What is even the point of passive crossovers in 2021?

[antcollinet]

Let us just answer a simple question: how to get Dirac with multiple speakers using active crossovers?

In the case of passive crossover the answer is so simple: a Onkyo TX RZ50 and a 5.1 (or more) speaker pack.
Why to chose a complicated and expensive solution?

Similar with Direc stereo.

MiniDSP DDRC24 for $450 together with standard (probably existing) stereo amp and passively crossed speakers.

Can also be upgraded (or is that just changed?) later to active crossover by adding 2 channels of amplfication.

 

[Lambda]

Well if you look at modern properly engineered ant integrated products the have active crossover.
But the HiFi world is slow an traditional..

Look at some "smart" wifi based speaker systems they all use DSP as well as modern PA systems.

In the Hifi world many speaker manufactures are just wood working shops buying of the shelf components, they don’t have the resources to engineered something new from ground up an make there own DSP + class d amplifier board.

 

[Frgirard]

A mountain of prejudice.

Focal is on the passive market and the active market.

Design a speaker today active or passive is not hard.
The most hard is to penetrate the market.

 

[Jdunk54nl]

The discussion was about comparing the mini dsp for active crossover. Presumably active speakers would have the crossover/dsp built in - but not Direc Live? But then you have the problem of multi speaker power cabling. Plus comparing new cost of one piece of kit with 10yo second hand kit is not valid.

The discussion my reply was for was how to get Dirac for active speakers, not other issues that are easily mitigated. The bonus of being also able to design your own active speakers if you wanted AND have Dirac would also be nice.

The use of used gear to me is completely valid if it accomplishes the goal at a cheaper cost, which it does easily. Also, a lot of people will already have this used gear that they are currently using and do not need to buy anything but the minidsp to implement Dirac into their active speakers.

 

[DonH56]

It can be done manually in "BB code" mode by using "LIST=1":

[LIST=1]
[*]foo
[*]bar
[/LIST]

1. foo
2. bar

Thanks, I thought of trying that but did not remember the BB code (old analog guy). And I am lazy.

 

[Grumpish]

Active solutions cost much more, add multiple layers of complexity, and, depending on the actual setup, can be less flexible. Many years in the IT industry taught me two important principles - Keep It Simple, and don't try to fix something that isn't broken.

 

[izeek]

I think it is a combination of many of the reasons mentioned here. Like most things there isn't just one reason.

To group many of the points already made (maybe with a new one or two)

- some people like their sound with a bit of 'color'

- some don't enjoy the super 'clean' or 'accurate' sound that is embraced by active speakers.

- if you have a system you like already, it is difficult to scrap it all and start again with just speakers with built in amps.

- for some people, audio components can be little works of art in their room

- the dreaded hiss

- running speaker wires is easier than running power cords to many locations.

- it can be nice thinking/knowing that an amp you buy, with a bit of upkeep, can still be going decades later.

- some like amps they can repair if needed.

- the generation that uses their phone for a source and doesn't have elaborate systems already is embracing active speakers in the lower end market.

- I don't want to control my speakers with my phone or PC. I want to flip a power switch and spin a volume knob.

- there aren't as many components to sell so reviewers and sellers aren't going to push them

- what upgrades can places sell for active speakers? If a pitchman or a shop sells a regular system there is a lifetime of cables and lotions to be sold for them.

- the youtube infomercial hosts aren't going to gush about active speakers because their fans might revolt

- I really enjoy the sound of my passive speakers, why would I want to scrap that? You may be able to guarantee me the new setup will be more 'accurate' but you can't guarantee me that I will like it better.

- if I just buy active speakers then how can I brag about the synergy that my system has and how that makes it better than other people's systems? Everyone that has the same speakers would have the same sound.

- to switch to active speakers for some would require doing a 180 turn on all that they have believed and said about audio and the importance of each component as well as the magic instilled by each component.

- Passive speakers can't be bricked by a firmware update or 'no longer supported' by the manufacture and stop working because of that. Two of my amps have been working for over a half century and should be working for a long time to come.

- a lot of active speakers look really 'industrial' or 'plastic'

- for some the 'what are you stupid' attitude they get from the active speaker fans just makes them dig in their heels more.

