Do active speakers for hifi listening (not monitoring/pro use) make sense anymore?

[ckernel8]

I for one will never purchase a separate amplifier again if it can possibly be avoided. (The only caveat is if I end up building a couple subwoofers I'll want to use a commercial rack amp instead of a plate amplifier...unless Hypex has some real good Fusion options by then)

 

[Audio Science Pal]

I'm not considering Genelecs...

These are the ATC SCM40, and these speakers have been on my 'to audition' list for a while.

SCM40 - ATC Loudspeakers

Overview New ATC designed and built 25mm soft dome HF unit with precision alloy wave guide. ATC 164mm bass driver. Massive optimised motor assembly. ATC Soft Dome mid-range driver. Flat impedance curve allowing easy load for amplifiers. Veneered Finish Options - Cherry, Black Ash. Painted Finish...

atc.audio

These are the ATC SCM40A, the active versions of the ones above:

SCM40A - ATC Loudspeakers

3-way, tri-amplified, active, floor standing sealed box loudspeaker featuring hand made drive units and amplifiers

atc.audio

The self powered tri-amped active speakers will have DSP tuning, better crossovers, and reproduce the sound more precisely than the near equivalent passive model.

Check out Genelec 8030c vs 8330.
CJH

Cool. Can you do the same for the ATC speakers?

 

[Ziltoe]

It comes down to using quality components as well as good design. For instance if they have electrolytic capacitors those typically leak after a period of time. They will degrade easier especially if in a warmer environment or without good cooling design. Probably ok for 10 years but better designed capacitors can last 40+ years.

I hear you. Based on my experience, not only with the active Genelec 8020s, which have been in use for over two decades and are still superb. I’m just wondering about the idea that passive speakers last longer, given what you argue. However, I’m not fully with you, but happy to exchange thoughts.

 

[Ellebob]

In theory the electronics should outlast the woofers and tweeters. Usually, in woofers the surrounds start to go. The foam surrounds typically don't last as long as rubber types but even rubber dries out after ~20+ years. Good amps can last a long time. Companies like Bryston that offer 20 years warranty definitely make their amps to last. I wouldn't expect that out of a Monoprice or Emotiva but 10-15 years is reasonable.

We have had many types of speakers and studio monitors where I work. Genelec is not an inexpensive speaker. Even the 8020 when it came out in ~2006 was over $500/pair. When the JBL LSR-305 came out ~12 years ago we have had failures on some of those. Mostly the capacitors going. Of course when they first came out they were $99 each, you can't complain for under $200 a pair. I've seen some other less expensive models die after 7 or 10 years. Again they are very inexpensive.

On the passive side we have had very few just die unless overdriven. I have seen the drivers deteriorate but typically that's over 20 years. I don't see foam surrounds used much anymore but those probably only made it 10 years or so. Sometimes the crossovers stop working. Again usually do the cheap components.

I guess passives just have less that can go wrong. I think both are more than reliable for most situations. If I get 15 years out of a of speaker I'm not complaining. However, on the electronic side like receivers, processors, Etc. I've seen a lot more failures. Even with those, most get replaced because the technology outdated rather than die.

 

[Eddybiker60]

EDIT - are you suggesting that a well designed+implemented active speaker setup should in theory sound better than a passive setup regardless of build and composition?

Well. I don't know. Would a modern active standmount with a 5 inch woofer make a passive design with a 10 inch woofer redudant, given an equally correct listening room?

If you're suggesting modern active design can help overcome some typical physics limitations in speaker design - it's an interesting question and I don't have an answer.

I was responding to the part of your comment regarding speaker types, driver arrangement and composition, etc.

 

[CD2]

I'd argue that the real benefits of a modern, DSP-powered active speaker are impossible to achieve with self-integrated conventional passive speakers, even with upstream DSP. In theory, that is; whether or not you or I would personally enjoy such speakers more or less is another matter.

