Why do passive speakers still exist?

[raistlin65]

Theoretically yes

That's what we are talking about: theoretical. Remember my post that you responded to initially talked about more robust and cheaper DSP if the market changed.

And what you are advocating with active speakers is theoretical. Not all active speakers take advantage of DSP to the extent that you indicate.

Something you can only do very broadly, and your measurements would be a mix of all drivers, or even both speakers, mixed up with the reflections in your room. This is pretty far from the EQ that the manufacturer can apply directly on the individual driver response. That being said, fine adjustments of the driver response don't necessarily end up as audible improvements when the loudspeaker in the end is placed in a home environment full of reflections, but that's another story.

Why is "all drivers" a problem? I already acknowledged in my post that you initially replied to that active has the advantage with the crossover. Beyond that, the speaker won't respond differently because it's not applied in a bi-amped or tri-amp situation to the specific driver.

"Even both speakers?" Audyssey, Dirac, mini-DSP can all EQ individual channels. So that's not even theoretical.

And as far as "mixed up with room reflections," you are conflating the measurement process with the EQ. You could certainly take Amir's measurements and use them to EQ a passive speaker without the room reflections. In fact, since we actually are talking theoretical, with widespread use of DSP in passive speaker setups, manufacturers could provide the sound signature for their speakers to allow users to correct them.

But even then, you'd still have to measure them again to adjust for room influence and redo your EQ. So I don't know. Does that really work better than just to take the measurements at the listening position to begin with? Or are you advocating not ever EQing speakers to improve the response at the listening position with active speakers?

 

[sigbergaudio]

That's what we are talking about: theoretical. Remember my post that you responded to initially talked about more robust and cheaper DSP if the market changed.

And what you are advocating with active speakers is theoretical. Not all active speakers take advantage of DSP to the extent that you indicate.



Why is "all drivers" a problem? I already acknowledged in my post that you initially replied to that active has the advantage with the crossover. Beyond that, the speaker won't respond differently because it's not applied in a bi-amped or tri-amp situation to the specific driver.

"Even both speakers?" Audyssey, Dirac, mini-DSP can all EQ individual channels. So that's not even theoretical.

And as far as "mixed up with room reflections," you are conflating the measurement process with the EQ. You could certainly take Amir's measurements and use them to EQ a passive speaker without the room reflections. In fact, since we actually are talking theoretical, with widespread use of DSP in passive speaker setups, manufacturers could provide the sound signature for their speakers to allow users to correct them.

But even then, you'd still have to measure them again to adjust for room influence and redo your EQ. So I don't know. Does that really work better than just to take the measurements at the listening position to begin with? Or are you advocating not ever EQing speakers to improve the response at the listening position with active speakers?

Not sure we're getting anywhere. Do you see no difference between a loudspeaker designer/manufacturer having access to DSP to design the sound of the speaker and the consumer plugging a passive speaker to a surround receiver with Audyssey?

Also please refrain from strawman arguments. I have never categorically implied that active speakers are better, I have said they open up possibilities to do things that are not possible with passive speakers. Some manufacturers take advantage of that, some do not.

 

[StefaanE]

WiSA?

A multi-channel processor with WiSA would be good, yes.

I learned about WiSA from taking an interest in Buchardt’s A700 back in April (when they were on pre-order for September delivery) — I nearly sent them my money, but through googling for WiSA I found out that they are just rebadging a generic box/remote as their hub, and a have generic active module in the A700. Nothing wrong with that per se, and there is probably customised software etc., but somehow the hype of the website didn’t rhyme with the use of generic modules. So I nearly gave up on getting new speakers until I stumbled onto the Nubert X-8000 RC active floorstanders, which I got on 30-day approval and decided to keep. They use their own wireless protocol (which is a disadvantage but it works very well, no interference and no disconnections) and their active modules are apparently their own development. The Nubert ampX didn’t do well when measured by Amirm, but to my not very experienced ears, the speakers are excellent. They do digitise the signal before DSP-ing it and sending it on to 4 separate amps (1 per driver), so feeding them through my SR5013 entails a lot of useless DAC/ADC. Hence my interest in a digital multi-channel sound processor.

I only learned about the Canton Smart Connect after I had already decided to keep the Nuberts, so unfortunately I can’t compare their approach with that of Nubert (my budget is limited, and it was never high enough for a $6000 JBL SDP-55, in addition to being largely spent ). The Canton’s €500 price is more in my ballpark.
Thanks for the suggestions, it’s much appreciated.

 

[StefaanE]

There are also other examples: ATC has produced both passive and active versions of the same speakers, I think.

Canton also have active, wireless versions of their speakers.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

They use their own wireless protocol (which is a disadvantage but it works very well, no interference and no disconnections) and their active modules are apparently their own development.

