Subjectively active studio monitors are sometimes described as more "punchy" than passive speakers. If true what could be the explanation/measurement

[BobbyTimmons]

Subjectively active speakers are often described as more "punchy" (feel free to substitute a better adjective) than passives. This is from sighted listening so might be no more than evidence of the power of suggestion. For the sake of argument though do you think this could have any basis in reality and if so what could be explanation and where would we see this in the measurements.

 

[robh36062]

Depends on the active speaker. Are you talking desktop like a JBL M308 Mk2 or a full up large format system with sub's 15' mid woofers midrange and a large format CD on a waveguide? It's a very broad term with lots of nuance.

Rob

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I'm not sure how this could be ascertained or even investigated without some consensus definition of punchy (or is there one I'm unaware of?)

 

[robh36062]

definition of punchy

Substitute "Dynamic" OP?

Rob

 

[BobbyTimmons]

I'm not sure how this could be ascertained or even investigated without some consensus definition of punchy (or is there one I'm unaware of?)

It's a common adjective in hi-fi reviews but like most such terms it has no real consensus definition. I think it's better to leave it as a certain "je ne sais quoi".

 

[DWPress]

A lot of active speakers have baked in DSP to prevent distortion, over excursion etc to make them useful in a certain bandwidth with maybe a hit to SPL as a result. As observed - what kind of active are we talking about?

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Substitute "Dynamic" OP?

Rob

well that can be easily measured

 

[kemmler3D]

Personally when I hear "punchy" I think of strong-sounding transients / impulses.

As far as that goes, I think active speakers could (all else held equal) do better in terms of time alignment / phase correction, and they might also be able to get more bass out of a given set of drivers vs. using a passive crossover. A tight impulse with more bass should sound more "punchy" than otherwise.

So, if there is anything to this anecdotal trend of subjective reviews, I'd start there looking for the basis of it.

 

[Redacted]

They're almost always class D with bags of power. Often with built-in active XO.

But you'd have to do blind A-B testing to determine which are "punchy" or "dynamic" and ideally have a means of quantifying what that means.

 

[john61ct]

Since you likely mean "DSP" when you talk about "active systems"

to me it's mostly due to that, so many systems with passive speakers may not be properly tuned with DSP

To me, punch means (a high SQ +) SPL below say, 300-500Hz "midrange"? down to midbass maybe lower, where people usually start mono'ing trueSubs

In pro circles they talk about MBM reinforcement (Couplers) or even dedicated boxes, kickbass, chest punch.

Obviously this is exactly the frequency range of the Schröder transition, where room effects dominate.

Exactly where well deployed DSP can have the most impact whether used for bass management / crossovers or for EQ / overall DRC.

 

[Ellebob]

Let's look advantages of active design. Powering the drivers directly and individually should result in better damping or driver control by the amps. How audible it is the question. Active should have less distortion. Because of more precise crossover and steeper slopes for speaker protection actives will often play to lower frequencies then their passive equivalent. If you compare the typical bookshelf with say a 6" woofer and a tweeter, the active version usually plays 10-20hz lower in frequency then the passive version. This is audible and might be called more 'punchy'.

 

[Sokel]

They're almost always class D with bags of power. Often with built-in active XO.

But you'd have to do blind A-B testing to determine which are "punchy" or "dynamic" and ideally have a means of quantifying what that means.

This kind of test must not only be blind but deaf a well.
The only one of the sensory modalities allowed must be touch

 

[Sokel]

Let's look advantages of active design. Powering the drivers directly and individually should result in better damping or driver control by the amps. How audible it is the question. Active should have less distortion. Because of more precise crossover and steeper slopes for speaker protection actives will often play to lower frequencies then their passive equivalent. If you compare the typical bookshelf with say a 6" woofer and a tweeter, the active version usually plays 10-20hz lower in frequency then the passive version. This is audible and might be called more 'punchy'.

It depends of the punch.

Gut-punch and rumble is low, agree with that.
Chest-punch is much higher though, if both can do good 40'-50's for example difference would not be about low extension for chest punch, only sheer power, motor strength, etc. (for equal size boxes) .

 

[LTig]

Many studio monitors use internal EQ to extend the low frequency response, albeit at a loss of max SPL (which in near field is not a real problem). This could be felt as more punch.

 

[JiiPee]

I think dedicated amplifiers and DSP-based crossovers give significant advantage in bookshelf/stand mount sized speakers. When it comes to big well-designed tower speakers, the advantage will be smaller, simply because they can achieve very high capability even with passive architecture. Of course, if we are talking about active speakers with built-in room correction, an external DSP system with similar capability must be assumed as part of the passive set-up to make comparison reasonable.

 

[robh36062]

To do a fair comparison you would have to build one active and one passive everything else identical. No EQ same power available to both systems. Same cabinets, frequency response, system directivity all of it.

Then compare.

Rob

 

[john61ct]

But the point of "DSP gives more punch" is the fact that the DSP is adjusted to do so.

And really the whole point of active vs passive, is your options with the latter are more complicated and likely more expensive

What's "fair" got to do with anything?

 

[JohnnyNG]

To me, punch means (a high SQ +) SPL below say, 300-500Hz "midrange"? down to midbass maybe lower, where people usually start mono'ing trueSubs

In pro circles they talk about MBM reinforcement (Couplers) or even dedicated boxes, kickbass, chest punch.

Yup. It rarely refers to infrasonic rumble or "dynamics" in general.

 

[robh36062]

What's "fair" got to do with anything?

Well do you want to find out if there is any merit to "active" being more dynamic? If that is the case you need two identical systems one active one passive. Comparing different systems as in "apples and oranges" is going to be fruitless!

Rob

 

[john61ct]

It would be very hard to create a passive (no DSP) system that is not blown away by one with DSP tuned for punch.

If you just mean the amp included in speaker box, then sure no difference.

If you mean a full active DSP system powering passive speakers, sure no difference.

IMO the OP is asking about the first context.