Are active speakers the future? (YouTube series)

[sigbergaudio]

No, he doesn't say that. He says "vinyl can" "[penetrate] the soul".

You do make a good point, though: If you change his words into other words they may sound less fetishistic.

I got the impression that the man is very articulate and chooses his words with intention, so I'll take him at his own words rather than attempting an English-to-English translation.

I also think he chooses his words with intention, which is one of the other reasons I reacted to your first comment where you also wrote "unexceptionable", which I think is downplaying it a bit because I suspect a lot of work goes into the videos. But you are free to disregard both him and his content due to whatever reason you want of course.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I reacted to your first comment where you also wrote "unexceptionable", which I think is downplaying it a bit because I suspect a lot of work goes into the videos.

Unexceptionable means "satisfactory, faultless, or not open to criticism or objection" (I suspect you may have misinterpreted it as "unexceptional")

 

[Mort]

It's not the worst example or anything. The content is good.

I get that a you tube content maker would want to be welcoming to both the objectivist and subjectivist perspective to be more eyeball friendly.

In that sense I appreciate the subjectivist restraint.

 

[Woofersnoofer]

My actives have been my future for the past 8 years, no reliability issues or anything. Curious about some of the newer ones with dsp and waveguides like the KH120-II or KH150. I like the concept of Ma-1 as well though i wish they'd allow setting a hpf inside it as well.
Right now i use dirac but it's a love hate affair. Sometimes it just shifts the image to the left of right after a calibration, even though i was very precise in my 1st measurement point.

 

[kharan]

Yup, I own one.

But having tried tube preamplifiers with solid state power amplification, I find it most of the “tube sound” that I like tends to come from tube power amps.

I was going to say that stepping down the voltage of power amp or running one with a unitary gain would do the trick, but that's too much of a hassle and doesn't replicate the distortion of tubes into real speakers.

 

[MattHooper]

I was going to say that stepping down the voltage of power amp or running one with a unitary gain would do the trick, but that's too much of a hassle and doesn't replicate the distortion of tubes into real speakers.

Plus for me it would take the charm, fun and aesthetics out of the equation.

 

[VTKZ]

Without watching the video...

Active speakers have some potential performance advantages. (But they probably won't last forever like my antique passive speakers,)

I see a couple of issues:

Tradition - Stereo and home theater speakers are passive. (Except for the sub.) If you go into an audio/video store, that's what you'll find (mostly). It's a chicken-and-egg thing. Receivers and AVRs have amplifiers (and sometimes pre-amp outputs) and to be economical the amplifiers would have to be left-out. Ane the way marketing works, the first receivers/AVRs without amplifiers would probably cost more than an average one, at least at first before the mass-market adapts.

AC Power - Running speaker wires for 5 or more home theaters can already be difficult and plugging them into power would usually get "messy":

Thats not realy ture, a lot of People use Actives in Home Theatre with an Trinnov / Storm Audio for example as Processor where the Crossover etc is set up. Many people here build Active Home Theatres with DIY Cabinets etc. Btw when we talk about Home Theatre, i dont mean the cheap 5.1 Klipsch in the Living room, i mean dedicated Rooms, Treated, Single or Double Bass Arrays, DSP, Dirac Art etc... Nearly no one here with an good Hometheatre Scene use Actives Premade Subs with mounted Plate Amps. Its all sourced out, mostly DIY Subwoofer Arrays (ScanSpeak, Dayton etc)... And than PA Amplifier. I dont know where you from but when i compare the Cinemas here in Germany with the ,,High End,, Cinemas from the US - Theyre here on a complete different level, more technical, better treated and designed. Never saw one US cinema that is so detailed and technical with the Gear, Acoustic, DSP Setup, Concept etc.. but thats just my view.

And that Actives die is also an Myth. Its funny to hear that all from Passive Users, who never heard many years with Actives. They're just repeating what others have said at some point... I personally use Actives over 10 years, i'm in various forums and i've maybe just a handful of People who have issues... Thats a myth or from people who buy cheap active 200$€ Speakers. And btw there is Product support where you can replace the Amps or Electronic like any normal Amplifier Manufacture ;-) Also imo hifi stores arent the best example for High Quality Gear. They sell what People buy, and not what sounds better.

 

[john61ct]

Just a noob definition question.

In the old days, an "active speaker" only needed the power amp included to be called that.

I realize that recent releases often (always?) include DSP functionality

but is that now essential to the term, part of the definition?

Of course in the speaker DIY design and DSP-discussion universe, the association is strong with designs where every driver gets its own amp, crossovers are done at line level

but setting that aside, please help me understand the plain-English definition among those that may never even heard of crossovers, bi- and tri-amping, or even DSP...

 

[Mort]

Just a noob definition question.

