Steve Guttenberg on active speakers

[Sancus]

That's a pretty bold statement. What is the evidence? "Any passive speaker", even a crappy one?

Huh? How is it a bold statement to say that any passive speaker can be improved by making it active? DSP alone will make any speaker, even the worst passive speaker, better compared to itself without the DSP.

The only case where it could possibly make the speaker worse is if the DSP implementation was done without measuring, or intentionally malicious. And obviously these are possible, but you don't evaluate any technology by saying "well what if the designer is an idiot?". All speakers regardless of type need to be measured to confirm that critical mistakes weren't made in the design and manufacturing process.

 

[GrimSurfer]

You started by saying that "the evidence pretty strongly bears out". Again, I ask "what evidence"? And by evidence, I mean something other than anecdotal. Perhaps a scholarly article or one from AES...

Designers can be idiots. Manufacturers can be morons. And testing can be skipped (take a wild guess how many speaker manufacturers own and operate an anechoic chamber) and results falsified. It happens all the time...

We see this with some of the amps, DACs and other devices that Amir tests. Why would it be different for active speakers?

In terms of professional standards, the only thing rivalling the audio industry is the adult entertainment business. Hence my reluctance to accept what consumers are frequently asked to swallow.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Having heard the LS50, I have no idea where the hype for it comes from. Rolled off in the highs, muddy bass, wide imaging but poor soundstage. I think it's a below average speaker especially when you consider its high pricing. I don't know why stereophile raves about it. Imo it's a $200 bookshelf, push it to $400 purely due to its great looks. The Emotiva airmotiv 5 and the Adam Audio monitors stomp all over it (imo).

Hence my use of the term "chattering masses", a group of people who parrot what the industry tells them and frequently get it wrong.

 

[amirm]

Having heard the LS50, I have no idea where the hype for it comes from. Rolled off in the highs, muddy bass, wide imaging but poor soundstage. I think it's a below average speaker especially when you consider its high pricing. I don't know why stereophile raves about it. Imo it's a $200 bookshelf, push it to $400 purely due to its great looks. The Emotiva airmotiv 5 and the Adam Audio monitors stomp all over it (imo).

I have heard the Emotiva speakers at show and they sounded terrible to me. See: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/ces-2017-emotiva.1225/#post-31394

I don't know how you can put them in the same sentence as KEF LS50.

Isn't audio subjectivism wonderful?

 

[GrimSurfer]

I first became suspicious of claims about the LS50s when a few audio reviewers started mentioning them in very second sentence... for weeks in podcasts and online reviews. Frankly, it reminded me of the days of AM/FM radio when DJs would be pressured by labels and ordered by management to increase play on a song.

Now maybe I went into an audition biased, but the LS50s sounded pretty good to me in near field, less so in more open settings. But to attribute the generally good near field performance to the fact it is a powered speaker is an over simplification in the extreme.

Some of KEFs older, larger, and unpowered designs (when properly driven) would crush the LS50 at high SPL and more open settings. This doesn't mean that unpowered speakers are better. The only thing that it means is that differing designs can be good at some things and less so at others... but it is a very individual thing and not the stuff upon which to make sweeping generalizations.

So while the chattering masses have now adopted powered speakers as "the next best thing" in audio, I prefer to look at speakers (and amps, and DACs) on a case by case basis.

 

[svart-hvitt]

The pro audio guys seem to be perfectly happy with their actives. For over 20 years now.

FWIW, Genelec celebrated their 40th anniversary last year. Active from day 1.

40th anniversary book: https://www.genelec.com/sites/default/files/media/About Us/40th_anniversary_book_en.pdf

 

[Daverz]

I don't think it's true that the audiophile press has been resistant to active speakers. The Stereophile review of the old NHT Xd was quite enthusiastic. The reception of the KEF LS50W has also been pretty broadly enthusiastic. Also the Dynaudio active stuff has been well received. The Absolute Sound gave the Elac ARB-51 an enthusiastic review, and I remember an ecstatic TAS review of an Emerald Physics speaker. It's true that pro stuff has not been covered much, but that's a market segment issue.

 

[svart-hvitt]

I don't think it's true that the audiophile press has been resistant to active speakers. The Stereophile review of the old NHT Xd was quite enthusiastic. The reception of the KEF LS50W has also been pretty broadly enthusiastic. I also the Dynaudio active stuff has been well received. The Absolute Sound gave the Elac ARB-51 an enthusiastic review, and I remember an ecstatic TAS review of an Emerald Physics speaker. It's true that pro stuff has not been covered much, but that's a market segment issue.

