Why do passive speakers still exist?

[Purité Audio]

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.

A lifetime of second best, I expect to only have the one life, I intend to enjoy the best possible sound while I am alive, active speakers ( contemporary designs) are simply better.
Keith

 

[bennybbbx]

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

problem for active speakers stay same, no price worth AVR with RCA here. or can you post link for a AVR with RCA out for around 400$ ?

the reason that many active speakers have no RCA i guess is because speaker produce a lot of hiss noise (when no sound output happen)when use RCA(-10 db). Kali LP6 have RCA but it have maybe a signal to noise ratio of 70 db when use it. when i connect my presonus mixer with unsymetrical 6.3 Jack plug it reach 80 db. problen on kali and many active speakers i see is that the volume knob in active does not sit just before power amp. it sit before preamp. and the preamp need boost enough that the -10 db can reach the max spl of 100 db such a monitor have. mostly it is enough to have 90 db and 10 db less hiss. this can reach when the volume adjust knob of monitor sit behind preamp and before poweramp

 

[Frank Dernie]

A lifetime of second best, I expect to only have the one life, I intend to enjoy the best possible sound while I am alive, active speakers ( contemporary designs) are simply better.
Keith

Still not convinced they are enough better to put up with the inconvenience for me.
I only use mine very rarely, pretty well only when streaming, which isn't often anyway.
The SQ of my system is entirely adequate for me in as much as it does not spoil my musical enjoyment.
If I were younger maybe....

 

[StefaanE]

A lifetime of second best, I expect to only have the one life, I intend to enjoy the best possible sound while I am alive, active speakers ( contemporary designs) are simply better.
Keith

I decided to buy a new set of speakers because the trip I'd planned for my 65th birthday was "covided" . Otherwise, there would not have been a budget and I would happily have continued to enjoy my Infinity Primus 360ies. There's also a reluctance to get rid of what I felt were really good speakers. That being said, my new active speakers are so much better (I actually hear triangles and bass-lines, and the low bass was a real eye-opener -- I didn't know that information was on my CDs).

Now, it's obvious there are better speakers than my Nubert X-8000RCs, but I'm pretty sure I would have to spend a lot more than €3600 to get better passive speakers (like the Revel F208 or F328be or a KEF R7 or R11), a DAC (why not from @Okto Research) and an amplifier (such as one from @boXem | audio or @March Audio) to get audibly better stereo sound.

Then there's the issue of listening to the setup before making a final decision. There's no Revel dealer nearby, so I'd have to buy them sound unheard from a shop in England (selling F208s at a reasonable price over eBay). It's not a problem for amplifiers and DACs, but I did really appreciate having 30 days to listen to the speakers knowing that I could send them back at no cost.

I don't know if the electronics in my active speakers will last 20 years (hell, I don't know if I will last another 20 years), but I am happy to have discovered a (relatively) new technology that sounds and works well instead of sticking to the tried and trusted. Makes one feel a teeny-weeny bit younger .

 

[oivavoi]

I decided to buy a new set of speakers because the trip I'd planned for my 65th birthday was "covided" . Otherwise, there would not have been a budget and I would happily have continued to enjoy my Infinity Primus 360ies. There's also a reluctance to get rid of what I felt were really good speakers. That being said, my new active speakers are so much better (I actually hear triangles and bass-lines, and the low bass was a real eye-opener -- I didn't know that information was on my CDs).

Now, it's obvious there are better speakers than my Nubert X-8000RCs, but I'm pretty sure I would have to spend a lot more than €3600 to get better passive speakers (like the Revel F208 or F328be or a KEF R7 or R11), a DAC (why not from @Okto Research) and an amplifier (such as one from @boXem | audio or @March Audio) to get audibly better stereo sound.

.

I checked out a German review of these speakers just now, with basic measurements. That does indeed look like an excellent speaker! And yeah, absolutely everything included, even room correction. Tempting

 

[ctrl]

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.

Let's just take a look at a practical example.
Crossover frequency of a woofer, once passive, once actively crossed.

The filter slope of the chassis can be realized both passively (black curve) and actively (red curve) without any problems (LR2@250Hz).

But you can see that there are still some resonances (1.8 kHz and 2.7kHz) visible. These are clearly audible when you listen to the woofer with pink noise.
Whether these resonances will still be audible together with the mid-range drivers is a matter of opinion - probably not.

But with active filtering the question doesn't really arise. To guarantee that "ringing" is avoided, these resonances are simply filtered out (black curve).

This can also be achieved passively with two notch filters (black curve), but not quite as thoroughly and you must always make sure that the overall impedance of the loudspeaker does not suffer too much (this would not be a problem in our example).

A passive realization would require six additional components for the two notch filters only in the low frequency range and would therefore usually not be realized. In German, crossovers with absurd many components are called "Bauteilgrab" - component grave.

