So, why is it that active floor standers are so rare?

[Zek]

... and you also have two cables for each speaker - one for power and one for signal ...

 

[JSmith]

New from the Netherlands ;-)

Wish they'd have used more curved, less boxy looking cabinets...



JSmith

 

[somebodyelse]

More visible.

I still don't follow. Outside the cables (speaker, mains or interconnect) that are designed to be seen, mains and speaker cables are similar sizes, available in a similar range of colours, and can be hidden using similar methods.

 

[Wombat]

I still don't follow. Outside the cables (speaker, mains or interconnect) that are designed to be seen, mains and speaker cables are similar sizes, available in a similar range of colours, and can be hidden using similar methods.

WAF.

 

[buz]

I still don't follow. Outside the cables (speaker, mains or interconnect) that are designed to be seen, mains and speaker cables are similar sizes, available in a similar range of colours, and can be hidden using similar methods.

You need cables to carry power and signal vs one cable carrying both.

 

[Sancus]

This isn't a generic actives vs passives thread, it's about active floorstanders specifically. The cabling derail has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Unless you believe active bookshelves somehow don't require mains cables.

 

[Vincent Kars]

and you also have two cables for each speaker - one for power and one for signal

Have a look at WISA

https://www.wisaassociation.org/member-products/wisa-certified-speakers/

 

[NYfan2]

Have a look at WISA

https://www.wisaassociation.org/member-products/wisa-certified-speakers/

I agree some manufacturers (Buchardt, KADaudio, B&O) use WISA and then you get a very clean setup with only a power cable to the loudspeaker and a WISA source.

 

[Linus]

Linn have been making active speakers for over 20 years, although not powered at first. Crossover before power amp & one amp per driver = nice stack of boxes.

 

[maverickronin]

This isn't a generic actives vs passives thread, it's about active floorstanders specifically. The cabling derail has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Unless you believe active bookshelves somehow don't require mains cables.

Yeah but bookshelf size studio monitors usually sit on desks so the extra power cables aren't just running across the family room floor like they would be with active towers.

 

[Jim Matthews]

I'll venture a SWAG that getting a large floorstander to behave well in most spaces was prohibitively difficult until recent computing advances.

Further more (guessing motives) sufficient amplification running i. An enclosed space was only a recent development.

In this same period, taste in audio furniture changed to smaller boxes.

 

[Thomas savage]

Well a floor standing speaker would suggest more than a passing interest in hifi , in hifi land actives are not desirable.

This is changing with some stand mount options but has yet to seep through to the floor standing customers .

 

[sergeauckland]

I've had floor standing actives since the 1990s, and stand-mount actives before that. I just don't see the problem. Whether one cable or two, so what? They can be run together so hardly more intrusive.

As to reliability, again. never had a problem, in any event, older actives were easy to repair, I accept modern DSP-based actives with everything surface-mounted and DSP controlled would be more difficult, but then so are any modern separates.

One way of avoiding the problem of all-in-one box is the Linn and my current approach of the loudspeaker box being entirely passive, and the electronics in a separate rack. A few more boxes, but again, so what.

WAF is in the mind of the beholder. For some people, any loudspeaker is an intrusion.

S.

 

[q3cpma]

It is totally right and correct that consumers are wary of active speakers.

If one buys an active speaker, one is stuck with the amplifier that comes with the speaker. The consumer has no say whatsoever regarding the specific characteristics of the amplifier, especially those characteristics regarding longevity. If something goes wrong within a reasonably short period of time, warranty will take care of it, although the consumer will be discommoded. But as years go on, costs of repair rise. Not only that, but the company may cease support of the amp section. MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE has been that an unacceptably large percentage of amp sections in active speakers have been unreliable. If there is someone who has had absolutely no bad experience with active speakers, what is that to me? I judge on my experience, not someone else's.

That's like buying Fifty Shades of Grey and saying "books sure are retarded, I'm never reading another!". Did your experience include brands like Genelec?

If a consumer buys a speaker and separate amp, a replacement can be purchased the same day as the piece malfunctions IF NECESSARY.

