Why do passive speakers still exist?

[MarkS]

We do.

Nice! Looks like a good design, good luck with it!

 

[Ultrasonic]

Nice! Looks like a good design, good luck with it!

^Seconded . The sort of option I might consider longer term should some form of demo/sale-or-return system be in place to the UK.

 

[sigbergaudio]

^Seconded . The sort of option I might consider longer term should some form of demo/sale-or-return system be in place to the UK.

We have a 60 day return policy world-wide. Please refer to our product threads in the desperate dealers forum or DM for further information, so we don't derail this thread with direct focus on our products, which probably will be against forum rules.

 

[EJ3]

I'm struggling to understand quite the point you've been trying to make from your last two posts now?

If anyone wants specifically to generate sound in the 20-40 Hz region then there are loads of subwoofer options that do so and they are fairly universally also going to be cheaper than full-size speakers that try to do the same, and don't have the positioning compromises of full-range speakers.

To get back to the active/passive question I'd suggest that active is overwhelmingly the dominant approach to subwoofer design now (whether with amp in the sub or external).

I built my subs initially in the late 1980's, since then I've changed cabs once & speakers twice. At this time I run strictly 2 channel (both audio and movies). I have a large room to fill. I like DSP & room correction but I think that having +- 2 db from 26 Hz-20k is doing pretty good for analog crossovers and that I am not sure that I can do better (except for having room correction. But the point is, no matter how you do it, active subs, passive subs, towers, whatever, you need both physical volume and power to get it done to 15 Hz (approximately the low note of big pie organs.
Sometimes the journey is almost as important as the results. In this case, there are very many ways to get there.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Maybe a dac's/pre with integrated actives crossover and some payments to some brands for match theirs speakers would be interesting (?)

 

[EJ3]

I built my subs initially in the late 1980's, since then I've changed cabs once & speakers twice. At this time I run strictly 2 channel (both audio and movies). I have a large room to fill. I like DSP & room correction but I think that having +- 2 db from 26 Hz-20k is doing pretty good for analog crossovers and that I am not sure that I can do better (except for having room correction. But the point is, no matter how you do it, active subs, passive subs, towers, whatever, you need both physical volume and power to get it done to 15 Hz (approximately the low note of big pie organs.
Sometimes the journey is almost as important as the results. In this case, there are very many ways to get there.

Yep, I meant "big pipe organs"

 

[sigbergaudio]

Maybe a dac's/pre with integrated actives crossover and some payments to some brands for match theirs speakers would be interesting (?)

How would that work? You would then need to disconnect the speakers passive crossovers and add a number of power amplifiers to get the whole thing working, if I understand what you are saying correctly. Not sure I understand what you are suggesting. Can you explain a bit more?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

How would that work? You would then need to disconnect the speakers passive crossovers and add a number of power amplifiers to get the whole thing working, if I understand what you are saying correctly. Not sure I understand what you are suggesting. Can you explain a bit more?

hmm, my idea is unfinished but i saw the devialet have something called '' sam '', they have a lot of speakers and many kefs..., if the things go '' passive '' where is the best place to put the DSP? if the typical chain is dac -> pre -> power -> speakers?

https://www.devialet.com/en-eu/expert-pro-sam-ready-speakers/kef/r7/

 

[sigbergaudio]

hmm, my idea is unfinished but i saw the devialet have something called '' sam '', they have a lot of speakers and many kefs..., if the things go '' passive '' where is the best place to put the DSP? if the typical chain is dac -> pre -> power -> speakers?

https://www.devialet.com/en-eu/expert-pro-sam-ready-speakers/kef/r7/

That thing appears to be some kind of active/dynamic EQ custom tuned to different speakers, that comes in addition to the passive crossover (not replacing it).

If you have a truly active speaker, everything that's mentioned on that page can be built directly into the DSP in the speaker, and tailored to the speaker by the actual speaker manufacturer.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

That thing appears to be some kind of active/dynamic EQ custom tuned to different speakers, that comes in addition to the passive crossover (not replacing it).

If you have a truly active speaker, everything that's mentioned on that page can be built directly into the DSP in the speaker, and tailored to the speaker by the actual speaker manufacturer.

Yeah but i think is fun if the solution come with the passive speakers in mind

 

[A Surfer]

I cannot imagine that well designed, well voiced passive speakers that are properly setup in a room that is decent will not sound so good that these type of discussions become mostly academic with the differences being in the measurable as opposed to audible range. I won't rush out to replace my passive speakers; however, I will also acknowledge that as active speakers continue to enter the marketplace that I would not seriously consider them. I just do not like the idea that if the onboard amp fails, the entire system fails. With my passives, if the amp goes, at least I can use a temporary amp while either fixing or replacing the amp.

What happens in the case where the internal amp or DSP section fails? Does the owner have to pay to ship the speaker for repair and replacement?

 

[Zvu]

......................
What happens in the case where the internal amp or DSP section fails? Does the owner have to pay to ship the speaker for repair and replacement?

https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/374076-converting-active-monitors-passive.html

 

[sigbergaudio]

What happens in the case where the internal amp or DSP section fails? Does the owner have to pay to ship the speaker for repair and replacement?

It would of course depend on the manufacturer, but for instance our amps have a quick connector for the speaker wires, so we would send you a new, fully configured amp, which you could easily replace yourself. The amp is attached with machine screws so no risk of damaging the cabinet while removing the old amp. So you remove the old amp, unplug the speaker wires and plug it into the new amp, and reinstall it into the cabinet. 10 minute job.

I would assume many manufacturers of active speakers have smiliar solutions.

