AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Single Driver, Wide-Bandwidth Speakers => Topic started by: Jonathon Janusz on 31 Mar 2019, 02:08 pm
-
As to not clutter up another thread with an off topic debate, after being on AC long enough now to notice, I thought this might be a valid question to ask, as this topic pops up as a discussion that seems to sidetrack conversations across many threads across circles. Before impulsively piling on I thought it would be worthwhile to clearly and plainly give the question its moment in the sun to find out if this change away from what appears to me to be commonly settled and understood industry jargon is genuinely gaining traction in this community and or the industry more broadly.
So, what does our community think? Good, bad, right, wrong, harmless, or confusing?
Thanks!
-
Calling fullrange drivers of active may be confusing to audiophiles and music lovers, xoverless FR drivers are a niche market inside a already small market, we are only a few thousands people in the entire world, there is no teens in FR drivers we are old people, new generations want cheap earsbuds.
-
You left out "No because it's completely wrong" ;)
-
Who knows? Seems to me you should first define what is an active speaker? :scratch:
Gene
-
An active speaker is a speaker that uses an active crossover. An active crossover is a crossover made out of active components - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_component#Classifications.
-
Thanks. I did not know that! :thumb:
Gene
-
The advantage of an active full range would be you can also add the DAC to the configuration. Less cables and parts would make the sound even better. I won't mention the company, but there is one that is considering on doing that to the Cube loudspeakers from Poland.
If not active, what would you call this?
-
Hmm, active but with no built-in amp? That would not make sense to me.
-
The advantage of an active full range would be you can also add the DAC to the configuration. Less cables and parts would make the sound even better. I won't mention the company, but there is one that is considering on doing that to the Cube loudspeakers from Poland.
If not active, what would you call this?
An AC a DAC?
-
The most important factor of an active speaker is that the amp(s) only push the driver voice coil, not any other passive devices like resistors, inductors, and capacitors as in a conventional multi way speaker. In that sense a single driver speaker(without passive equalization) is certainly related to active speakers. Indeed one could add active equalization before an amp to a single driver system to flatten and/or extend its response and it still is a single driver system.
-
Hmm, active but with no built-in amp? That would not make sense to me.
Amp and Dac together.
Maybe a DACactive?
-
You left out "No because it's completely wrong" ;)
Except that it's actually completely correct.
-
An active speaker is a speaker that uses an active crossover. An active crossover is a crossover made out of active components - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_component#Classifications.
If you read the definition posted, a loudspeaker is a transducer that is an electromechanical device. It is not a component and does not follow the same definitions as say a passive or active preamp. A single driver speaker absolutely is an active arrangement. When the crossover comes before the amplification stage, or if there is no crossover, it's active. Most home loudspeakers have the crossover after the amplification, and are therefore passive. It matters not one bit if the speaker is "powered" or not, that's totally seperate. Most lifestyle "powered" speakers are actually passive setups.
-
If you read the definition posted, a loudspeaker is a transducer that is an electromechanical device. It is not a component and does not follow the same definitions as say a passive or active preamp.
Well, it does still meet the definition of passive component, but regardless, that's not relevant to whether the crossover is active or not.
A single driver speaker absolutely is an active arrangement. When the crossover comes before the amplification stage, or if there is no crossover, it's active.
No, the absence of a crossover is by no means the same thing as having an active crossover....
-
An active speaker is a speaker that uses an active crossover. An active crossover is a crossover made out of active components - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_component#Classifications.
I don't see or derive that verbiage from the wikipedia link and don't find it helpful anyway. I prefer this definition: "An active loudspeaker is one that uses one channel of amplification to directly power each driver." In which case single driver speakers (including most subwoofers) qualify as active, as well as what is traditionally termed as active speakers.
But I wouldn't use the term because it's not useful with single driver designs, as it's redundant and active speakers are understood even less well than single driver speakers even though it's completely true. I've pushed the idea because of the advantages of active design (greater dynamics, flatter frequency response, deep/full bass) help explain the remarkable performance possible from single driver speakers, which would help broaden acceptance of the concept. BTW my adoption of the single driver concept came from a remarkable audition that compared manufactured active versus passive versions of the same 2-way monitor (Paradigm Studio 20 v.2 versus Active 20, roughly 18 years ago) - it was no contest.
Note also that single driver speakers may use filters such as zobel and baffle-step, so there can be circuitry between the power amplification and each driver. And the above definitions do not require the amplifier to be inside the cabinet.
-
Ahm... no, the wikipedia link does not contain the "verbiage", it's for people who don't know that - in the context of electronic circuits - the words active and passive already have a well-understood meaning, you can't just make up new definitions for them as you please.
Your definition isn't even useful for multi-way active speakers, as there's no need for the amps to be connected directly to the drivers, or for that matter for there to be one amplification channel per driver.
-
:scratch:
JLM sure is adamant about this. But since he has the worlds best sounding speakers, according to him, maybe that is the reason.
-
Your definition isn't even useful for multi-way active speakers, as there's no need for the amps to be connected directly to the drivers, or for that matter for there to be one amplification channel per driver.
Huh??
-
:scratch:
JLM sure is adamant about this. But since he has the worlds best sounding speakers, according to him, maybe that is the reason.
