a home theatre thing.

My experience is that it is hard to seamlessly integrate all speakers into a system so that one area doesn't cause a little "colouration"  with high quality audio, although it isn't a problem in home theatre where it's more about steering sound effects and dialogue.

[Kal Rubinson]

9 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

There is also a lot of difference preference about accuracy in the pro audio world...

They are not immune.

8 hours ago, firedog said:

No one claims they will match the physical slam of the bass output of a 12 inch or 15 inch sub-woofer powered by a big amp.

Kii Three + BXT

[Richard Dale]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

My experience is that it is hard to seamlessly integrate all speakers into a system so that one area doesn't cause a little "colouration"  with high quality audio, although it isn't a problem in home theatre where it's more about steering sound effects and dialogue.

Maybe you are thinking of integrating subs with passive speakers, as opposed to integrating with active speakers that have a controllable DSP based high pass filter that makes it easier?

[sandyk]

10 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

Maybe you are thinking of integrating subs with passive speakers, as opposed to integrating with active speakers that have a controllable DSP based high pass filter that makes it easier?

 Yes.

 I don't like what I have heard with a friend's DSP processing, and I believe that proper room corrections are the best approach.

[GregWormald]

12 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

No DSP.  Old school.  Not what I would associate with modern acoustic design.

Yeah. Harry (dad) is an LP and analog fan from way back, and infected Stuart (son) with that, as well as a love of music. Stuart has done consulting work for a number of the big digital/electronics concerns (e.g. TI if I remember correctly) and his amps are top rate. 

In some ways they are an unusual pair to be designing and manufacturing audio, but the results show that it works.

[4est]

19 hours ago, firedog said:

One of the advantages of such a system is it allows the designer to maximize the output of the woofers without pushing them into distortion. So the same woofer in such a speaker can output significantly more bass (sometimes as even going 10 or20 hz lower) than the same woofer in a conventional setup. 

You might want to consider this assertion. The DSP likely creates more distortion as it attempts to force the smaller drivers to operate below what it is capable of. This might sound good to you, but there is little chance that the bass driver actually has lower distortion than if you were using a proper one - unless perchance it is servo controlled or something.

[firedog]

11 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

They are not immune.

Kii Three + BXT

 

11 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

They are not immune.

Kii Three + BXT

Clearly wasn't referring to the BXT, that's already a different animal. 

[BlueDL]

18 minutes ago, firedog said:

 

Clearly wasn't referring to the BXT, that's already a different animal. 

Given size of that beast, I tend to agree with you 😃

[firedog]

52 minutes ago, 4est said:

You might want to consider this assertion. The DSP likely creates more distortion as it attempts to force the smaller drivers to operate below what it is capable of. This might sound good to you, but there is little chance that the bass driver actually has lower distortion than if you were using a proper one - unless perchance it is servo controlled or something.

Not at all. There are different types of DSP going on in such a system like the Kii or Beolab 90. One of the things the DSP in such a system does is PREVENT distortion. It's not a question of a "proper" driver. It means that the designers have mapped the behavior of the specific woofer and use DSP to control it so it goes to the limit of its ability and not beyond. That isn't possible in a conventional system. So it allows more bass extension and less distortion. 

Devialet does a similar thing with SAM. Check out how SAM changes and extends the response of various speakers. 

[Kal Rubinson]

4 hours ago, firedog said:

Clearly wasn't referring to the BXT, that's already a different animal. 

Just as is the Beolab 90 that you mention.  If you need big, go big.

[Abtr]

On 5/16/2020 at 2:28 PM, Richard Dale said:

My LS50 Wireless speakers have a subwoofer output with filters you can customise with the KEF control app, and I use them with a pair of subs. That works very well. 

 

The question 'Why do most audiophiles prefer not to use subwoofers?' seems to be related to the question that is the subject of this thread. Logically it makes more sense to put the bass units in separate boxes, but most audiophiles don't want to do that. Subs are seen as a home theatre thing.

