Why do passive speakers still exist?

[andreasmaaan]

My Meridian M33s are 20 years old and are still working fine.

That company was well ahead of its time. And you must have been too in choosing to buy them back then.

A pity Bob Stuart is cashing in on audiophile nonsense these days.

 

[DSJR]

Thanks to all who commented on my post earlier. As regards hiss from tweeters, I suppose that's one 'advantage' of tinnitus in that I can't hear such quiet high frequency noise nowadays. Mind you, the two active speakers I once owned never ever troubled me with hiss from the tweeters, this in the days when my ears worked better...

What I reckon IS important as we get older and our ears start to age, is harshness around the upper crossover region. I still maintain that the upper response dip engineered into many speakers is deliberate to make the sound 'safer?' may not look good on a Klippel response plot and it may well play havoc with good dispersion figures too, but it must help with making a speaker sound 'nice' overall in the best cases. I wonder if the hiss on the baby JBL's (I call then beer-budget 'cos I go back to the UK high end where Sonus Faber and others, sold a good few smaller models for thousands of pounds a pair and currently, when re-hashed LS3/5A's (a real 'thumpy squeaker' to my ears) sell for two and a half grand the pair) is there because the design seems so 'linear' in the lower khz region.

 

[Lorenzo74]

In a world where amazing active speakers / monitors exist, why do passive speakers not only continue to exist but are almost 90% of all speakers sold ( i guess).
What are the benefits of a passive speaker vs an active one?

good point! (a bit ironic too, I like it).

science can reply simply to the question: which technology is better for a given price?
the slope (inclination) of the regression curve in the chart here is evident.
https://sites.google.com/view/speakerdata/preference-ratings-graphs
Among the population measured by ASR Actives show a better performance vs price ratio. It is even more true that if you consider with passive you have to add amplifier cost.
no question. (At least to me)

then the question why there are more passive speakers than active is to me due mainly to legacy and education of people.
audiophiles buy in spades tube amp, expensive cables and connectors, turntables,cartridge, loving that coloration vs a wifi streamed 24/96 signal to good engineered, cheap DAC implementation (Many reviewed here for less than 500€)

I would love to hear the opinion of people like John Atkinsons, Andrew Jones, @Kal Rubinson , @Bruno Putzeys, @Floyd Toole , and our beloved @amirm on this..

thay have the knowledge and the experience to make this debate useful for the audiophile community.
my Best
L.

 

[Frank Dernie]

That company was well ahead of its time. And you must have been too in choosing to buy them back then.

A pity Bob Stuart is cashing in on audiophile nonsense these days.

I would like to have bought some of the more sophisticated oned like the M1 or M2 but far too expensive for me when they came out.

 

[DSJR]

My Meridian M33s are 20 years old and are still working fine.

I remember the M33's well. very neutral I seem to remember and rather 'odd compared to the coloured resonant models we also sold. Listen to them in isolation and they were very good as I remember (their 502 'balanced' preamp was used).

 

[DSJR]

I would like to have bought some of the more sophisticated oned like the M1 or M2 but far too expensive for me when they came out.
View attachment 95000View attachment 95001

M1 was a funky box as I recall but maybe a bit 'muted' sounding today. M2 had too much low bass eq to be serviceable for rock music at anything other than a low level but I seem to remember the M20 was better. they did a column active later - M60 and despoite being totally overshadowed by the early digital models they made at the time (which went out of date very quickly as you'd imagine) and also our dealer-preference for more profitable Linn-naim actives with all the paraphernalia and mind-programming associated with such products, I thought they sounded very good too

 

[raistlin65]

No one is telling that quality must be a downfall, for example some of the most currently sold wireless multiroom systems often sound better than most average Jo classic hifi systems of the 80s, the people having huge Infinity IRS etc where always a tiny exception.

I bet you those good wireless multi-room systems you're talking about are the "tiny exception" relative to the number of people using bad soundbars, Amazon echos, or portable Bluetooth speakers as their main audio solution.

 

[Helicopter]

I bet you those good wireless multi-room systems you're talking about are the "tiny exception" relative to the number of people using bad soundbars, Amazon echos, or portable Bluetooth speakers as their main audio solution.

The Amazon top 100 sellers unanimously support this assertion.

 

[raistlin65]

The Amazon top 100 sellers unanimously support this assertion.

I keep forgetting to check that. One can also walk through Best Buy and see how those products overwhelmingly dominate displays.

There's also a major step back in audio appreciation in this trend. The benefits of different channels in audio.

