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

[Oddball]

Don't think that active studio monitors are more "punchy" than passive speakers. It can really cut both ways depending on the specific speakers and the system - DSP included.

For example the famous D&D 8c are EUR 15K a pair. For that price you can get a pair of Arendal 1528 monitors for EUR 6.2K. They are called monitors because of the form factor, but each is almost 50kg and quite large, specd to output 115dB. On top of that you can get 2 Arendal 1723 2V subs for another EUR 6.2K. Two of these will be very capable to raise hell in most rooms. For the remaining 2.6K you can get Denon 3800H with full Dirac suite and still have some cash left for miscellaneous stuff. Both systems would probably pack some serious punch. Arendals would for sure go louder and reach lower, and probably punch a bit harder though. With ART, there would be no need to drain Denon to power monitors at significant levels below 100hz, so likely it would work in just 2 speaker setup.

Just an example - choosing different speakers and DSP to compare could lead to opposite results.

I'd actually be interested to hear the above setups and obviously to see the measurements. Like the usual stuff - FQ response, decay, impulse, phase, distortion - to name some of the favorite ones.

 

[robh36062]

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

Why? When the JBL M2 came out it was blind tested against the Revel Salon and lost. So it may be hard but obviously it's possible. It's all in the implementation. As far as tuned for punch why would you? I can EQ a passive and achieve the same result. EQ for a specific target does not answer passive vs active. Let's face it this discussion has been around long before DSP was in the picture.

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

Identical boxes one crossed over active the other passive no amps in boxes.

Rob

Shootout between JBL M2 and Revel Salon 2

A blind listening test was organized and reported on AVS Forum. It ran this weekend and here are the results: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-speakers/2907816-speaker-shootout-two-most-accurate-well-reviewed-speakers-ever-made-12.html#post54628832 There are the details of tracks on the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[john61ct]

Well on another budget scale, Rythmik FM-8 are specifically designed for high SQ punch, MBM bridging the gap in the frequency range I described above.

Now discontinued, but somrtimes they go used for under a grand.

Which is too pricey for me, but they do have sophisticated processing that delivers great Punch, despite being pure analog.

So, not "active" themselves, but well suited to an active System with externally managed DSP at line level.

 

[john61ct]

I don't see anyone advocating for OG passive EQ, even the finest 31-band, over even a $200 DSP investment.

 

[john61ct]

it may be hard but obviously it's possible

Exactly what I said.

> As far as tuned for punch why would you?

Because the system needs it (maybe the room, the content, the listener's preference)

And if so, yes "active" here = DSP

Finally, because that's the OP topic.

 

[robh36062]

Because the system needs it (maybe the room, the content, the listener's preference)

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

​

​

Hello

We are looking at this from different stand points. I see 3 questions are actives more punchy and if so why and is it measurable.

Not that it's his preference needed or what have you. Any system can be EQ for preference active or passive. As I see it that is outside the scope of the discussion.

Rob

 

[BobbyTimmons]

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.

Maybe "punchy" is a confusing term as the audiophile journalists seem to use it in different ways. Some are talking transients, others about bass.

 

[kemmler3D]

Maybe "punchy" is a confusing term as the audiophile journalists seem to use it in different ways. Some are talking transients, others about bass.

My opinion is they're related... if you are in the studio and you want drums or instruments to sound more "punchy", you're going to reach for your compressor / expander / transient processor, you're likely also going to do something with the bass (boost EQ around 60-100hz and/or add harmonic distortion), you MIGHT also cut certain bass frequencies to make it sound a little tighter.

So translating those concepts to a speaker, you would be looking for good bass output as well as transient response. My personal subjective opinion only.

To put it another way, bass where the transient is spread out all over the place (long attack, long decay) is not punchy, regardless of how loud the bass is.

Likewise, sharp transients lacking bass aren't "punchy", they're "snappy". Cymbals are rarely described as 'punchy'.

These terms are confusing enough when they're used in direct, concrete ways to modify a sound, when audiophile writers come into the room all context tends to be lost.

 

[Redacted]

Are transients not measurable for comparisons?

 

[levimax]

I asked Claude AI about "slam" and how to define and measure it and see below what it came up with. I believe this is correct, if not let me know what is not right as I would be interested. Assuming it is correct , slam / punch is mostly a time domaine thing so it makes some sense that active speakers with carefully designed DSP crossovers are generally going to be better than passive designs.