Passive, similar size and linearity alternatives to the Kali LP-UNF ?

[L H]

Title, searching out there for the closest mirror copy to the LP-UNFs that measures almost as well, similar in size but passive instead of active. Does anyone know of any that fit the criteria ?

I know there are plenty of passives that measure just as well and if not better, but when they do they're often way too big (6+ inch woofers) or have deep cabinet sizes, usually over 9" / 24 cm in depth which isn't optimal for my PC desk. For reference the LP-UNFs only is a 4.5" woofer and measures 7.4 Inches (18.6 cm) in depth which just barely hits the mark for me of being optimal.

I don't want to ditch my amp and all it's cleanliness and power for an active formula :/ Though i would replace my mains performance for the LP-UNF's performance in a heartbeat.. So i am torn right now, is there any passive alternatives ? Because i am finding it hard to find one, currently digging through spinorama website.

 

[staticV3]

Neumi Silk 4
Arendal 1961 Bookshelf

are the only ones I can think of.

 

[kharan]

Ascend Acoustics Luna V2 mini-monitors will fit the bill at 6" deep, but you will need a sub.

OFC, there's the Sierra series which is easier to amp and don't need a sub, but they are bigger.

 

[AnalogSteph]

This is a good illustration of the problem (the 1961 Bookshelf has even less bass):

Can you make passive 4" bookshelves with the bass extension of the LP-UNF? I guess so, if you're willing to throw something like some Purifi drivers and accompanying passive radiators at the problem... but then you're out what a pair of LP-UNFs cost for just the drivers of one speaker, and we haven't talked tweeters, crossovers (not cheap in passive) and cabinets yet.

OK, there is something like these with a decently low fs of 53.8 Hz (bulky surround notwithstanding - more something for a sub)... they're suggesting a vented 0.13ft³ (about 3.5 liter) cabinet for a 54 Hz -3 dB cutoff. Given that the LP-UNFs have about twice the external volume, that doesn't seem impossible.

The good thing about going active is that you can beat drivers into shape that would not normally have been a good fit but may have other desirable properties (e.g. higher sensitivity, better electrical linearity), or work with cabinet volumes smaller or larger than ideal. It's the only reason cheap and good subwoofers exist. You would never see passive 3.5" class monitors like iLoud Micros, ADAM D3Vs and their ilk with comparable performance either.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

ascend acoustic luna v2 mini monitor might fit the bill.

-10db for bass looks about 10hz higher than the kali, btw, but a bit smaller in size.

 

[L H]

Neumi Silk 4
Arendal 1961 Bookshelf

Neumi is meh, peaking mid range and dipped treble. I think the Sonys SS-CS5 or Polk XT15 are more exciting purchases even if their linearity is jagged.

Arendal 1961 wow, wasted potential for a port or a passive radiator to finish it's design. Feels incomplete and the value is hurt in my opinion, especially considering the price tag. Those treble dips don't help it either.

The good thing about going active is that you can beat drivers into shape that would not normally have been a good fit but may have other desirable properties (e.g. higher sensitivity, better electrical linearity), or work with cabinet volumes smaller or larger than ideal. It's the only reason cheap and good subwoofers exist. You would never see passive 3.5" class monitors like iLoud Micros, ADAM D3Vs and their ilk with comparable performance either.

I guess so, yeah.

Makes me wish i never bought an amp + passives and instead went with either the Kali LP-UNF or iLoud MTM MKII

Ascend Acoustics Luna V2

ascend acoustic luna v2

Damn, that looks so good.. Annnd unsurprisingly, comes with a crazy high cost.

I'd need an Erin or ASR review before i can start justifying that purchase. Maybe one day.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Neumi is meh, peaking mid range and dipped treble.

Yep. I use them in my office, but with a sub. Given cinder block walls, I do boost 1k, but I cut 4k and 16k (standard eq on my phone). It's a nice speaker, but I don't think it is a good one for general use. At ~1/10th the price of the lunas, fine for me. I'd rather have the lunas, but it's just not worth it to me for an hour or two every morning before people get in.

Damn, that looks so good.. Annnd unsurprisingly, comes with a crazy high cost.

I'd need an Erin or ASR review before i can start justifying that purchase. Maybe one day.

Ascend provides Kipple measures. They are accurate, and I am pretty sure Amir sees little need to review speakers that do that. Erin has reviewed one from them (sierra 1 v2?), and his measures match what Ascend reports. I do have the LXs from them, and they are very nice in every way.