The kinds of things that Dutch & Dutch, Kii, etc are doing are really moving the game onwards. In my view. Those are systems (not really just speakers, really systems) designed around what you can do with DSP and with our current understanding of audio science. KEF LS60, most of Buchardt's range, Dynaudio's Focus range, SIgberg Audio, Mesanovic, etc -- these are designed around the active concept.

I am sceptical of any speaker that's an "activated" version of a passive. Of course with careful design you can do good things with such a speaker (and user terryforsythe in this thread shows what can be done in that department too.)

None of this says you or I wouldn't enjoy a passive + outboard setup more of course -- because that would take into account many factors not considered in a simplified "active" vs "passive" dichotomy.

For me -- with MY constraints -- full DSP active is the way to go.

Note: none of this says you need to get rid of your existing sources. The ideal system would have high-quality analogue (ADC) as well as digital inputs, so that internal streamers etc need not be used. Those are usually the weakest point in these systems, in my view.

(Aside: we love these kinds of threads here, don't we!)

The Buchardt actives, with the streamer external, seem like a reasonable approach.

As you write, DSP amplification built around specific drivers is a large technical advance, Eash room correction sounds good too. Also way fewer boxes and cables.

 

[Audionaut]

By pairing small drivers with incredibly powerful Class D amplifiers, you can achieve the deep, tight bass of a giant cabinet in a fraction of the size.

It's dangerous nonsense to write something like that, because some people might believe it. If the speaker chassis can't handle the excursion and power handling, they will simply be mechanically destroyed. It's that simple. And before they burn out, they will distort heavily in the range before destruction. Even with high excursion capabilities, a small driver usually has a smaller displacement volume and a smaller voice coil, which results in lower mechanical power handling.
For tricks with the DSP, which the driver is reluctant to follow in a passive crossover, you need very resilient speaker drivers with a large headroom. As a rule, I only work with frequency reductions, not boosts, in active speakers.
If I want to raise and amplify the bass range with DSP, I only use very resilient PA drivers of the highest quality with large displacement volume and high mechanical and electrical resilience.
You can't outsmart physics. If you want high sound pressure and deep tuning at the same time, you need a lot of membrane area and large excursion capabilities. It doesn't matter whether active or passive. Only with active speakers can you interpret the Thiele Small parameters a little more generously.

Sometimes the crossovers stop working. Again usually do the cheap components.

Yes, the safest and best option is to build a passive crossover using only air coils and film capacitors—but that is expensive.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I absolutely see where you're coming from and I love getting rid of big boxes. But I have sources already, and a DAC+preamp, so the only boxes I'd need to reintroduce would be two power amps.

I'm not sure I would agree that this is a valid argument. Most people of course have a complete system already, but a) most people also replace those components from time to time, so you would just be doing that yet again, but now some of them are integrated in one place. And b) not all active speakers require you to get rid of anything but your power amplifier(s). Just plug XLR cables from your preamp into the active speakers and keep everything else.

I see the beauty and obvious technical advantages of having tailored amplification after the crossover in the speakers, but I don't want to spend money on in-speaker connectivity and electronics I won't need (bluetooth, wifi, dsp, etc) and most of the new active speakers seem to me to be lifestyle statements too ('get rid of boxes! get rid of cables! All you need is a phone and these speakers!') which doesn't particularly interest me.

High-end options are starting to appear, our speaker systems are (humbly) one option, others are from the likes of Dutch&Dutch, Kii and more recently Focal and others.

Our designs are explicitly not supersmart, as I would like the customers to not have to worry about updates and future proofing, so I'd rather have streaming etc externally. The speakers would still work 20 years down the road without updates from a technical standpoint, with standard analog and digital inputs from a preamp or source.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Well. I don't know. Would a modern active standmount with a 5 inch woofer make a passive design with a 10 inch woofer redudant, given an equally correct listening room?

No. An active system can typically do some trickery to extend lower in the bass, but not at unlimited listening volumes.