Can you expand on that? I see only BlueTooth and AAC. WiFi seems to be based on added modules.

Canton also have active, wireless versions of their speakers.

Many now do but I would not want any with a proprietary protocol.

 

[EJ3]

Beyond using DSP in active speakers to establish the crossover, what you said does not make sense to me.

Of course you can EQ the sound coming out of a passive speaker with DSP, whether you do it to change the characteristics of the speaker, or to compensate for room influence.

I believe that sonically you are correct: their may be differences but I don't think that they will be audible. When I DSP I do my left sub (80 Hz down) is first, then my right sub (80 Hz down), then my left main (26 Hz up), then my right main (26 Hz up). Then the left sub and it's main, then the right sub & it's main. Then all together now. Then I evaluate and adjust to my personal preferences. As to differences in the "sweet spot" size that may be true in certain rooms. I have to fill a volumous space (compared to many homes) that does not have standing waves that I can perceive. Perhaps, one day, when prices come down for quality active speakers and when I can run my TT's, RTR's, bit perfect CD's into the inputs of the active speakers... In the mean time, I'll do it my way (because it is sufficient to me).

 

[StefaanE]

Can you expand on that? I see only BlueTooth and AAC. WiFi seems to be based on added modules.

Nubert calls it Xconnect, it’s not WiFi, and only connects their active X-series speakers to their ampX or to each other. A speaker can be master (in which case you’d connect your analogue and digital sources to it) or slave (right or left channel). Audio is transmitted in 192k/24 bit format and each speaker plays its assigned channel. When using the ampX it is the master and the two speakers are configured as left and right slaves. A X-sub gets the complete signal and is configured with a steep low-pass filter. They have an app to do that, hence the speakers contain 2 bluetooth modules, one for the sound source and one for the app. They don’t use WiFi and their speakers and ampX are not “networked”, so no OTA updates. But it’s easy to set up and works well (and as I said, in my opinion the X-8000 RC —for Room Correction— sounds really good.)

 

[raistlin65]

Also please refrain from strawman arguments. I have never categorically implied that active speakers are better, I have said they open up possibilities to do things that are not possible with passive speakers. Some manufacturers take advantage of that, some do not.

A faulty strawman argument. Please point to where I indicated in my last post that you implied "that active speakers are better?"

I thought we were having a discussion about your claims about the superior benefits of active speaker DSP??? I suspect you have lost the thread of the conversation.

Not sure we're getting anywhere. Do you see no difference between a loudspeaker designer/manufacturer having access to DSP to design the sound of the speaker and the consumer plugging a passive speaker to a surround receiver with Audyssey?

That's definitely a strawman argument. I'll repeat for you again. You initially replied to my post where I discussed the market changing to provide more robust DSP. I better quote it this time, because you didn't bother to go back and review it.

Once a large enough market segment exists that want DSP, we will eventually see much less expensive, more robust DSP solutions implemented as part of standard passive speaker setups.

At this point, I'm done. All you are doing is repeating common arguments about the superiority of active speakers, without the ability to really engage on the topic.

 

[Sancus]

TWhy is "all drivers" a problem? I already acknowledged in my post that you initially replied to that active has the advantage with the crossover. Beyond that, the speaker won't respond differently because it's not applied in a bi-amped or tri-amp situation to the specific driver.

A speaker can have more than 2 or 3 drivers though, in fact it can have dozens. There are many active designs that, as far as I know, wouldn't really be possible(or at least practical) without individual-driver DSP. For example, the Apple HomePod, Beolab 90(both use beamforming iirc), D&D 8C and Genelec W371A cardioid bass systems, and a number of CBT designs.

They all offer advantages in terms of how they interact with rooms that can't easily be duplicated by EQ of a whole speaker.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Nubert calls it Xconnect, it’s not WiFi, and only connects their active X-series speakers to their ampX or to each other. A speaker can be master (in which case you’d connect your analogue and digital sources to it) or slave (right or left channel). Audio is transmitted in 192k/24 bit format and each speaker plays its assigned channel. When using the ampX it is the master and the two speakers are configured as left and right slaves. A X-sub gets the complete signal and is configured with a steep low-pass filter. They have an app to do that, hence the speakers contain 2 bluetooth modules, one for the sound source and one for the app. They don’t use WiFi and their speakers and ampX are not “networked”, so no OTA updates. But it’s easy to set up and works well (and as I said, in my opinion the X-8000 RC —for Room Correction— sounds really good.)

Thanks. Not for me.

 

[StefaanE]

Thanks. Not for me.