- the Paul McGowans of the world, generally, seem like a more fun type to hang out with (see 'what are you stupid' above) (see also "but often arent as discerning as we up in here." comment in post #46 about those that don't buy good enough active speakers) so a lot of people will continue to listen to them. Very few 'technical' videos about audio are engaging beyond their content.

So, just tackle all of those, and the ones I missed, and active speaker sales should take off.

beat that nail in for me.lol

 

[izeek]

Given how many speakers Sonos sells, not to mention all the Bluetooth speakers out there, I would say active speakers by volume are doing amazing.

mostly bought by folks who like music but often arent as discerning as we up in here.
+++++×+×
sorry, man. wasnt high-browing. my comment was aimed at the sonos portion of the comment.
ive read a few articles discussing bluetooth noting that convenience often took precedent over sound quality for buyers. its also noted that sonos and a few others, b&o, are making muuuch better bluetooth devices offering significant sound quality for what bluetooth can do.
then there's the crowd getting in on the bottom(not really accurate) end of the spectrum realizing that better sound quality is exists and begins their version of audiophilia.
gotta start somewhere.
im with you on most of what you posted.
Reply
Report •••

I think it is a combination of many of the reasons mentioned here. Like most things there isn't just one reason.

To group many of the points already made (maybe with a new one or two)

- some people like their sound with a bit of 'color'

- some don't enjoy the super 'clean' or 'accurate' sound that is embraced by active speakers.

- if you have a system you like already, it is difficult to scrap it all and start again with just speakers with built in amps.

- for some people, audio components can be little works of art in their room

- the dreaded hiss

- running speaker wires is easier than running power cords to many locations.

- it can be nice thinking/knowing that an amp you buy, with a bit of upkeep, can still be going decades later.

- some like amps they can repair if needed.

- the generation that uses their phone for a source and doesn't have elaborate systems already is embracing active speakers in the lower end market.

- I don't want to control my speakers with my phone or PC. I want to flip a power switch and spin a volume knob.

- there aren't as many components to sell so reviewers and sellers aren't going to push them

- what upgrades can places sell for active speakers? If a pitchman or a shop sells a regular system there is a lifetime of cables and lotions to be sold for them.

- the youtube infomercial hosts aren't going to gush about active speakers because their fans might revolt

- I really enjoy the sound of my passive speakers, why would I want to scrap that? You may be able to guarantee me the new setup will be more 'accurate' but you can't guarantee me that I will like it better.

- if I just buy active speakers then how can I brag about the synergy that my system has and how that makes it better than other people's systems? Everyone that has the same speakers would have the same sound.

- to switch to active speakers for some would require doing a 180 turn on all that they have believed and said about audio and the importance of each component as well as the magic instilled by each component.

- Passive speakers can't be bricked by a firmware update or 'no longer supported' by the manufacture and stop working because of that. Two of my amps have been working for over a half century and should be working for a long time to come.

- a lot of active speakers look really 'industrial' or 'plastic'

- for some the 'what are you stupid' attitude they get from the active speaker fans just makes them dig in their heels more.

- the Paul McGowans of the world, generally, seem like a more fun type to hang out with (see 'what are you stupid' above) (see also "but often arent as discerning as we up in here." comment in post #46 about those that don't buy good enough active speakers) so a lot of people will continue to listen to them. Very few 'technical' videos about audio are engaging beyond their content.

So, just tackle all of those, and the ones I missed, and active speaker sales should take off.

Given how many speakers Sonos sells, not to mention all the Bluetooth speakers out there, I would say active speakers by volume are doing amazing.

mostly bought by folks who like music but often arent as discerning as we up in here.
+++++×+×
sorry, man. wasnt high-browing. my comment was aimed at the sonos portion of the comment.
ive read a few articles discussing bluetooth noting that convenience often took precedent over sound quality for buyers. its also noted that sonos and a few others, b&o, are making muuuch better bluetooth devices offering significant sound quality for what bluetooth can do.
then there's the crowd getting in on the bottom(not really accurate) end of the spectrum realizing that better sound quality is exists and begins their version of audiophilia.
gotta start somewhere

 

[antcollinet]

There's an echo in here

 

[pseudoid]

Today, @Sancus sent me here from Genelec 8351B Teardown, telling me I was in the wrong thread. I wasn't but I'll post my rhetorical post here.