With an active concept, these two additional EQs have practically no negative effects.

Maybe this shows some of you the advantages of an active concept better than the usual keywords like delay, linkwitz transform,...

 

[MattHooper]

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.

I hear ya!

I still have a pair of Thiel 02 speakers, for almost 30 years, that continue to thrill me.

 

[EJ3]

I hear ya!

I still have a pair of Thiel 02 speakers, for almost 30 years, that continue to thrill me.

I've had my smaller speakers since 1977: Frazier Super Monte Carlo's (they are operated by a pair of NAD 2100's in bridged mode)
Continuous Output Power (into 8 Ω) : 60 W (17 dBW)
Rated Distortion (THD 20Hz - 20kHz): 0,03%
Clipping Power (maximum continuous power per channel): 70 W
IHF Dynamic Headroom (at 8 Ω): +6dB
IHF Dynamic Power (maximum short term power per channel)
8 Ω : 200 W (23 dBW)
4 Ω : 250 W (24 dBW)
2 Ω : 330 W (25 dBW)
Damping Factor (ref. 8 Ω, 50 Hz): better than 100
Input Impedance: 10 kΩ / 600 pF
Input Sensitivity (for rated power into 8 Ω): 0.85V
Frequency Response: 3 Hz - 100 kHz +0, -3 dB
Signal-to-Noise Ratio
ref. 1W : 100 dB
ref. rated power : 117 dB
Total Harmonic Distortion (20Hz - 20kHz): less than 0,03%
Bridged Mode
Continuous Output Power (into 8 Ω) : 100 W (20 dBW)
IHF Dynamic Headroom (at 8 Ω) : +7 dB
IHF Dynamic Power (maximum short term power per channel)
8 Ω : 500 W (27 dBW)
4 Ω : 660 W (28 dBW)

and my bigger speakers since 1990: Dahlquist M-905's (operated by a pair of NAD 2200's in bridged mode) [see Amir's test of one of mine. Amirm did not test the bridged mode].
The only thing I have done with either setup is run a 3rd NAD 2200 in stereo for a pair of subs (less than 80 Hz) and some DSP. I am Happy as can be with this setup. (Even if I did not run DSP).

 

[LTig]

There are so many wonderful passives speakers that it is unfathomable. I can't for the life of me imagine that if all else is equal and the speakers are identical, one passive with good electronics, one active with good electronics, you're not going to hear the difference. I also very much agree that having the electronics embedded in the speakers has risks as well. I will guarantee you that nobody is getting 15 years problem free operation with their actives. One of them is going down. We still have passives and vintage electronics running for decades.

You lost:

• My K&H O300D bought in 2004 are still as good as new despite using them almost daily.
• The active sub (Genelec 7060b) bought in 2006 never failed me.
• My Genelec 8020s bought in 2006 never failed me and since March they run 10 hours each weekday.

 

[Helicopter]

My Klipsch Heresys are soon to be 50, and I have a few pairs of Panasonic speakers that are over 50. A re-cap will be simple, but actually all are still holding up fine.

 

[restorer-john]

In German, crossovers with absurd many components are called "Bauteilgrab" - component grave.

With an active concept, these two additional EQs have practically no negative effects.

So a passive speaker with a sophisticated crossover is somehow a "component grave" and yet a DSP based PEQ with many millions (or billions) of component elements is somehow not? Hypocritical much?

 

[RayDunzl]

Why do passive speakers still exist?

The Top Ten list of Why? here at Neverland East

Because:

10. They're paid for.

9. The newer non-green amps I bought for them during "upgrade" 9 years ago led to initiating an investment process that ended up paying for the entire system and then some

8. I like them well enough, and they put me at serious odds with the Sean Olive Trained Listener Listening Preference Test Tests, which I can privately wear as a badge of Honor

7. The little actives that I have aren't world-beaters, and don't show me any significant advantages, other than being somewhat self-contained/portable. They were supposed to go into the garage but have remained in here as Daily Drivers.

6. Either will EQ equally well at the listening position using "room correction"

5. I can run big speaker cables to the passives (2AWG THHN and even biwired) for grins, because it was free, and I could)

4. They measure well, better than the actives, the way I measure them.

3. Distortion is lower than the actives at equivalent listening levels.

2. They'll cleanly play louder than I can stand.

And number one...

No hiss!

 

[LTig]

+1.
There is some minor advantages with passive driven tweeters, and that is the opportunity to :
1. Less thermal compression if you use a resistor before the tweeter.
2. Less distortion.

But..... All of this can also be done with active loudspeakers. Simply put a resistor with the same value as the tweeter in series with the + pole .
A 4 ohm tweeter can have a 4 ohm resistor . The resistor and tweeter coil will then share the upbuilding heat = less thermal compression.
You loose some output, but you also get less noise. Its worth experimenting with this, if you have an active system.

