Active is better sounding than passive

[Tangband]

Here is a comparison between Kef ls50 and ls50 W . The first speaker is a passive one, the other is active with a dsp crossover . Its the same driveunit in both speakers

In my opinion, this is thypically what happens when switching to an active speaker. The sound gets better in every way.

All of you enthusiasts who have the ls50 passive and thinking about upgrading your amplifier - dont do it .

The sound can never be as good as the active ls50 W.
The active approach have advantages that makes the sound much better .

Dont forget to vote .

KEF LS50W vs KEF LS50 - Soundnews

Whoever read my comparative tests with loudspeakers of up to 500 USD and up to 1000 USD, understood too well that good old Sandu hunts a pair of upper-class speakers. At one point, however, this mission had become too tiring. I have taken home many times speakers from different manufacturers and...

soundnews.net

”The LS50W sounded more dynamic and livelier, even more explosive on some tracks, while the LS50 sounded slower and calmer with weaker dynamic rises.

The sound impact suffered the most, the difference was not huge but very noticeable in my case. In most cases, I listen to fast-paced music with fast dynamic rises and for this reason LS50W sounded more impressive.”

Read more about the tecnically advantages of active crossovers here :

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers - what are the factors that make active the only choice for serious hi-fi? Driver control is not well understood, but perhaps this article will help.

sound-au.com

 

[HarmonicTHD]

No, the SQ does not depend on whether a speaker is passive or active.

Whether the two KEFs sound different, I don’t know. Also hard to tell based on that purely subjective review by soundnews.net.

Edit: typo

 

[Tangband]

No, the SQ does not depend on whether a speaker is passive or active.

If the two KEFs sound different, I don’t know. Also hard to tell based on that purely subjective review by soundness.net.

This is wrong - you dont have the facts to back this up . Elliott sound production and Siegfried Linkwitz has shown ( and many others ) there are big sound advantages in the active approach . And they back it up with measurements .

What evidence do you have for your statement ? . Just saying that the SQ is the same with passive and active loudspeakers is not good enough .

 

[Tangband]

Linkwitz about crossovers :

Crossovers

Driver limitations in frequency response and excursion capability that lead to acoustic crossover requirements

www.linkwitzlab.com

”Crossovers may be implemented either as passive RLC networks, as active filters with operational amplifier circuits or with DSP engines and software. The only excuse for passive crossovers is their low cost. Their behavior changes with the signal level dependent dynamics of the drivers. They block the power amplifier from taking maximum control over the voice coil motion. They are a waste of time, if accuracy of reproduction is the goal.

 

[FeddyLost]

If you don't count money, results might be different.
Also with different competence of designers.
Otherwise you are right. Actives are usually better.

 

[maverickronin]

Actives certainly have higher potential overall SQ but that doesn't always mean any particular design will take advantage of it. These paticular Kefs would seem to do that though.

There are also several downside to actives as well with the biggest (IMO) being tweeter hiss and reliability.

Hiss is usually nonexistent with any halfway decent equipment behind passives because the crossover will just eat low level noise. OTOH people lucky enough to have quiet rooms can hear hiss from even expensive active monitors.

The second is reliability. Most speaker manufacturers aren't also electronics manufacturers or software developers (Something a "lifestyle" speaker like the LS50W needs a lot of.) and it shows in their reliability and usability. Passives slowly age, but unless you over drive them, they are usually immune to sudden failure. The AIO nature of most actives also makes them a single point of failure while with passives you can have old or inexpensive backup electronics to swap in in case of failure.

Everybody will have their own personal opinions and risk tolerance but personally I wouldn't spend more than a few hundred dollars per unit on an AIO active speaker that isn't made by a company without a reputation for bulletproof reliability like Genelec or ATC. If it has external electronics I'd be more likely to take a chance on a startup or other newer entrant into the active market since a box of electronics is easier to repair or send back than a medium or large speaker.

FWIW I own both active and passive speakers - JBL 305MKII, Genelec 8010A, and Kef R3.

 

[antennaguru]

I have owned 3 different active loudspeakers that should have become obsolete when their internal amplifiers failed, and replacement plate amplifiers were not available from their top rated manufacturer. These were each around 10 years old when they failed, and would have been destined for the landfill If I didn't personally have the sheet metal working capability to be able to make filler plates on my shear/brake to adapt generic replacement plate amplifiers to fit within the existing cabinet hole after removing the dead OEM unobtainable plate amplifier. Unfortunately the amplifier hole in active loudspeakers is not even close to being standardized, and amplifiers don't generally like being enclosed and shake tested inside a speaker cabinet.

Meanwhile I have several 30 - 40 year old passive loudspeakers that still sound great, and have never had any sort of failure. When an amp fails, and active components will indeed fail, you simply connect another amp to the standardized speaker binding posts while you figure out what you're going to do about the failed amp...

 

[DVDdoug]

Actives certainly have higher potential overall SQ

Right! There are LOTS of variables in speaker design. If you have same exact speaker sold as passive & active I WOULD expect better performance from the active version, if It was done right.