My good buddy 'Devil's Advocate' asked me to ask a simpleton question, and not directed to anyone specifically:
What really is the love affair (infatuation?) with powered/active speakers, anyways?
If I must; I can understand 'plug-in' boards, in sum rear access panel.
I fully understand (and respect) that designing a proper speaker is no walk-in-the-park and neither is designing active circuits.
Yet, stuffing a passive and a very reliable component (of the audio chain) with electronics just seems like a NO-OP failure just waiting to happen.
IMHO, AIOs = NFG!

"Single Point Failure" phobia: Always have had it and always will.
I also don't mind spending good money on reliable, quality, and proper A/V gear/hardware.
Simply because my aim is NOT to build the most bitchin' a/v system this side of BFE.
...but to build one that allows me to have continuous music in the house, without fartsing around with the hardware (or #$%^ sw/fw).

 

[Sancus]

Today, @Sancus sent me here from Genelec 8351B Teardown, telling me I was in the wrong thread. I wasn't but I'll post my rhetorical post here.

You were, because that thread is specific to the Genelec 8351B. Threads on this forum are prone to getting derailed by these endless argument topics that cannot have any real conclusion and it would be better to keep them on topic so they are actually useful to people who read them in the future. 10 pages of "why actives tho¿" can do nothing but make that thread worse.

Yet, stuffing a passive and a very reliable component (of the audio chain) with electronics just seems like a NO-OP failure just waiting to happen.

The problem is that this argument is generic. There are passive speakers that will fail long before any Genelec or Neumann will. There are some that may last 50+ years with no maintenance.

Out of all the speakers I've had, the only one that failed in less than 10 years was a passive speaker, a Magnepan 1.7, which in fact failed in less than 5 years(the panel delaminated). And they are notorious for durability issues, with the panel delaminating for a wide variety of reasons basically up to and including "you looked at it the wrong way". That list includes a pair of cheap (~$100 at the time) Cambridge Soundworks PC desktop active speakers, which lasted over 10 years, and which I finally ended up throwing out(mostly because I wanted to upgrade) but partially because the connecting cord with volume control on it broke. The speakers still played fine.

People resell 20+ year old studio monitors from the major pro audio companies all the time, in perfect working order, I've even seen a few that were >30 years old on eBay and were still working. Those speakers got far harder use over those decades than anything I own ever will. If reliability was a huge issue, then businesses wouldn't be using these products for work day in and day out. But they do, and have been doing so for many decades.

The fact of the matter is, most people will want to upgrade at the 10-20 year mark anyways, if not even earlier lol. If that's not you, and if 30+ year old durability is a concern for you, then I'd be careful what you buy, and that includes avoiding certain kinds of passive speakers. But it is also very difficult to even find good information on failure rates at these time scales, so to some extent, it's down to luck.

 

[pseudoid]

Out of all the speakers I've had, the only one that failed in less than 10 years was a passive speaker, a Magnepan 1.7, which in fact failed in less than 5 years(the panel delaminated).

This part of your example is not legit! Especially, for someone that lives in salty-humid beach community and we both know the Maggies are kinda passive. But okay! I am not hear the discuss the reliability of that example; however passive they maybe.
Regarding passive versus active speakers, and their reliability: Would we like to discuss MTBF? Or how sixSigma would be applicable to the mix?

 

[richard12511]

The only two speakers I've ever had fail were passive speakers(two Infinity speakers) because I turned them up too loud. My Genelecs actively protect themselves from that sort of damage to a degree that no passive speakers can. Genelec also has a good reputation for supporting their monitors for up to 30 years, which is more than enough for me. As much as I love my 8351b speakers, if they're still the SOTA 30 years from now, I'll be very disappointed.

 

[valerianf]

Does anybody know what is MTBF ( mean time between failure)?
It can be calculated for all electronic equipments.