Obviously an advantage, but not weighted by the probability of said failure. Using it as the ultimate decider doesn't really make sense, when we're talking about already vanishingly low numbers. Reminds me of people buying 4x4 cars "just in case".

Not only that, but even if there is no malfunction, upgrades can be made judiciously based on market advances and tech improvements.

Amplifiers don't "improve" unless you started with something utterly bad or don't have enough power.

Consumers in general want reliability and practicality.

Most people buying ****** bluetooth speakers don't speak in favour of your magical statistic.

All of this without mentioning the advanced driver protections that most active speakers sport? Or that most amplifiers being stereo, you'll have to buy a whole one even if only one channel fails? Or the advantages (in term of reliability) of having a benign load and lowered consumption for the internal amplifiers compared to passive crossovers? I do smell some bias, even if the general argument that you can't just pop a replacement amplifier in if one of your active speaker dies certainly can't be denied.

 

[MattHooper]

I'm probably part of the "problem" for sales of active speakers to consumers. Yeah, I'm one of those audiophiles who prefers passive for one thing because I like to be able to choose my amplification (I like tube amps). For another, the vast majority of active speakers I see are unsightly looking to me, just not designed with a consumer in mind. At least as the marketplace is now, for me there are vastly bigger selection of attractive-looking passive speakers, of intriguing design, than active.

Another is the added cabling, especially the power cables, necessity of having AC power outlets nearby (and if you don't, now you are adding extension cables...yuck!).

I have a couple of subwoofers that I'm considering selling and part of the reason is the added hassle and aesthetic displeasure. The need for cables to AC outlets in particular (I really prefer as neat and clean a look as possible, with less gear and cables).

Also, I have auditioned some powered speakers, e.g. Kii Audio Three, and they were good but didn't really grab me.

 

[AnalogSteph]

I can't think of any practical reason to not do so other than audiophiles being oddly wary of anything active.

You can probably blame the rising audiophool press of the early 1980s for active speakers not catching on. Active hi-fi loudspeakers go back all the way to at least the early 1970s (e.g. Braun LV720) and had gotten somewhat common around 1980. Arguably the most mass-market company to promote active speaker systems by that time was Grundig, with quite a range of preamps and preceivers to match. You can find active speakers from at least 4 big West German manufacturers of the time (Braun, Canton, Heco and Grundig), and they were not alone in Europe either (e.g. the now-legendary Philips MFB speakers employing motional feedback).

It's a pity that all this kind of fizzled out just before higher integration levels would have made going active a more attractive proposition (by the mid-'80s, the choice among opamp ICs would have been much improved, and by the early '90s there would have been more attractive power amp ICs). Having two cables to contend with is a nuisance in a home environment, that's correct... and mains cables traditionally are either black, white or brown and not too decorative, not to mention having to find a nearby outlet. It is much easier to make active work at a PC or mixing desk or when the looks side of things doesn't matter as much, that's for sure.

 

[MarkS]

You can probably blame the rising audiophool press of the early 1980s for active speakers not catching on.

I'm not sure that's fair. Audiophiles of all stripes like to have control over the components of their systems. For example, many people here seem to like to buy components with better measurements even if they believe that poorer-measuring products will sound the same.

In the 90s Paradigm made an active version of the Studio 20 bookshelf that was well reviewed by the audiophile press (e.g. https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/597), but I don't think it sold well despite that.

 

[richard12511]

Meridian are another counter example - they've been making active speakers with DSP and digital inputs for years, and usually have a floorstander in the lineup.

Goldmund too. I also would consider the Grimm speakers with subwoofer module as floorstanders(you don't need stands).

 

[richard12511]

More visible.

Still less visible than external amplifiers, though .

Though I think some audiophiles enjoy looking at their amplifiers . Looking and imagining that they're somehow "improving" the sound quality of the system .

All things considered, actives win the aesthetic war for the general population(who don't enjoy having giant metal boxes in their living room).

 

[NTK]

B&W's almost 30 years old flagship.