Here are some useful quotes from another thread about self-noise in which Amirm uses the term 'Active Speaker System' to describe a monitor with an amp per driver and DSP crossovers before the amp. I think that's the most common usage now.

Does that mean that if active monitors are described as having two amplifiers - one for the LF driver and one for the HF driver - they are more likely to have higher self-noise (because the crossover is placed before the amplifiers)?

Only indirectly in that it means it has an active crossover before the amps. Otherwise it wouldn't need more than one amp.

The ones with one amp do indicate the classic crossover on the output of the amp meaning you just get convenience of a built-in amp, not the benefits of an active speaker system.

only needed the power amp included to be called that.

This would be a 'built-in' amp.

 

[Chrispy]

Just a noob definition question.

In the old days, an "active speaker" only needed the power amp included to be called that.

I realize that recent releases often (always?) include DSP functionality

but is that now essential to the term, part of the definition?

Of course in the speaker DIY design and DSP-discussion universe, the association is strong with designs where every driver gets its own amp, crossovers are done at line level

but setting that aside, please help me understand the plain-English definition among those that may never even heard of crossovers, bi- and tri-amping, or even DSP...

Active is still used to describe a powered speaker often enough, but I think that multiple amps/electronic crossovers are a better definition for active rather than simply powered....kinda like studio monitors were sometimes passive, not always active altho they are much more often active now.

 

[Shrek6]

But having tried tube preamplifiers with solid state power amplification, I find it most of the “tube sound” that I like tends to come from tube power amps.

guitarists often say the same thing

 

[john61ct]

Lots of systems have line-level crossovers before the amps, multiple power channels (maybe combined in one external box) feeding (what I would call) passive speakers.

To me, when talking about crossovers specifically, "passive" is clearly distinct to even analog electronics - no power source, no gain involved - in fact may reduce power

but all of these above can be line level, come before the power amplification stage.

Does this newer definition of "active speakers" require DSP to be involved?

 

[Chrispy]

Lots of systems have line-level crossovers before the amps, multiple power channels (maybe combined in one external box) feeding (what I would call) passive speakers.

To me, when talking about crossovers specifically, "passive" is clearly distinct to even analog electronics - no power source, no gain involved in fact may reduce power

but all of these above can be line level, come before the power amplification stage.

Does this newer definition of "active speakers" require DSP to be involved?

To me at least, those are still active speakers....no passive crossover (unless still using passive crossovers for some reason).

 

[john61ct]

To me at least, those are still active speakers....no passive crossover (unless still using passive crossovers for some reason).

Sorry do not know which referent example you mean for "those". Maybe just give your definition?

within the specified context

> in the speaker DIY design and DSP-discussion universe, the association is strong with designs where every driver gets its own amp, crossovers are done at line level

> but setting that aside, please help me understand the plain-English definition among those that may have never even heard of crossovers, bi- and tri-amping, or even DSP...

 

[Chrispy]

Sorry do not know which referent example you mean for "those". Maybe just give your definition?

within the specified context

> in the speaker DIY design and DSP-discussion universe, the association is strong with designs where every driver gets its own amp, crossovers are done at line level

> but setting that aside, please help me understand the plain-English definition among those that may have never even heard of crossovers, bi- and tri-amping, or even DSP...

Referring to your example of an actively crossed speaker not in a plate amp.

 

[john61ct]

OK, so now, "actively crossed"

Any active crossover used (analog or digital?)

Or is "each driver separately amped" inherently implied?

For example, I plan to ADD bass management to a passive multi-driver front pair

Some of the subs may be "active speakers" but only in the OG sense, not using built-in DSP.

If I do use DSP, it will be across multiple channels, separate from any individual speakers, both component types can be swapped out independently of each other.

 

[Chrispy]

OK, so now, "actively crossed"

Any active crossover used (analog or digital?)

Or is "each driver separately amped" inherently implied?

For example, I plan to ADD bass management to a passive multi-driver front pair

Some of the subs may be "active speakers" but only in the OG sense, not using built-in DSP.

If I do use DSP, it will be across multiple channels, separate from any individual speakers, both component types can be swapped out independently of each other.

Active crossover would be digital afaic. Passive would be analog. If adding a sub to a speaker most likely that's an active crossover these days (hopefully).

 

[john61ct]

Active analog, for me, unless it turns out I really need DSP on those channels anyway. In which case I may need to skimp on groceries for many months.

 

[Chrispy]

Active analog, for me, unless it turns out I really need DSP on those channels anyway. In which case I may need to skimp on groceries for many months.

What analog crossovers (externally) do you use?

 

[Mort]

Active analog, for me, unless it turns out I really need DSP on those channels anyway. In which case I may need to skimp on groceries for many months.

I'm confused by the terms. Does Analog mean passive? You are putting capacitors and resistors and stuff before the amp, so it's an 'active design' with passive components?