Why do passive speakers still exist?

[MattHooper]

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

Yeah, that's a turn off for me. I dislike cables as it is, especially AC cables, and adding more in to the mix, needing more outlets, is unnatractive to me. It's even one of the reasons I'm having trouble raising my enthusiasm to integrate my subwoofers. I hate the extra cabling, boxes/AC outlet requirements.

 

[mhardy6647]

Heh, and there's a pair of HPM-1100s here.
I don't use them, though (although they're not terrible -- they're also nothing special).
I don't have any good photos of them, so here's a bad photo of one taken right after I refoamed them.
Not bad loudspeakers for freebies, I will allow.

 

[ctrl]

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?

The "component grave" refers to the cost of the crossover, not to the sound (which should rather be improved). A notch filter is not unusually expensive, but in the example we have only considered the low frequency filter.
In addition, I am a "Schwabe" (region in the south of DE), which is a stereotype for stingy people in the German speaking world

 

[Helicopter]

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...

18. Lots of options designed with domestic use in mind, including big rooms and 10 to 20 foot listening distance.

19. Lots of options with nice wood veneer cabinets and other classic designs.

 

[RayDunzl]

Post #348

Thread Summary:

Passives have their place.

Actives have their place.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Another point no one mentioned is that actives(some, but don't know if all of them) have an active crossovers vs a passive one in a passive speaker.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Another point no one mentioned is that actives(some, but don't know if all of them) have an active crossovers vs a passive one in a passive speaker.

The reason it wasn’t mentioned is that it’s literally the definition of an active speaker (as opposed to a powered speaker with a passive crossover)

 

[Pearljam5000]

The reason it wasn’t mentioned is that it’s literally the definition of an active speaker (as opposed to a powered speaker with a passive crossover)

Oops my bad

 

[Helicopter]

I might try iLoud MTM when my spreadsheet approves. $350 Seems like a proper price for an ugly nearfield speaker with a cheap electronics to go bad inside.

Edit: ^ basically how I would define 95% of active speakers.

 

[richard12511]

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?

If we’re going down that path of calling every little bit a “component”, then the passive crossover actually has far more components; way more than millions or billions .

 

[Pearljam5000]

I might try iLoud MTM when my spreadsheet approves. $350 Seems like a proper price for an ugly nearfield speaker with a cheap electronics to go bad inside.

Lol
If actives were so fragile compared to passives i don't think people would invest 10-15$K in Kii Three or D&D 8C

 

[richard12511]

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.

Absolutes are almost always wrong

 

[andreasmaaan]

Lol
If actives were so fragile compared to passives i don't think people would invest 10-15$K in Kii Three or D&D 8C

I’m continually impressed by your faith in the rationality of consumer behaviour

 

[richard12511]

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.

In some sense, owning and listening to a passive speaker for 20 years is a bad thing, as that’s 20 years you’ve been living with inferior sound .

 

[valerianf]

It is possible to find vintage speakers 30 years old still performing.
Do you really think that the hi tech active speakers from nowadays will be alive in 30 years?
40 years ago there was a french company that made active speakers.
At this date there may still exist one of 2 units as collector piece (I have seen pictures of them).

It is a little similar with the mechanical DSLR versus the digital camera.
You only keep the Leica on the field through centuries.
Digital equipment are for instant use and later going to the trash.
I may have five old digital cameras: they are obsolete.
But I go on buying digital camera.

As I am keeping my speakers a very long time I will go on with passive ones.
Only the sub will be active (a passive sub is a non sense nowadays).

 

[richard12511]

Yeah, that's a turn off for me. I dislike cables as it is, especially AC cables, and adding more in to the mix, needing more outlets, is unnatractive to me. It's even one of the reasons I'm having trouble raising my enthusiasm to integrate my subwoofers. I hate the extra cabling, boxes/AC outlet requirements.

That’s the biggest downside to actives in my mind, especially for multichannel. I wish more actives would run separate amplifiers outside the box.

 

[mhardy6647]

It is possible to find vintage speakers 30 years old still performing.

Oh -- one may find them much older than that.

Here're some very vintage electrodynamic RCA Theatre drivers & horns, e.g.,

 

[andreasmaaan]

I have no doubt active speakers are more prone to failure than passives (for the same reason it’s more likely that any one of your DAC, amp OR passive speakers fails than that merely a passive speaker fails).

FWIW though, I have a friend whose daily listening speakers are a pair of actives that have been operational since they were built in the late-1970s.

 

[valerianf]

Yes I remember these Philips units. Happy to see that they are still working.

 

[sigbergaudio]

It is possible to find vintage speakers 30 years old still performing.
Do you really think that the hi tech active speakers from nowadays will be alive in 30 years?
40 years ago there was a french company that made active speakers.
At this date there may still exist one of 2 units as collector piece (I have seen pictures of them).

It is a little similar with the mechanical DSLR versus the digital camera.
You only keep the Leica on the field through centuries.
Digital equipment are for instant use and later going to the trash.
I may have five old digital cameras: they are obsolete.
But I go on buying digital camera.

As I am keeping my speakers a very long time I will go on with passive ones.
Only the sub will be active (a passive sub is a non sense nowadays).

I have active logitech speakers and subwoofer for my computer setup, probably 15 years old, works perfectly fine. I have a Canon 60D DSLR, bought in 2010, works perfectly fine, the picture quality is still great, still no problem to connect it to a computer and transfer pictures.

If I buy a fancy mid-priced active speaker with spotify connect and apple airplay and whatever built-in, will all that still work in 20 years? Maybe not. But if I buy a quality active speakers who concentrate on being just that, without tons of connectivity to all kinds of digital services, will that still work in 20 years? I think that's pretty likely.

If "will this piece of equipment still work in 30 years" is an important part of your buying decision, passive speakers may likely be the better choice. Not sure that's a major concern for most buyers though. I don't know how many passive speakers I've owned the last 30 years (lost count).