 

[Ultrasonic]

I cannot imagine that well designed, well voiced passive speakers that are properly setup in a room that is decent will not sound so good that these type of discussions become mostly academic with the differences being in the measurable as opposed to audible range. I won't rush out to replace my passive speakers; however, I will also acknowledge that as active speakers continue to enter the marketplace that I would not seriously consider them. I just do not like the idea that if the onboard amp fails, the entire system fails. With my passives, if the amp goes, at least I can use a temporary amp while either fixing or replacing the amp.

I see this sort of argument a lot but I don't really think it holds up. If any component of a passive speaker based system has a fault then you either have no sound or you need to have a back-up. Any part of a system can fail so you need a complete back-up system.

Have you heard any/many active speakers out of interest? I'll be honest the technical advantages inherently appeal to me but as I posted above my interest was piqued first of all on the basis of being impressed by what I heard.

 

[maverickronin]

If any component of a passive speaker based system has a fault then you either have no sound or you need to have a back-up. Any part of a system can fail so you need a complete back-up system.

Except it far easier to have backups in a passive system because all the electronics are interchangeable and lower spec backups can be had dirt cheap.

 

[Ultrasonic]

Except it far easier to have backups in a passive system because all the electronics are interchangeable and lower spec backups can be had dirt cheap.

I don't see that as an 'except'. You could have exactly the same back-up system in either case. Or a cheaper active speaker as a back-up for a main active speaker.

 

[maverickronin]

I don't see that as an 'except'. You could have exactly the same back-up system in either case.

The point is that it a lot easier and cheaper with passives, not that it's completely impossible with actives.

How many manufacturers are going to directly sell you replacement boards? Probably only a few. If you're starting from scratch are they going be cheaper than used AVRs or PA amps? If you're not starting from scratch you probably already have spare amps.

Or a cheaper active speaker as a back-up for a main active speaker.

That option is much easier, but a much worse compromise in interim sound quality since the speakers themselves (and not the electronics driving them) make the largest contribution.

 

[levimax]

Have you heard any/many active speakers out of interest? I'll be honest the technical advantages inherently appeal to me but as I posted above my interest was piqued first of all on the basis of being impressed by what I heard.

I have been playing around with DIY tri-amped speakers with active crossovers for years (amplification not built in to speakers). The interesting thing is that with this configuration you can also use external passive crossovers. Of course the hard part is "fine tuning" the crossovers whether active or passive but new tools like REW and Rephase make this much easier than it used to be. My listening impression between using the same speakers with active and passive crossovers is that there is not much if any difference and the "tuning" of the crossovers is by far more important than whether active or passive.

 

[Reed]

I think the powered vs passive argument is the wrong end of the stick. Digital Room Control via DSP is the future. At this point there are few powered speakers that do active (vs preset) room correction. And they’re expensive. I’m an NAD/Dirac user and Dirac is why I went passive, at least for now. I could run my C658 in front of powered speakers but im already invested in passive. What I’d like to see is the ability to upload a Dirac correction to powered speakers. If that’s something available now then please let me know. Folks who aren’t interested in DRC could do without. Those who want it could buy a license. Not sure what kind of in-speaker computing power would be required but MiniDSP offers freestanding Dirac DRC for a reasonable price. So if say KEF could offer a powered LS50 with Dirac for an additional $400 I’d be very interested.

 

[Ultrasonic]

The point is that it a lot easier and cheaper with passives, not that it's completely impossible with actives.

The context of the discussion above was specifically about having back-up equipment when main equipment fails. If your comment is sticking to this subject then no, I don't agree. The cost is identical as I explained above and the difference in inconvenience is so minimal I just don't think it registers as any sort of factor to influence purchasing decisions personally. All we'd be talking about is possibly having to move one or two extra bits of kit at the point of a failure, and arguably this is offset by having to move fewer bits of kit when initially installing the active speakers.

Possibly though you were changing the subject to the cost of the actual repair? If you were then I'd be interested in comments from people with actual experience to chip in but on the face of it I don't see why there is such an obvious issue that it should obviously disuade active speaker ownership. The one concern that I do think is possibly worth at least considering is the chance of an active speaker not being repairable at all. I say this because if it did happen then the total loss would be greater since you'd be writing off both speakers and amp at that point, as opposed to just one element with a passive speaker system. However, is there evidence for this being a significant real concern? Certainly have a long history of supporting their active speaker range, and I'm increasingly getting the impression that Genelec do as well? For newer companies there will inevitably be less evidence to go on, but equally does anyone know of particular examples of this potential concern actually being a real issue?

Since the above is all specifically about faults I suppose it's possibly relevant that at least some active speakers include protection to stop speaker driver damage, and so inherently reduce the chance of faults happening in the first place.

I'll also just observe that active speakers are clearly used extensively in the professional studio environment. If there really were such a slam-dunk argument for actives being so obviously inferior from a cost and hassle perspective in the event of faults then why would this be? I don't see it myself.

I'm not pushing active speakers as some magical solution that everyone should suddenly switch to (they're far from new for starters!) but simply posting to discourage the concept being dismissed for flawed reasons.

How many manufacturers are going to directly sell you replacement boards?

I'm not quite sure what you had in mind by this question but I will just mention that it's pretty common practice for active subwoofer manufacturers to provide customers with replacement plate amps. I've not read anything about anyone having active speakers repaired to have any insight into to what extent any consumer swappable parts may be provided though.

That option is much easier, but a much worse compromise in interim sound quality since the speakers themselves (and not the electronics driving them) make the largest contribution.

You're commenting from the perspective of an amp failure being more likely than a speaker failure there I think? Possibly my experience is atypical but in my ~25 years of hifi use I've never actually had an amp fail but have had to replace a couple of speaker drivers. I do though agree that having to swap to back-up speakers will be more likely to have a more significant detrimental affect on sound quality than a back-up amp.