If you're suggesting modern active design can help overcome some typical physics limitations in speaker design - it's an interesting question and I don't have an answer.

A competent active design will have the potential to be better both in bass extension and overall linearity due to the fact that an active crossover design gives the designer more tools to work with than with a traditional passive crossover. It is of course not guaranteed that it is better, you still need a competent speaker designer to execute it. And the you still need a competent physical speaker design and good drivers etc as well, DSP isn't magic.

 

[tokyo_blues]

I'm not sure I would agree that this is a valid argument. Most people of course have a complete system already, but a) most people also replace those components from time to time, so you would just be doing that yet again, but now some of them are integrated in one place. And b) not all active speakers require you to get rid of anything but your power amplifier(s). Just plug XLR cables from your preamp into the active speakers and keep everything else.

Sigberg, thank you for taking the time to replying to my posts - all contributions I've received so far make sense to me, including yours. I would only like to argument further a little on the boldfaced bit above.

As I said in my first post I own, and still rather enjoy, active speakers already so I've been fine with not owning power monoblocks.

However, I'm pretty happy with everything upstream of that, for two reasons: 1) I have a record player + phono preamp, and 2) a headphone based setup. I actually do most of my listening on my headphone setup (Sennheiser HD800) and I've tailored my sources etc around them. Both the CD player, FLAC streamer and the phono preamp go through 'the core' of my system which is a Benchmark preamp. I really want to use one volume control for everything: LPs, CDs, Flacs and just choose between speakers and headphones.

So in my case at least, I'm really happy with my setup, it's giving me a very musical experience with my headphones, and the speakers would be an addition, and perhaps the power amps if I decide to go passive floorstanders instead of active. I wouldn't quite want to shift a larger portion of the signal processing into the speakers because I need to reroute it 'earlier', so to say.

But I can see how, eg. something like a pair of KEF LS60 might be everything one might need if no other needs are present: no existing headphone listening, no records, no preamp, no CD player. If I was starting now and all I had was an iphone and a Tidal account, shifting everything into a pair of modern speakers would make sense - but it doesn't for me.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Sigberg, thank you for taking the time to replying to my posts - all contributions I've received so far make sense to me, including yours. I would only like to argument further a little on the boldfaced bit above.

As I said in my first post I own, and still rather enjoy, active speakers already so I've been fine with not owning power monoblocks.

However, I'm pretty happy with everything upstream of that, for two reasons: 1) I have a record player + phono preamp, and 2) a headphone based setup. I actually do most of my listening on my headphone setup (Sennheiser HD800) and I've tailored my sources etc around them. Both the CD player, FLAC streamer and the phono preamp go through 'the core' of my system which is a Benchmark preamp. I really want to use one volume control for everything: LPs, CDs, Flacs and just choose between speakers and headphones.

So in my case at least, I'm really happy with my setup, it's giving me a very musical experience with my headphones, and the speakers would be an addition, and perhaps the power amps if I decide to go passive floorstanders instead of active. I wouldn't quite want to shift a larger portion of the signal processing into the speakers because I need to reroute it 'earlier', so to say.

But I can see how, eg. something like a pair of KEF LS60 might be everything one might need if no other needs are present: no existing headphone listening, no records, no preamp, no CD player. If I was starting now and all I had was an iphone and a Tidal account, shifting everything into a pair of modern speakers would make sense - but it doesn't for me.

As I said, you can keep all of that gear and still go active.

To use LS60 as an example since you mentioned it, while they do have built-in stuff, they also have RCA in so that you could use your current setup as is. And our systems don't even have any of that built-in, so you'd actually have to keep it (unless you want to simplify and do just an external streamer with volume control or something).

So you can enjoy the benefits of active, and still keep all the gear (including your excellent Benchmark preamp) that you are happy with.

 

[tokyo_blues]

As I said, you can keep all of that gear and still go active.