Ascend does have a less expensive option (CBM-170SE BOOKSHELF MONITOR PAIR) for under $400. But the size is a bit big for what you are looking for (12" x 9" x 10"). Rear ported, not front like the Lunas. And a dome for a tweeter.

You really are looking for a unicorn if you limit prices. Bass will be an issue for most that small. But a 4.5" long throw woofer should be an indication that you should look further at a speaker, that's what I would suggest. That's what I would use as my first point of information to build a list of of options. But the size and bass you are looking for makes this a really, really tough challenge for passive.

I looked this one up just on a guess. Maybe the JBL stage 240 b? There's an issue at 1.4k hz, but Erin's review of the 250b (slightly larger) says you can EQ that. The issue seems to exist on the floor stand model he reviews in the same video, so I would guess that the same things exists on the 240. $400 retail, I assume they will go on sale end of November, many things do.

Still might be a bit big for you though.
Height: 10.7"
Width: 6.9"
Depth: 8.5"

 

[GIEGAR]

Title, searching out there for the closest mirror copy to the LP-UNFs that measures almost as well, similar in size but passive instead of active. Does anyone know of any that fit the criteria ?

I know there are plenty of passives that measure just as well and if not better, but when they do they're often way too big (6+ inch woofers) or have deep cabinet sizes, usually over 9" / 24 cm in depth which isn't optimal for my PC desk. For reference the LP-UNFs only is a 4.5" woofer and measures 7.4 Inches (18.6 cm) in depth which just barely hits the mark for me of being optimal.

I don't want to ditch my amp and all it's cleanliness and power for an active formula :/ Though i would replace my mains performance for the LP-UNF's performance in a heartbeat.. So i am torn right now, is there any passive alternatives ? Because i am finding it hard to find one, currently digging through spinorama website.

Nobody will know of any because they don't exist. This is the physics of active speakers; they're more than just the sum of their parts. For a given cabinet size, a passive speaker won't be able to match the combination of LF extension/output that's achievable with an equivalent actively amplified speaker.

Why? Because the active speaker designer has the extra tool of applying variable voltage drive to the woofer to boost/extend it's LF response, in order to support significantly lower tuning. A passive speaker designer cannot lift low frequencies in this manner (at least not without huge inductors and capacitors that wouldn't fit in the cabinet). In conjunction with extending the LF response, the active speaker designer will also cut voltage drive with a steep filter below tuning frequency to reduce unwanted driver excursion and distortion.

In addition, with active speakers baffle step compensation can be addressed by providing boost below the native response hump/rise to flatten out the response. In a passive speaker, the designer doesn't have this option and may only flatten the response by attenuating mid-range output with a large inductor and resistor, thereby sacrificing overall sensitivity.

What all that above (and probably a couple of other aspects I've forgotten) means is that a compact, actively amplified speaker will match - or in fact exceed - the LF extension and output of significantly larger passive speakers. A couple of visual examples to drive it home below.

 

[L H]

You really are looking for a unicorn if you limit prices. Bass will be an issue for most that small. But a 4.5" long throw woofer should be an indication that you should look further at a speaker, that's what I would suggest. That's what I would use as my first point of information to build a list of of options. But the size and bass you are looking for makes this a really, really tough challenge for passive.

Yeah this looks like the reality of it.

Until that unicorn passive comes into play looks like there's no killer options, only sidegrades to what i have at best. (Well unless i decide to burn over a thousand on the Luna V2)

This is the physics of active speakers; they're more than just the sum of their parts.

True true, this i learned to remember in this post. Actives are usually more than just speakers with built in amps, they are tuned with that amp.

My biggest turn off with Actives is two things, they seem to always exhibit strong tweeter hiss / woofer hum and have higher chances of their amps blowing out.
I'v had an active sub blow out on me in the past. And example, one of the most popular studio monitors, Adam T5V when fed AC is a hissing noise nightmare.

 

[AnalogSteph]

My biggest turn off with Actives is two things, they seem to always exhibit strong tweeter hiss / woofer hum and have higher chances of their amps blowing out.

Definitely not always (or ALVVAYS, for that matter ). Neither hiss nor power supply noises are entirely uncommon (and then there's the JBLs where hiss gets a lot worse when there's a ground loop involved), but hiss allergics have been relatively vocal and I feel a majority of newer designs tend to take this problem into consideration as long as they aren't dirt cheap bargain basement affairs like the Swissonics. The v2 Kalis came with a 20+ dB reduction in output noise levels, which took them from "really meh" to "good" overnight. I guess advances in Class D and fully digital amps and the availability of better inexpensive ADCs are helping out as well.

