I had never owned a failed active speaker over longer time. Usually if there is some kind of defect it's shows up immediately (distortion or weird side noises) but i'm also never used a single speaker pair for more than 5 years so can not tell more than that.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Are studio monitors a better buy than passive hifi speakers?
- Thread starter olds1959special
- Start date
Agreed it's really only a consideration. For me personally I have lots of amplifiers but no spare active speakers.
I can't recall ever having a passive speaker fail on me. Amplifiers, yes, but only twice in forty years.
Ultrasonic
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Think I've had 3 or 4 driver issues over about the last 30 years but the only amp issue I can remember is one of two channels failing on a stereo power amp. I still have it in a box somewhere but this was years ago!
This isn't why but I currently have two spare pairs of passive speakers but no spare power amps. Think I have a very old integrated amp somewhere too but I've not tried it in years so maybe it's broken without me realising at this point!
Some years back I went through a phase of buying equipment I wanted as a teenager but could not afford, so I have lots of everything. Given my age now the well is unlikely to run dry in my remaining lifetime
RexrothPigeon
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2025
- Messages
- 867
- Likes
- 1,710
That argument may hold if you buy only one pair of loudspeakers and never intend to make an upgrade. But when reading the last couple of pages of this thread, people who are on their third or fourth pair of active speakers have obviously paid for their internal amplification every time they decided to upgrade their active speakers, while someone upgrading their passive speakers may use their existing amplifier for all of them. And besides that, internal amplification also seems to have a shorter lifespan, on average, than most external amplifiers.
This isn't me arguing for or against passive or active loudspeakers, as I don't really have a preference. I just want to point out what some people seem to miss when saying that money will be saved when not needing external amps and speaker wires, as those are hardly things you have to upgrade every time you decide to upgrade your passive loudspeakers.
Well, if part of your car breaks, you can't drive anywhere while it's being repaired. Meanwhile, if my horse gets sick I just yoke up another one to my buggy and keep rollin along. Fools and their "automobiles" haha, flash in the pan trend that just won't last, simply not practical. Horses and buggiez 4 evar!
And if a wheel comes off your buggy you can just ride the horse until it's fixed! I'm sold, take my money!
OP
olds1959special
Major Contributor
- Thread Starter
- #307
I've never had a studio monitor fail. They are designed to be left on and used daily, since they are professional tools. The built-in amps are optimized for the speakers they are built into, so designed not to overheat and fail. I've had separate amps die though, (possibly due to mismatching them with speakers.)
Can you (without some strange metaphors) explain to me what the things you just wrote have to do with what I wrote? It seems like you are stuck in another conversation, which you may have had with other people in the thread.
I have not even said anything about things breaking, which may or may not be hard to replace in an easy or not an easy way. I was just shooting down the idea that going active is necessarily the cheaper way to go, as that depends on how many active speakers you buy over time, versus how long time you may keep your external amplifier for the same number of passive speakers you may buy.
All this will be different for different people, so the whole discussion doesn't have a clear answer. It all depends on so many different factors, which will hardly be the same for everyone. That's why you will never see me argue about passive vs active loudspeakers.
It's more of a 'what if it does? than a 'when it does', that is true, but we can agree that the failure rate for professional active monitors is not zero.
Waxx
Major Contributor
Fora like diyaudio and others are full of helpcalls for failed active speakers, so claiming they don't fail is lying. But brands like Genelec and Neumann and other much used in pro studio's have often a long lasting support service (which is an sale argument for pro studio's) where parts are often availeble to over 20 years. The cheaper brands don't have that, and often are not repairable when the amp fails. It's also a fact that a plate amp suffers a lot from the vibrations and air pressure inside the speaker, and so fails a lot faster (in general) than external amplifiers. So from technical point of view it's not that good to have build in amps, but practical and economical reasons are often more important for the brands than that.
But if that is not an issue for you, they are a good choice. I prefer to have external amps, even when using active crossovers (be it dsp or analog). Others prefer passive systems (i also in some cases) The choice is yours, and your case is probally different from another person. There is no absolute truth in this, it's a matter of choices, what is more important to you.