Even ASR deals 99 percent with separates, predominantly DACs. In that respect, ASR and the press are the same.

 

[MZKM]

I have heard the Emotiva speakers at show and they sounded terrible to me. See: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/ces-2017-emotiva.1225/#post-31394

I don't know how you can put them in the same sentence as KEF LS50.

Isn't audio subjectivism wonderful?

Just their passives or their actives?

The T2 was measured by Stereophile, and for <=$1000/pair, it is pretty good:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/emotiva-audio-airmotiv-t2-loudspeaker-measurements

 

[garbulky]

I have heard the Emotiva speakers at show and they sounded terrible to me. See: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/ces-2017-emotiva.1225/#post-31394

I don't know how you can put them in the same sentence as KEF LS50.

Isn't audio subjectivism wonderful?

Well I believe you heard it sound bad. Surprisingly your description was very close to what I got from the KEF's! I think the t2's are quite amazing and I thought the KEF's didn't even come close! I don't think it was down to preference though. The KEF's simply don't cut it like the T2's can. We compared the T2's to a Sonus Faber Sonetto VIII and though there were differences, they were toe to toe in sound quality. The difference for us was that the low mids had a bit more solidity with the SF Sonetto but the T2 actually extended lower. I reccomend a second look at them if you get the chance. It's one of the best speakers I've heard.

 

[garbulky]

Hence my use of the term "chattering masses", a group of people who parrot what the industry tells them and frequently get it wrong.

Yep. The part time audiophile keeps fawning over these speakers. He's heard some incredible high end units and I don't understand how they could include this speaker among themm.

 

[LTig]

I would never go back to passive. Active DSP Beolabs FTW!

Me too - K&H O300D, Genelec 8020, Mackie HR824, JBL LSR2325, JBL Charge 3 (YES!)

 

[PierreV]

On the LS50 side of thing (disclaimer, I own a pair) they subjectively sound good in my office and objectively measure well.

Subjectively, it's of course a matter of taste, but can say that it isn't ownership bias since I own a dozen pair of other speakers and I could replace them at any time if I didn't subjectively liked them. Now, to be honest, I considered moving the Giya G3 to my office because they subjectively sound much better than the Kef but I decided to try to optimize the whole experience the way @mitchco did by adding a SVS SB16-Ultra. I am quite happy with the result, even if I can't exactly match his response curve.

That being said, I think one has to put things into their context and the LS50 was indeed very impressive when it was released. That does not exclude the possibility that other speakers released later perform as well or better and I understand the constant LS50 hype can be irritating. But at the time they were released, they were definitely impressive.

Now, I believe that one reason people may have a different experience with the LS50 is the amplification used. I can't put a clear reason on that (I am sure there is one and it is above my pay grade) but that must be an issue that has had the attention of KEF engineers since the LS50W sounds even better out of the box (I do not own a pair of those, but a few of my IT ignoramus friends who do requires my assistance now and then do and I have clocked a few dozen hours of music listening on them).

Objectively, they measure well and that's all we objectively need isn't it?

 

[LTig]

FWIW, Genelec celebrated their 40th anniversary last year. Active from day 1.

40th anniversary book: https://www.genelec.com/sites/default/files/media/About Us/40th_anniversary_book_en.pdf

That's a good read. I was so lucky and got a free hardcover at Highend 2019 in Munich

 

[andreasmaaan]

Those here arguing that active speakers are not technically superior, all else equal: What specific evidence would be required to convince you otherwise?

 

[GrimSurfer]

Those here arguing that active speakers are not technically superior, all else equal: What specific evidence would be required to convince you otherwise?

The discussion wasn't on technical superiority but performance.

You can find superbly performing active speakers. You can find superbly performing passive ones. The inclusion of an amp with DSP inside the enclosure isn't relevant because one can find superb component amps with audio correction. If this was otherwise the case, anyone with an Ultimate Ears would claim superior sound over a pair of B&W Nautilus.

So saying active speakers perform better than passive ones is a uselessly broad statement.

On the other hand, suggesting that active speakers are an ideal choice for space critical applications, such as studios where excellent sound, small form factor and near field use are very important considerations would be closer to the mark. This is why they ARE so frequently used the recording industry, though I would caveat this by saying that the recording industry is willing to pay a great deal more for the very best due to the stakes at play.

And, yes, I do understand that there are active towers too. The point is that active, passive are irrelevant unless one looks at performance at a system wide level. Why? Because that's what our ears end up hearing... and apples to oranges comparisons are a waste of time.