Amazon Echoes and portable Bluetooth speakers gave up on stereo separation. Cheap soundbars usually have terrible LRC front soundstaging and are a mockery of the notion of surround speakers.

Say what you will about the audio quality of the cheap Soundesign "hifi"setup my brother got when he was 14 during the 70s. At least it had speakers that could be placed apart. Although I might be scared to find out what the crosstalk measurements were for it. lol

 

[sigbergaudio]

The diy speakers didn't cost more than his, not when he purchased them anyway, that wasn't my point, forget how much the diy speakers cost then, they have over £700 worth of bling for crossovers which around here would be a complete waste of money anyway so my point is he prefers the sound of a 30 year old amp and some diy passives over his Kefs, I personally aren't surprised but a lot of people would choose the Kefs without hearing both because Kef are a company who make a living from this. It was my answer to the ops original questions, of course I believe this is not the only reason passives still exist as many have pointed out already....

Hard to consider this as even anecdotal evidence one way or another when we don't know anything about the speakers. A 30 year old amp could easily be transparent for normal listening, so it's not a big factor. There are also all kind of bias that could be in play for him to prefer the speakers you sold him over the KEFs.

 

[Helicopter]

I keep forgetting to check that. One can also walk through Best Buy and see how those products overwhelmingly dominate displays.

There's also a major step back in audio appreciation in this trend. The benefits of different channels in audio.

Amazon Echoes and portable Bluetooth speakers gave up on stereo separation. Cheap soundbars usually have terrible LRC front soundstaging and are a mockery of the notion of surround speakers.

Say what you will about the audio quality of the cheap Soundesign "hifi"setup my brother got when he was 14 during the 70s. At least it had speakers that could be placed apart. Although I might be scared to find out what the crosstalk measurements were for it. lol

You can pair echos, Polk, JBL BT speakers for stereo, but probably only like 5% or less use them this way...

The echo studio has tech similar to Atmos and has DRC built in and fully automated. That might make them hard to test on the NFS, but I am curious how they perform in a room. Maybe a pair of them with a sub for $500ish with current discounts. I am not going to spring for it right now though.

I am also hoping big tech is somewhere we see some good products or platform integration in the coming years. Dirac is so expensive because the market is so small.

Of course no one is going to spend more than a few hundred dollars on any single piece of this type of thing, but the volume is on a different scale.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

They sure do, but I don't see classic Hifi with a rack full of devices and passive loudspeakers ever becoming a mainstream market again like they were in the past.
The trend goes to usability, comfort and design and thus to one box solutions like wireless multiroom loudspeakers which at a touch on your smartphone play what you want to hear from your NAS or your streaming service like in the video segment Netflix also took over people buying DVD & Blurays.

I do agree but I do not think we have gotten that far yet. At present, there are clear distinctions in sound quality between the modern convenience/lifestyle products and traditional audio products.

When the time comes, we will see traditional audio companies getting into the market and populating it with single-box products incorporating all the features you describe but also with higher quality electronics and transducers.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

then the question why there are more passive speakers than active is to me due mainly to legacy and education of people.
audiophiles buy in spades tube amp, expensive cables and connectors, turntables,cartridge, loving that coloration vs a wifi streamed 24/96 signal to good engineered, cheap DAC implementation (Many reviewed here for less than 500€)

I think it is not surprising since, for many, the preoccupation is with the journey (hifi as a hobby) and not the goal (listening to music reproduced as accurately as possible). It is made clear to me in this thread and in others when individuals cite the inability to choose their own amplifiers as a reason for rejecting active loudspeakers. (Puerile automobile analogies declined.)

 

[laudio]

good point! (a bit ironic too, I like it).

science can reply simply to the question: which technology is better for a given price?
the slope (inclination) of the regression curve in the chart here is evident.
https://sites.google.com/view/speakerdata/preference-ratings-graphs
Among the population measured by ASR Actives show a better performance vs price ratio. It is even more true that if you consider with passive you have to add amplifier cost.
no question. (At least to me)

then the question why there are more passive speakers than active is to me due mainly to legacy and education of people.
audiophiles buy in spades tube amp, expensive cables and connectors, turntables,cartridge, loving that coloration vs a wifi streamed 24/96 signal to good engineered, cheap DAC implementation (Many reviewed here for less than 500€)

I would love to hear the opinion of people like John Atkinsons, Andrew Jones, @Kal Rubinson , @Bruno Putzeys, @Floyd Toole , and our beloved @amirm on this..

thay have the knowledge and the experience to make this debate useful for the audiophile community.
my Best
L.