But if that is not an issue for you, they are a good choice. I prefer to have external amps, even when using active crossovers (be it dsp or analog). Others prefer passive systems (i also in some cases) The choice is yours, and your case is probally different from another person. There is no absolute truth in this, it's a matter of choices, what is more important to you.
OP
olds1959special
Major Contributor
- Thread Starter
- #311
But how loud do you have to listen for vibrations and air pressure to be an issue for the longevity of a built-in class D amp? Wouldn't this be more of an issue for subwoofers maybe?
Just my personal observation, I've been using 5 Dynaudio studio monitors plus Dynaudio sub (among other active speakers) for 12+ years with no issues. In my experience, when I've had my gear fail or give me problems, it's been with various external amps.
My Rotel amp died. My SMSL amp died. My Kenwood amp needed repair. My tube amps needed work when I used them. But every single one of my studio monitors has worked perfectly without incident over the years. I've used Yamaha, Dynaudio, Focal, JBL, Genelec, Presonus, and KRK. I did avoid buying Adam monitors though after I encountered a used one that was buzzing.
I've also had experience with active stage monitors like QSC and Alto being reliable.
Last edited:
Svend P
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Sample of one. Others are not that lucky
Aging Dynaudio AIR-15 DSP Speakers and repetitive repairs: Convert to external active or buy new L-C-R's?
I have a many-years standing quandary. I have a L-C-R set of older Dynaudio AIR-15's (Active 8"/1" - internal TC-Electronics 96k DSP and 200w x2 B&O Amp Modules). These have required multiple repairs as the PSU section ends up failing in such a way that fries the DSP section; or the output...
www.audiosciencereview.com
ivayvr
Active Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2021
- Messages
- 291
- Likes
- 345
In many instances, you get the amp for free. Comparable Dynaudio bookshelf speakers and studio monitors cost less than the passive (Hi-Fi) speakers.
Same applies to some of the Focal active VS passive bookshelf sized speakers.
So it is not that whenever you buy a new pair of actives you buy a new amp.
Same applies to some of the Focal active VS passive bookshelf sized speakers.
So it is not that whenever you buy a new pair of actives you buy a new amp.
RexrothPigeon
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2025
- Messages
- 867
- Likes
- 1,710
Yes, and the amp gets more out of the speakers because they're engineered together:
Active Speakers—The Second Wave, by Bruno Putzeys, Part 1 of 2
What can active speakers do that passive ones can’t? Impulse response, impulse response, impulse response, says Bruno Putzeys. That, and their sheer practicality, makes them the wave of the future.
pmamagazine.org
Active Speakers—The Second Wave, by Bruno Putzeys, Part 2 of 2
Bruno Putzeys concludes his two-part series that explains why active speakers are inherently better than passive ones.
pmamagazine.org
Most of the ones I'm looking at are fully wireless. Power cable and that's it. Way fewer boxes!
Splitting the audio per driver has two advantages: the sum of power of the splitted amp can play at higher levels than a single amp of the same power. Also the direct coupling of the amp without the resistance of the xover and long speaker cables is an advantage.
Last edited:
dtaylo1066
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2019
- Messages
- 906
- Likes
- 1,246
The Buchardt are quite fine and well engineered. The KEF LS 60 is a very good speaker. I would love to have either. I almost nabbed a pair of the KEFs on sale but my wife would have pooped her pants over it. So I got the little KEF LSX II LT instead for $499. I think Costco still have them on deal.
I no longer use Bryston pre and power amps or Dynaudio speakers. I've had a pair of Adam Audios for 10 years and I will never go back to passive speakers and traditional hi-fi.
My 200€ DAC has XLR outputs.
XLR–XLR and XLR–TRS cables cost very little and you can find them in any musical instrument shop or on Amazon.
This is true in theory. But I question the practical value of such increased efficiency when you can have 2x250W of clean power for under 400€.
On top of that, the bottleneck for efficiency in domestic systems is almost always the efficiency of the woofer/bass section, if you have that adapted for your listening needs, there are basically no cases where the midrange and the tweeter need sufficiently more power to require separate amplification.
Similar threads