Hiss List (S&R)

Lots of discussion about hiss lately, how perceptible or annoying it is, and if it matters. I've created a sheet with Sound & Recording measurements of hiss in active loudspeakers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n62hGAdKptSSKC74_fIT_R7DxFJ60YR2_O9C8x-vYQI/edit?usp=sharing Viewers can...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Studio monitor speakers without hiss?

Hello, because of the measurements, I bought the JBL 305P Mark II for my desktop. The problem is, that Im very sensitive with noise, but I wanted to give them a chance. At the end I sent them back because of the hiss. 1. What measured speakers are dead silent? 2. Are there some silent ones in...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Hiss concerns were one reason why EVE SC203s became my current office speakers (some issues had to be addressed via PEQ but they're dead quiet), as opposed to say iLoud Micros (some hiss and power supply squealing) or even Genelec 8010As (more sensitive than the princess on the pea, also I wanted a set with easily accessible front volume and power).

I'v had an active sub blow out on me in the past.

Failing DASH amplifiers are almost a meme at this point. They're generally repairable but annoying. Some electrolytics in the lowpass filter are a common failure point but not the only one.

And example, one of the most popular studio monitors, Adam T5V when fed AC is a hissing noise nightmare.

Almost 30 dB SPL(A) @ 10 cm, yeah, that's pretty meh indeed and even worse than the 305s. Weirdly enough the T8V was actually found to be over 4 dB less noisy so given a much larger typical listening distance that one should generally be just fine. 5" models that are commonly thought to be low in noise would be Mackie MR524 (a bit of transformer noise tops) or KRK RP5 G4, no idea about the G5 but no complaints so far either (the bigger G4s were explicitly noted to be noisy though). HSx series Yamahas tend not to be drawing complaints either. With the smaller Genelecs up to 8030C it may be advisable to go with the substantially less sensitive G series counterparts instead, and Neumanns should always be fine or else there's something wrong. Focals can be a bit too sensitive for their own good but some models are first-rate. Dynaudio are a bit stuck in the past but hiss does not appear to be an issue of theirs.

 

[GIEGAR]

...
True true, this i learned to remember in this post. Actives are usually more than just speakers with built in amps, they are tuned with that amp.

Not only that but, thanks mainly to the principle of superposition in audio (the highs 'ride' the lows), an active requires considerably less amp input to produce any given SPL compared to a passive speaker. One can readily contrive a scenario where a 2-way speaker requires a ~450W amp passively hooked up to match it's SPL output when actively bi-amped with only 2 x 50W.

My biggest turn off with Actives is two things, they seem to always exhibit strong tweeter hiss / woofer hum and have higher chances of their amps blowing out.
I'v had an active sub blow out on me in the past. And example, one of the most popular studio monitors, Adam T5V when fed AC is a hissing noise nightmare.

My original point was not to push actives per se, but to encourage you to give up the speaker quest outlined in the thread title. That speaker doesn't exist.

So, your passive options are a considerably larger speaker per the example above, or a similar sized speaker with somewhat reduced LF extension/output capabilities. My suggestion would tend towards the latter and properly integrate (LPF/HPF) a sub later on.

How about these?

The True Mini Monitor (Price per Pair)

philharmonicaudio.com

 

[AnalogSteph]

Not only that but, thanks mainly to the principle of superposition in audio (the highs 'ride' the lows), an active requires considerably less amp input to produce any given SPL compared to a passive speaker. One can readily contrive a scenario where a 2-way speaker requires a ~450W amp passively hooked up to match it's SPL output when actively bi-amped with only 2 x 50W.

Now that seems a bit of a stretch. You generally lose a few dB in a passive crossover (maybe 2-3 typical), but other than that the woofer tends to do most of the heavy lifting. 1x 100 W passive = 50+50 W active, that I could see happening.

 

[GIEGAR]

Now that seems a bit of a stretch. You generally lose a few dB in a passive crossover (maybe 2-3 typical), but other than that the woofer tends to do most of the heavy lifting. 1x 100 W passive = 50+50 W active, that I could see happening.

You're absolutely right Steph, it is a stretch. I should've said 2 x 100W (not 2 x 50W) as I'd not recalled Jim Rush's example on page 8 here properly, where he calculates a 6.5dB advantage to active amplification. Of course: 100W + 6.5dB = 447W.