The MTBF of a LRC filter (the passive crossover) is very high when the MTBF of any board with active components (transistors, amplifiers, DSP, power supply) is far lower.
So the problem is easy to understand: if you place some electronics boards in all the speakers, they will fail one after the others.
If you place all the electronic in a single AVR, you only have to change it time to time.
Anyway the AVR will become obsolete before the speakers and will need to be changed.

Good luck with the ones that have 10 active speakers including 10 amps with 10 power supplies.
I do not even think about a lightning that strikes the room.

The failure rate of classic speakers with passive crossover is very low and most of the time it is the result of an error of the owner.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

The failure rate of classic speakers with passive crossover is very low and most of the time it is the result of an error of the owner.

Classic speakers overwhelmingly came with passive crossovers, but I've never seen any data on longevity of things like the drivers. I'm inclined to believe that speaker manufacturers didn't really give a lot of thought to time-to-failure, and were more concerned with just making good quality speakers for their price range. I certainly know this was the case when I worked at Altec Lansing, and I know that well taken care of examples lasted a long time (mine are still performing as good as they ever did). I've had more troubles with foam surrounds on JBL woofers, but that is easily cured. I've never had a passive crossover fail.

 

[Galliardist]

This feels like a retread of https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/why-do-passive-speakers-still-exist.17729/

Others have already said the real reason, but it's because there's a market that keeps buying them. I say "a" market, because in fact most buyers have already moved on to actives. They buy smart/wireless speakers, sound bars, etc. And the whole pro audio market is active too, as I'm sure the OP is well aware of.

So it's really only the "old school hi-fi" and the "home theatre" markets that are still dedicated to passives. For the latter, cabling mess and the default design of AVRs are both significant issues. Manufacturers trying to get past that have been working on wireless solutions(eg WISA) because that's, again, what people really want. It would take a major cooperation to change cabling standards, and why bother when what buyers really want is to be able to plug in their surrounds to the nearby wall and not have to pull a 30ft cable around the room perimeter.

As far as the stereo hi-fi folks go, IMO the main reason is the fact that it's a gear hobby. People like buying boxes and connecting them together with all kinds of cables. It makes you feel like you're building something. That and market inertia, fact is that it's an aging conservative market. Many if not most younger people getting into audio honestly just go straight to studio monitors for stereo music listening. Or stick with headphones.

You're assuming that all powered smart/wireless speakers are active. That's probably not the case - it's likely to be cheaper and easier to just put a single chip amp and crossover in the box, than an active crossover followed by multiple amps. Even if there's any electronic processing going on, that can be done before the passive crossover. And we wouldn't necessarily know the difference from the outside,

However, the other side to mass market "smart" products is that they are getting smarter. Us audiophiles may well find one day that they have completely outsmarted us and that part of that mass market have better sound than us! Self measuring equipment and AI will be the next stages in such development. The smarts will come to our equipment as well, of course, if we want it.

 

[antcollinet]

You're assuming that all powered smart/wireless speakers are active. That's probably not the case - it's likely to be cheaper and easier to just put a single chip amp and crossover in the box, than an active crossover followed by multiple amps. Even if there's any electronic processing going on, that can be done before the passive crossover. And we wouldn't necessarily know the difference from the outside,

However, the other side to mass market "smart" products is that they are getting smarter. Us audiophiles may well find one day that they have completely outsmarted us and that part of that mass market have better sound than us! Self measuring equipment and AI will be the next stages in such development. The smarts will come to our equipment as well, of course, if we want it.

I think the terms active/powered have been used pretty much interchangeably (or at least I do), despite the more correct "active" meaning 1amp per speaker with active crossover.

 

[pseudoid]

I think the terms active/powered have been used pretty much interchangeably (or at least I do), despite the more correct "active" meaning 1amp per speaker with active crossover.

I am not dis'in your claim but I have never heard of "active meaning 1amp/spkr". Citations????

 

[Trell]

I am not dis'in your claim but I have never heard of "active meaning 1amp/spkr". Citations????

Probably a typo where he meant 1 amp/driver.

 

[antcollinet]

I am not dis'in your claim but I have never heard of "active meaning 1amp/spkr". Citations????

Sorry - meant 1 amp per drive unit. (See, another interchangable term pair - speaker/drive unit)