Good point on the trend line but the number of actives at the lower price points are far less and not better than passives.

To wit passives around $500 score as well or better (e.g. elac or studio 530 vs 308s, plus the prices aren't accurate on what can actually buy for).

Roll up the curve and tell me those Neumans are superior to the R3s, certainly not in any home setting where looks matter (something not considered by a preference score at all). Sure the best measuring speaker on that chart is an active. Do should that be all anyone should buy?

Original question was silly. No reason to postulate why do passive speakers even exist anymore lol based on science, education or "learning". People buy based on market preference, and the science argument isn't that strong to begin with.

 

[thewas]

I bet you those good wireless multi-room systems you're talking about are the "tiny exception" relative to the number of people using bad soundbars, Amazon echos, or portable Bluetooth speakers as their main audio solution.

Yes, very good quality Hifi was always a specialised hobby and I doubt this will change in the future, although an Echo Studio or Apple Homepod sound better than most 90s-2000s compact systems they replaced.
Also young people nowadays listen mainly with headphones and smartphones in a quality that we would dream about in our youth so not everything was better in the past.

 

[q3cpma]

Yes, very good quality Hifi was always a specialised hobby

I think we can forget the "very good", people are deliberately going back to
the 60s by using mono speakers. I just can't get it, I even have people in my
family that supposedly care about music doing this and using those mono
lifestyle speakers because it can easily be used with their zombiephone.

 

[laudio]

Yes, I've heard systems with Goldmund and Spectral amps, which purportedly have high S/N ratios but also have very high gain (35 dB for some models), with hiss more noticeable than what I hear from most actives.

A relative of mine formerly had multichannel system with Sony ES processing/amplification (circa 2000) that had significant hiss from the listening position.

The hiss that I'm talking about from active speakers is something that you notice only if you get close to the loudspeaker. For someone with more-sensitive-than-average hearing, such hiss may be remotely audible late at night in a very quiet domestic room.

I have not heard the JBL 3-series monitors. Their hiss may be worse than that to which I am accustomed in active speakers.

Considering all the effort being made to analyze speaker performance and that active speakers that hiss are given kinda a free pass is also silly since it's noise. A class D amp that hisses would be called out I think.

 

[ABall]

Hard to consider this as even anecdotal evidence one way or another when we don't know anything about the speakers. A 30 year old amp could easily be transparent for normal listening, so it's not a big factor. There are also all kind of bias that could be in play for him to prefer the speakers you sold him over the KEFs.

Still not getting the point then, what evidence are you looking for? More to the point why? So the amp isnt a big factor, I didnt say it was, I was sharing an experience. The question was "why do passive speakers still exist" I offered some incite as to why based on basic facts,, the speakers cost me £400 on ebay, the amp probably £60 after parts. Again, the speakers are an MTM design so completely different to his Kefs, as I said, 2 different systems, I am probably going to repeat what others have already said to break it down further. Passives have been around a lot longer and there are many many more variations and choices, there are certainly more variations even if they havnt, I didnt post to start a subjective vs scientific argument but I did think someone would start one, good for you.... I am sure he liked them more because they had very expensive capacitors in the crossover. Or maybe because they had 2x 4" for mids, a ribbon and a 12" bass driver, the answer is still the same, I was leaving that to interpretation, I dont think we need to analyse it, a guy has some active speakers..... He had passive LS50s previous to this, a guy buys some passive speakers that are totally different and thinks they sound better, Ta Dah........ passive speakers still have a place....... Oh and I told him the speakers were way too big for his room before he bought them but he bought them anyway, the Kefs are much more suited to his environment.

 

[ferrellms]

In a world where amazing active speakers / monitors exist, why do passive speakers not only continue to exist but are almost 90% of all speakers sold ( i guess).
What are the benefits of a passive speaker vs an active one?

Cost, ability to interface with already-owned or commonly available gear, prejudice, marketing. No sonic advantages.

 

[A Surfer]

My Meridian M33s are 20 years old and are still working fine.

Are those class D amplifiers used? I am in doubt about the longevity of class D amps. Again, I am not saying I know my position is anything more than a musing not fact. And if the amps in the M33 are actually class D, that may be an exception and as you know the exception does not prove the rule. Perhaps I am as wrong as wrong can be, totally acknowledge that, but I would have to really be confident to be putting down 1o and 15 thousand dollars for main system actives. I actually would be open to it once I was extremely confident in the longevity, but support moving forward is important.