Nope. As you stated adding a series resistor reduces SPL which destroys the FR. To restore the original FR you must increase the output voltage until the power dissipated in the tweeter is the same as without the resistor. This leads to the same thermal compression as before and you need an amplifier with more power and you dissipate the additional power as heat in the resistor. Not a good idea if you ask me.

 

[richard12511]

You lost:

• My K&H O300D bought in 2004 are still as good as new despite using them almost daily.
• The active sub (Genelec 7060b) bought in 2006 never failed me.
• My Genelec 8020s bought in 2006 never failed me and since March they run 10 hours each weekday.

Ha! That did seem like a really outlandish thing to try and guarantee. My immediate though when reading that was “I guarantee you’re wrong” .

I’ve got some early 2000s active Logitech speakers here that still work perfectly.

 

[Pearljam5000]

You lost:

• My K&H O300D bought in 2004 are still as good as new despite using them almost daily.
• The active sub (Genelec 7060b) bought in 2006 never failed me.
• My Genelec 8020s bought in 2006 never failed me and since March they run 10 hours each weekday.

What speakers do you have? Passive and active.

 

[A Surfer]

You lost:

• My K&H O300D bought in 2004 are still as good as new despite using them almost daily.
• The active sub (Genelec 7060b) bought in 2006 never failed me.
• My Genelec 8020s bought in 2006 never failed me and since March they run 10 hours each weekday.

LOL, I knew I would regret that! Using absolutes like that usually comes back to bite me in the ass. Saying that I am still willing to bet that good old regular consumer analogue gear on average will have a significantly greater service life. Hopefully I will be wrong. I have purchased actives before, and I'll likely do so again, so I am not opposed on principle alone. Still, not a chance I would sink significant cash into them either, I have no issues with passives and external components.

 

[A Surfer]

I still use Pioneer HPM 100s from the 1980s to play the drums along with and the integrated powering them is from the early 1990s so as impressive as the longevity some members are experiencing with their actives (which I am really happy about) they have a long way to go yet. If I spend say $2000 on speakers, I expect nothing less than 30 years out of them.

 

[Steve Dallas]

Why do passive speakers still exist?

View attachment 95685

The Top Ten list of Why? here at Neverland East

Because:

10. They're paid for.

9. The newer non-green amps I bought for them during "upgrade" 9 years ago led to initiating an investment process that ended up paying for the entire system and then some

8. I like them well enough, and they put me at serious odds with the Sean Olive Trained Listener Listening Preference Test Tests, which I can privately wear as a badge of Honor

7. The little actives that I have aren't world-beaters, and don't show me any significant advantages, other than being somewhat self-contained/portable. They were supposed to go into the garage but have remained in here as Daily Drivers.

6. Either will EQ equally well at the listening position using "room correction"

5. I can run big speaker cables to the passives (2AWG THHN and even biwired) for grins, because it was free, and I could)

4. They measure well, better than the actives, the way I measure them.

3. Distortion is lower than the actives at equivalent listening levels.

2. They'll cleanly play louder than I can stand.

And number one...

No hiss!

View attachment 95686

11. I don't have to re-purchase amps and converters and DSP every time I want to try new speakers, which makes my hobby less expensive

12. I know the real specs of my amps and converters rather than relying on nebulous manufacturer claims

13. Choosing components is half the fun

14. I own passives that are >20 years old and have little worry about component failure

15. I don't need AC outlets all over the place and half the cable clutter

16. Single component failures are relatively inexpensive

17. Imagine the cost of active large floorstanders of any quality...

 

[Dialectic]

So the biggest benefit of passive speakers is reliability. (But of course the amps that drive them can fail.) And the consensus seems to be that, ceteris paribus, well-designed active speakers can sound and measure better than similar passive speakers with the exclusion of one parameter--the tweeter hiss that is audible when you get within 1 foot of the loudspeaker.

With passive loudspeakers, the absolute best one can hope for is many years of reliable, hiss-free sound that nonetheless lags behind active speaker sound in most respects. I still regret buying two pairs of passive loudspeakers I formerly owned and one pair that I own now. None have been as good as active loudspeakers, and they have all been overpriced.

I'm glad I didn't end up as an old man bragging on an audio forum about the reliable Klipschorns he'd owned since 1957. That's a long time to live with crappy sound.

 

[Doodski]

I still use Pioneer HPM 100s from the 1980s to play the drums along with and the integrated powering them is from the early 1990s so as impressive as the longevity some members are experiencing with their actives (which I am really happy about) they have a long way to go yet. If I spend say $2000 on speakers, I expect nothing less than 30 years out of them.

I had a pair of HPM 150. People dug the groovy tweeter on top. They where a party speaker for about 2 years and we never blew them up. It was AC/DC, The Who and Deep Purple allll night long. Thump... Thump...