 

I think many audiophiles don't want the extra AD/DA conversion and DSP of (most) active speakers. Indeed, what would be the use of owning a state of the art DAC if its output is resampled, digitally processed and again DA converted by some DAC chips inside your speakers? Personally I use a high quality analogue active 24dB/oct. Linkwitz-Riley 2-way crossover for my passive KEF-LS50s and powered subwoofer. I'm planning to give the active KEFs a try but I seriously doubt they will/can sound better than my current setup.

 

Advanced DSP can do more than just implement a crossover, such as time-align the output to the filtered channels. But my analogue 4th order crossover is already phase aligned at the cross-over frequency. I admit the low-pass channel is delayed by 360 degrees relative to the high-pass channel, but as yet I'm not convinced such a delay is audible at ~100Hz. And I'm sure the digital low-pass filter of the LS50W will have its own time problems..

[davide256]

Meridian has been in the active speaker  business since the 80's, with excellent technology

 

https://www.meridian-audio.com/products/home-audio-loudspeakers/reference/special-edition-dsp8000/

 

[Richard Dale]

2 minutes ago, Abtr said:

 

I think many audiophiles don't want the extra AD/DA conversion and DSP of (most) active speakers. Indeed, what would be the use of owning a state of the art DAC if its output is resampled, digitally processed and again DA converted by some DAC chips inside your speakers? Personally I use a high quality analogue active 24dB/oct. Linkwitz-Riley 2-way crossover for my passive KEF-LS50s and powered subwoofer. I'm planning to give the active KEFs a try but I seriously doubt they will/can sound better than my current setup.

 

Advanced DSP can do more than just implement a crossover, such as time-align the output to the filtered channels. But my analogue 4th order crossover is already phase aligned at the cross-over frequency. I admit the low-pass channel is delayed by 360 degrees relative to the high-pass channel, but as yet I'm not convinced such a delay is audible at ~100Hz. And I'm sure the digital low-pass filter of the LS50W will have its own time problems..

A criticism I have of KEF is that they don't specify much about the subwoofer filter slopes or anything else to do with the filters. The low pass filter could well be time aligned with the high pass filter for a given subwoofer position relative to the mains, as the DSP would allow it. But I have no info. The subs measure very well with REW and if I was a bit more expert I should be able to use the measurements to move the subs forwards or backwards to time align perhaps. My R400b subs are currently inside the mains with their centres in line with the front of the mid bass unit, and subjectively after adding quite a lot of bass traps the bass sounds extremely good.

 

KEF seem to be moving backwards with subwoofer options for the LS50Ws unfortunately. All their subs are only available in black, whereas my R400bs are white to go with my white LS50Ws. The R400b replacements, the KF92s are twice as expensive and so a pair would now cost you double the cost of the LS50Ws. This tends to make me think I'm a bigger fan of KEF's active speaker/sub pairings than KEF themselves are.

[Lone Mountain Audio]

On 5/13/2020 at 5:18 PM, GregWormald said:

I agree with Kal.

 

BTW I use the following definitions:

Passive speaker=no built-in/standard power. If there is a crossover it is also passive.

Active speaker=built-in/standard power. If there is a crossover it is also active i.e. each driver is individually driven with its specific required signal, which is produced in an individual amplifier; or occasionally in a separate pre-amplifier stage which feeds the individual amplifier.

Powered speaker=built-in/standard power. If there is a crossover it is passive.

 

I've been a hi-fi aficionado for more than 60 years and have been tempted by actives a couple of times but was never able to have an extensive preview and the costs ($$$$$) were beyond my means. A few years ago I was able to have a long audition of a set that were in my price range, and they were better than any other speaker I listened to at that time. So I bought them.

 

4 way speakers (drivers=hi, mid, mid-bass, 4 bass), 4 active crossovers in each box with multiple room/preference adjustments, all analog implementation, 650 watts/channel, separate power supply box, current drive.