To use LS60 as an example since you mentioned it, while they do have built-in stuff, they also have RCA in so that you could use your current setup as is. And our systems don't even have any of that built-in, so you'd actually have to keep it (unless you want to simplify and do just an external streamer with volume control or something).

So you can enjoy the benefits of active, and still keep all the gear you are happy with.

Sure - but the KEFs LS60 cost 5500 Euro. How much of that am I paying for electronics and sources I will likely not use for the time being?

Some of that 5500 of course goes into R&D and well matched power amp/crossover/driver design+implementation which I'm onboard with, and I am happy to pay for that - but could I approximate, get close to, the experience I'd get from the LS60 by spending those 5500 on a passive design with -say- a 10 inch unit and two well designed monoblocks? This is the key question I'm trying to figure.

 

[tokyo_blues]

@sigbergaudio your Saranna floorstanders look incredible by the way!

 

[sigbergaudio]

Sure - but the KEFs LS60 cost 5500 Euro. How much of that am I paying for electronics and sources I will likely not use for the time being?

There are probably very different answers to that question depending on the product. I think Kef may have developed their stuff in-house, I have no idea how Kef prices that. At the other end of the scale you have something like for instance Buchardt Audio, they are essentially using OEM amps (including the DSP/bluetooth/etc), so I doubt they have priced in lots of R&D.

Some of that 5500 of course goes into research and well matched power amp/crossover/driver design which I'm onboard with, and I am happy to pay for that - but could I approximate, get close to, the experience I'd get from the LS60 by spending those 5500 on a passive design with -say- a 10 inch unit and two well designed monoblocks? This is the key question I'm trying to figure.

Personally I think there exist pretty competitive active designs out there, but I'm obviously biased.

What pair of speakers + monoblocks would you suggest to purchase for 5500USD to compete with the LS60, to go with that example? Please note that the LS60 doesn't play super loud, so if that is a criteria it's perhaps not a great example. But sound quality wise I'm not sure you'd find lots of good passive alternatives at that price point (when including the price of amps).

 

[KSTR]

I'm not considering Genelecs or other high quality technical-looking monitoring speakers due to low/inexistent WAF.

Have a look a the white Genelecs, and white F-series subs. If those aren't stylish enough I don't know what else would be.

 

[tokyo_blues]

What pair of speakers + monoblocks would you suggest to purchase for 5500USD to compete with the LS60, to go with that example?

No idea. I've been out of the game for years. I've done all my listening on headphones and on my current Dynaudio Focus 110A actives which I've owned for 10+ years. I know nothing of current well measuring passive designs. If someone has recommendations, I'd gladly look into them

 

[Morla]

@tokyo_blues did you mention your listening room size by the way?

 

[tokyo_blues]

Have a look a the white Genelecs, and white F-series subs. If those aren't stylish enough I don't know what else would be.
View attachment 498344

Thanks - they're not floorstanders, and while I think they look good, they don't fit the room so WAF is inexistent. I wish Genelec could partner up with Sonus Faber etc:

or this

or

 

[sigbergaudio]

No idea. I've been out of the game for years. I've done all my listening on headphones and on my current Dynaudio Focus 110A actives which I've owned for 10+ years. I know nothing of current well measuring passive designs. If someone has recommendations, I'd gladly look into them

It goes against my religion to recommend passive designs.

 

[ShadowFiend]

All my speaker until now is active, DIY speaker for main and Neumann KH120A for desktop (and LSR305 before that). But honestly, if I am a customer and prepare to spend more than 1000-4000 euro/usd for a pair of speakers to put in living room, I would prefer to go with passive speaker. Why, because passive speakers are less likely to fail than active speaker, and I would not trust most hifi manufactures, even KEF, to support their active speaker long enough. Manufacturers with pro focus like Neumann, Genelecs, ... are more reliable for this task but to my eyes, they are ugly and very hard to fit as a furniture piece.

Exceptions for me are D&D 8C or even Kii3, but their price are much more steep.