 

[LTig]

He states a lot of points which typical highend audiophiles swallow because the don't know it better. Actually the majority of active speakers until a few years back were professional studio monitors:

• They are built to last, and they do last. Microphonics is not a problem.
• Most of them have AB power amps and analog crossovers, except newer models. Of course class D and DSP is the future, and rightly so, as Kii, Grimm Audio, and Neumann (KH80DSP) demonstrate.
• The big producers like Genelec and JBL have their own R&D people for development of speakers, amps and digital audio hard- and software.
• Many producers offer their bigger speakers with external amplifiers, especially those meant for setting up in wall.

However, I can understand the fear of typical highend speaker companies. Without experience in electronics and ditial audio it's very difficult to develop active speakers. Of course they could just develop a new analog line level crossover and use external amps. Linn did this with the Keilidh in the 90ies. This is also the only way to use tube amps. Putting tube amps inside a speaker box will not work because tubes are highly microphonic. But looking at all BS which is sold as audiophile it's maybe better if they continue to sell passive speakers ... and finally go out of market.

I can also understand the fear of the cable industrie - no more loudspeaker cables to sell.

 

[Old Listener]

The allure of active speakers is understandable in this era of simplicity. But simple, to the consumer, isn't the same as optimal from an engineering standpoint.

The reality is that self powered speakers are going to employ Class D amps, for whatever that is worth to people.

Just not true. Do your homework before posting.

These amps will be constrained by their packaging, both in terms of volume and heat.

Do you have any actual experience with good quality active speakers?

DSP will almost certainly be employed, which has positive and negative connotations.

DSP in active speakers has become more common in the last few years but is by no means universal even now. Do your homework before posting.


Steve raises a very good point wrt systems integration... getting the amp manufacturer and the loudspeaker manufacturer to closely collaborate on the overall design. Large manufacturers will likely do this reasonably well for no other reason than having both divisions under their control. High end or audiophile approaches can vary by a huge margin... some may do this out of engineering pride and others may not because they are image (not performance) oriented companies.

At the end of the day, the industry is simply presenting listeners with another option. How this option compares with components is debatable.

"The industry"? The pro-audio industry has been offering active speakers for years. The high-end audio industry has not.

 

[svart-hvitt]

He states a lot of points which typical highend audiophiles swallow because the don't know it better. Actually the majority of active speakers until a few years back were professional studio monitors:

• They are built to last, and they do last. Microphonics is not a problem.
• Most of them have AB power amps and analog crossovers, except newer models. Of course class D and DSP is the future, and rightly so, as Kii, Grimm Audio, and Neumann (KH80DSP) demonstrate.
• The big producers like Genelec and JBL have their own R&D people for development of speakers, amps and digital audio hard- and software.
• Many producers offer their bigger speakers with external amplifiers, especially those meant for setting up in wall.

However, I can understand the fear of typical highend speaker companies. Without experience in electronics and ditial audio it's very difficult to develop active speakers. Of course they could just develop a new analog line level crossover and use external amps. Linn did this with the Keilidh in the 90ies. This is also the only way to use tube amps. Putting tube amps inside a speaker box will not work because tubes are highly microphonic. But looking at all BS which is sold as audiophile it's maybe better if they continue to sell passive speakers ... and finally go out of market.

I can also understand the fear of the cable industrie - no more loudspeaker cables to sell.

FWIW, example of cable used in a SOTA active loudspeaker:

 

[LTig]

The discussion wasn't on technical superiority but performance.

You can find superbly performing active speakers. You can find superbly performing passive ones. The inclusion of an amp with DSP inside the enclosure isn't relevant because one can find superb component amps with audio correction. If this was otherwise the case, anyone with an Ultimate Ears would claim superior sound over a pair of B&W Nautilus.

So saying active speakers perform better than passive ones is a uselessly broad statement.

In my experience active speakers offer more SQ for the money, and this is regardless of the size. And if you want the best SQ possible at all an active speaker must be better than a passive one, because there is no crossover between amplifier and speaker chassis.

On the other hand, suggesting that active speakers are an ideal choice for space critical applications, such as studios where excellent sound, small form factor and near field use are very important considerations would be closer to the mark. This is why they ARE so frequently used the recording industry, though I would caveat this by saying that the recording industry is willing to pay a great deal more for the very best due to the stakes at play.

No, most studios use also very big active speakers for in wall mounting. And I mean really big! The biggest Genelec AFAIK weighs something like 180 kg.