 

 

 

Perfect explanation of the different types!  It drives me nuts to see people incorrectly refer to active loudspeakers as "powered".   

 

 

[PeterG]

If we strip away the pretense, being an audiophile is prioritizing sound quality above all else in your selection and set up of components.  So why don't most audiophiles purchase active speakers? They prefer the sound of certain passive speakers/amps in their price range to the sound of the actives.  While there may be very good active speakers at many price ranges, those who prefer the sound of B&W (800 line), Wilson, Magico, SF and many other high end speakers don't really have active choices available to them

[Lone Mountain Audio]

On 5/15/2020 at 2:09 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

1.  There are too few brick-and-mortar stores and they tend to be as technologically conservative as most audiophiles.  No surprise there.

2.  Active speakers such as Linn and ATC are just as old-hat as the passive loudspeakers on which they are based.  That includes many so-called "pro actives."

3.  The real dividing line is between all these and the new designs with DSP and cabinets focussed on controlling dispersion.  They are the next wave and some are already here.

Hey Kal

Okay, I'll bite.  Active is the simple solution to the passive crossover problem.  Here are some of the problems:

1) One cannot control phase through a passive crossover.  One of the biggest differences in a proper speaker system vs a poorly performing one is making it a "minimum phase system" Measuring how well the speaker controls phase is a part of speaker measurement everyone in the industry EXCEPT consumer.

2) there are tremendous losses though all that copper even in a properly built passive crossover with oxygen free copper oin proper air core inductors.  Then add the losses through the speaker cable are added to that!  All that cable is changing the way the amp sounds and the speakers sound.  I don't get it.  People argue about fuses but they run 5M to 10M of copper cable though a passive speaker.

3) Active has nothing to do with DSP or Class D.  It is simply locating the amps AFTER the electronic crossover, not before as in passive system.  You can now design the exact right amount of power for each driver to match the other driver's dynamic range.  ATC, whom I work with importing pro and consumer to the US, uses Class A/B power on their amps and zero DSP.  Fully analog input to output. 

4) Distortion is reduced with removing all those front ends of amplifiers.  The amp design is simpler and less complex. 

5) An active system is more reliable.  It has far fewer connectors which are a source difficulty down the road as audio people all know connectors are always the weakest link.  

6) Active will reveal far more about EVERTHING in front of it: the preamp, the DAC, the line level cables, the turn table, the cartridge- all these things are MORE obvious in active vs passive.  So while people will not switch out the amp anymore, the will intensify switching out everything else because the differences are so much more striking.  I think active will increase the hobby.

7) It saves so much money to not have to build four big pieces of metal (3 amps and an electronic crossover).  In an ATC active amp pack there are three amps plus a mono active crossover.  Active adds about 7K total the cost of a PAIR of passives.  Try to buy 3 stereo amps and 1 stereo electronic crossover for 7K total and properly power a larger three way.   

8 ) Active offers the possibility of upgrade because the 3 way amp inside the system can be recalibrated for a different driver.  ATC is offering upgrades right now to anyone who bought from 1990s to about 2018 to install the new ATC built tweeter to replace the OEM one in 50s through 150s. It requires recalibration, something you cannot do with a passive crossover.

9 ) Active offers the ability for me in the US to perfectly repair and match the settings and QC readings from the speakers initial measurements at the factory in England when it was built.      If ANYTHING such as an amp part or a driver has to be replaced, I can replicate the brand new settings. 

 

I could go on but these are probably the big reasons active is better- regardless of brand or design philosophy.  The two leaders in active have been Genelec and ATC, both began doing it this way in the early 80s and have not stopped.  Unlike Genelec, ATC does make passive versions of the speakers available for those that insist and two levels of performance in active: standard (19A through150A  and fully discrete (SE50 and SE100).  The discrete does indeed sound better.

 

Brad