”The LS50W sounded more dynamic and livelier, even more explosive on some tracks, while the LS50 sounded slower and calmer with weaker dynamic rises."

Meaningless "audiophile" words... How about the real characteristics like frequency response, dispersion, output level, distortion, noise from the active amp, etc.?

 

[JSmith]

Dont forget to vote .

But 2 & 3 are in effect the same response to your question.


JSmith

 

[Tom C]

I have owned 3 different active loudspeakers that should have become obsolete when their internal amplifiers failed, and replacement plate amplifiers were not available from their top rated manufacturer. These were each around 10 years old when they failed, and would have been destined for the landfill If I didn't personally have the sheet metal working capability to be able to make filler plates on my shear/brake to adapt generic replacement plate amplifiers to fit within the existing cabinet hole after removing the dead OEM unobtainable plate amplifier. Unfortunately the amplifier hole in active loudspeakers is not even close to being standardized, and amplifiers don't generally like being enclosed and shake tested inside a speaker cabinet.

Meanwhile I have several 30 - 40 year old passive loudspeakers that still sound great, and have never had any sort of failure. When an amp fails, and active components will indeed fail, you simply connect another amp to the standardized speaker binding posts while you figure out what you're going to do about the failed amp...

Wouldn’t it have been simpler to fashion a backplate to cover the hole, bring the speaker leads to terminals mounted on the new plate, and use external crossover and amp?

 

[fpitas]

Active certainly has the edge in potential. In the midst of a passive-crossover capacitor-sound internet fight, I asked if the best, most expensive caps added something good to the sound. Everyone agreed they cannot.

 

[Cote Dazur]

A well positioned passive speaker will always out performed a badly positioned active design, in a larger scheme of things, great sounding music can be had with both design. So no, active is not a solution, just a valid alternative. As for the review, please, the only thing missing in it is the “lifting the veil” comment.

 

[Matias]

I have owned 3 different active loudspeakers that should have become obsolete when their internal amplifiers failed, and replacement plate amplifiers were not available from their top rated manufacturer. These were each around 10 years old when they failed, and would have been destined for the landfill If I didn't personally have the sheet metal working capability to be able to make filler plates on my shear/brake to adapt generic replacement plate amplifiers to fit within the existing cabinet hole after removing the dead OEM unobtainable plate amplifier. Unfortunately the amplifier hole in active loudspeakers is not even close to being standardized, and amplifiers don't generally like being enclosed and shake tested inside a speaker cabinet.

Meanwhile I have several 30 - 40 year old passive loudspeakers that still sound great, and have never had any sort of failure. When an amp fails, and active components will indeed fail, you simply connect another amp to the standardized speaker binding posts while you figure out what you're going to do about the failed amp...

Exactly this. Sometimes it is not only about sound quality, but reliability, service and longevity.

 

[Joe Smith]

Reliability for me is key, as is budget. For that reason, I don't favor actives. I also listen at fairly modest listening levels and passives have always sounded fine to me with minimal to no hiss.

 

[antennaguru]

Wouldn’t it have been simpler to fashion a backplate to cover the hole, bring the speaker leads to terminals mounted on the new plate, and use external crossover and amp?

The points you're missing are why should the customer have to bother with handcrafted solutions, and why didn't the manufacturer continue to support their product beyond 10 years with replacement parts/plate amps? There are a multitude of alternative ways to solve the broken obsolete plate amp issue, and IMO the absolute easiest solution is to NEVER buy an active loudspeaker again - because I don't like being left high and dry and having to come up solutions on my own, with zero customer support from the OEM. I also don't appreciate you belittling the situation with your after-the-fact second guessing solution that doesn't solve the original points. You should feel free to do what you think is most appropriate when your active loudspeaker plate amp craps out - as it will eventually. Just don't belittle or second guess my solution(s) with your too late second guesses, and not expect my wrath in return .

BTW, one of the OEMs was a well known Harman company, and all three products were well up the product ladder for the OEMs.

 

[voodooless]

But 2 & 3 are in effect the same response to your question.

They are not!

I voted “No”, but not because passive sounds better. I voted “No” because it’s a blanket statement, and things depend very much on the implementation. There are good and bad examples to be found of both concepts.

 

[maverickronin]

Meaningless "audiophile" words... How about the real characteristics like frequency response, dispersion, output level, distortion, noise from the active amp, etc.?

My guess is that they cheated the bass extension down further with EQ and a limiter.

 

[fpitas]

My guess is that they cheated the bass extension down further with EQ and a limiter.

You can tune the port down a little also, and use EQ.

 

[fpitas]

They are not!

I voted “No”, but not because passive sounds better. I voted “No” because it’s a blanket statement, and things depend very much on the implementation. There are good and bad examples to be found of both concepts.

Yeah, implementation is everything.

 

[Vacceo]

I have the LS50 wireless II, but not the passive, so I cannot do a side by side comparison. If the active is more capable, that is fue to Kef doing a good implementation, but that is not a guaranteed.

Still, adding room correction to a passive seems more straightforward than an active (except Genelec and now Newman), so in the case of Kef, that is an aspect where the Wireless could improve quite a lot.