Fine with me . Anyway, you’d better live in Europe and know some German because they don’t do English. But they’re very professional commercially and the products I have are well-finished and work as advertised. I lack the experience to judge the sound quality of their speakers, but they’re far, far better than my Infinity Primus 360 (which might be a rather low bar, I admit). Compared to other active speakers, they’ve a plethora of inputs and a nice remote control:

They come with an ARC dongle that plugs into the USB-A port, but it can also be used with a suitable wireless or other adapter, or power a HDMI —> S/PDIF sound extractor. The AES port could be used for a DANTE connection I guess.

 

[oldsysop]

Active Speakers, Class D, Small Speakers, and Paul Mcgowan are the greatest tragedies in audio.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Active Speakers, Class D, Small Speakers, and Paul Mcgowan are the greatest tragedies in audio.

OK
So all the studios in the world that are using actives should throw them away?

 

[sigbergaudio]

A faulty strawman argument. Please point to where I indicated in my last post that you implied "that active speakers are better?"

You said "Not all active speakers take advantage of DSP to the extent that you indicate." I never said they did.

I thought we were having a discussion about your claims about the superior benefits of active speaker DSP??? I suspect you have lost the thread of the conversation.

Obviously many discussions are going on at once in this thread. Perhaps I am lost.

That's definitely a strawman argument. I'll repeat for you again. You initially replied to my post where I discussed the market changing to provide more robust DSP. I better quote it this time, because you didn't bother to go back and review it.

Not sure I think that DSP will become common on passive speakers, but time will tell.

 

[bennybbbx]

I do not know the market in Germany, so I cannot make an effective suggestions.
??? Are you talking about digital or analog connection from preamp to active speaker?
Are you asking for a stereo preamp with XLR analog output?

good price worth products are in germany available too. so you can post what you see in your country. I mean analog XLR or symetrical most active speakers have. preamp is enough. in your previous post the outlaw for 999$ with remote control is good for active speakers, it is only a preamp too. but the price is much to much. there can buy many good AVR with 6 or more power amp for passive speaker below 500 eur. and this is what i mean. before there are no good price worth preamps active speakers in living room have chance to sell more as passive speakers. when there are some price worth preamps only then active speakers are used more in living room for television and radio

 

[sigbergaudio]

good price worth products are in germany available too. so you can post what you see in your country. I mean analog XLR or symetrical most active speakers have. preamp is enough. in your previous post the outlaw for 999$ with remote control is good for active speakers, it is only a preamp too. but the price is much to much. there can buy many good AVR with 6 or more power amp for passive speaker below 500 eur. and this is what i mean. before there are no good price worth preamps active speakers in living room have chance to sell more as passive speakers. when there are some price worth preamps only then active speakers are used more in living room for television and radio

You can use RCA->XLR cables. Also, I'm a bit surprised not all active speakers intended for the consumer market have RCA inputs.

 

[Frank Dernie]

My view is that getting steep enough slopes in a crossover to make sure breakup in drivers that can be pistonic in their working range but have strong breakup outside it is probably impossible with a passive crossover without adding other shortcomings.
So to make a loudspeaker which actually works the way most people think speakers work probably requires and active crossover. Making it digital and DSP allows other corrections to be made which can not be achieved in an analogue circuit.
I am not going for it myself because I consider the irritation not worth the benefits.
Meridian have been pointing out the superiority of the performance of active speakers since the late 1970s.
I think the main reasons they haven't taken over is far more to do with the number of hifi enthusiasts who are equipment fanatics first and foremost rather than anything to do with SQ. Add to that concerns about reliability and here we are...

 

[Dennis Murphy]

My view is that getting steep enough slopes in a crossover to make sure breakup in drivers that can be pistonic in their working range but have strong breakup outside it is probably impossible with a passive crossover without adding other shortcomings.
So to make a loudspeaker which actually works the way most people think speakers work probably requires and active crossover. Making it digital and DSP allows other corrections to be made which can not be achieved in an analogue circuit.
.

That's really not a problem with most drivers. It's not the steepness of the slope that counts--it's the degree to which you can shape the contour of the roll-off, and smooth out irregularities in the pass band. That's where active filters have an advantage, although it's possible to achieve excellent results with a passive crossover assuming the drivers themselves aren't too erratic.

 

[abdo123]

I think the main reason is that passive speakers last for a really fucking long time, decades Infact. Possibly even forever.

with active speakers it’s a completely different story. Basically a good investment in a passive speakers is a life investment.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I think the main reason is that passive speakers last for a really fucking long time, decades Infact. Possibly even forever.

with active speakers it’s a completely different story. Basically a good investment in a passive speakers is a life investment.

I have been enjoying my current speakers for 25 years and the ones now in my bedroom and study longer than that so I tend to agree.