For my application, and for probably most audiophiles, many would agree that they are some of the world's very best. (JBL 708P)
-
An active crossover does not make an active speaker. And a full range single driver has nothing to do with the word "Active". 99% of all speakers in the standard home audio world are Passive, Pro audio uses a lot of ACTIVE speakers. Sure there are a few in the audio high end as well such as ATC.
Not sure where people are attempting to define this.
For the layman, the Pro Audio studio, or audiophile generally speaking an "Active Speaker" simply means it is self - powered with an amplifier internally which can be powering an internal crossover of either Passive or Active depending on how many amp channels are built into the cabinet.
So if you can plug a power cord into the back of the speaker cabinet to keep it simple, and feed the built in amplifier with a signal cable Ie. XLR or RCA, or 1/4" jack [not speaker cable] your running a form of active speaker as there is no additional speaker cables outside the box.
Whether this speaker uses an "Active [electronic] Crossover" or "Passive Crossover" it does not matter. Its a self powered unit period.
People that Bi-amp, or Tri-amp with multiple amp "one amp channel" per driver outside the speakers using an additional crossover like DBX or whoever to split the signals is an "ACTIVE SYSTEM" but not an active speaker.
A good simple example of an "Active speaker" is a SUBWOOFER. A powered subwoofer we all see at virtually every best buy on the planet. There are passive Subs as well that would use outboard crossover and amp, but not to many will be doing this unless in a huge professional P.A. system.
Back to the original question an ACTIVE subwoofer generally single driver would be the only common use active speaker for general definition, or purpose. And by the way there are some subwoofers mostly older variety that will allow you to hook up your main speaker cables in order to jump the signal from the left and right channel, this is a high level signal instead of the line level used by the standard subwoofer RCA or LFE input. Regardless its still an Active speaker in this case.
-
For my application, and for probably most audiophiles, many would agree that they are some of the world's very best. (JBL 708P)
That is great. And I love my Alnicos just like many others here on AC do. But I am not buying JBL's just becuase you say so. For some very odd reason, you sure like to pick on me about this view.
:duh:
There is another audiophile on another forum that thinks his passive JBL's are the world's best speakers. JBL fanboys are everywhere.
-
Ahm... no, the wikipedia link does not contain the "verbiage", it's for people who don't know that - in the context of electronic circuits - the words active and passive already have a well-understood meaning, you can't just make up new definitions for them as you please.
Your definition isn't even useful for multi-way active speakers, as there's no need for the amps to be connected directly to the drivers, or for that matter for there to be one amplification channel per driver.
Just curious, when something is totally different, why not make up a new definition? Nobody heard of immersive audio five years ago. Somebody had to make that up.
Two channel maybe totally dead in 10-20 years. WD was not wrong about Immersive.
-
Just curious, when something is totally different, why not make up a new definition? Nobody heard of immersive audio five years ago. Somebody had to make that up.
Two channel maybe totally dead in 10-20 years. WD was not wrong about Immersive.
For things that are new/different, sure, make up a new term/definition. No big deal. But to reuse established terms in a way that doesn't really coincide with even semi-established understanding is confusing matters for no apparent reason. Should we start calling front wheel drive cars, non-rear wheel drive cars instead? :D
-
The problem is less about the terms themselves and more the areas where they may overlap complicated by casual, less than fully precise usage.
- Active vs. passive refers to crossover approach implemented in a multi-driver speaker (with subsequent impacts to the amplification approach)
- Active speakers have a line-level cross-over upstream of the amps. (Requires more amps, but typically smaller.)
- Passive speakers have a speaker-level crossover downstream of the amps. (Requires fewer amps, but typically larger.)
- Active vs. passive in no way defines the crossover implementation - it can be analog or digital.
- Active vs. passive in no way defines where the amps or crossover are installed - they can be inside the speaker or external.
- Multi-driver speakers can be partially active. (Most commonly the mid-to-bass crossover will utilize an active crossover, as the large voice coils of these drivers produce the most significant back-EMF. The bass driver in this scenario could just as easily be a subwoofer as an integrated woofer.)
- Single-driver speakers do share one of the primary benefits of active speakers, mainly a lack of back-EMF transmitted through a crossover from one driver to any others, impacting the impedance response of all connected drivers. (Back-EMF complicates the crossover design, but can be addressed by a good designer.)
- Single-driver speakers may be implemented with frequency response correction (EQ), which is typically included as part of the crossover design in a multi-driver speaker. This could be done before or after the amp, either via analog or digital means.
- Powered speakers have the amp integrated into the speaker itself, which can then have either an active or passive crossover, or no crossover at all, as well as analog or digital driver EQ, or none at all. It implies nothing about how the signal is managed.
I don't recommend trying to co-opt terms used to describe crossover implementations as a means to highlight a single-driver speaker design benefit that just happens to be shared in common with one particular crossover approach. The 'single-driver' description already implies the lack of back-EMF that you're trying to acknowledge. There is no 'passive' version of a single driver speaker from which to try and differentiate.
Focus instead on understanding how the design compromises differ in a single driver implementation vs. that of a multi-driver implementation and the various ways in which they may be overcome, and then just be able to explain it while adding the correct details to your single-driver speaker description if you feel the need for added precision. Examples:
- If your amp is integrated into your single driver speaker, call it a 'powered single-driver speaker'.
- If you want to characterize the driver EQ description, call it a 'single-driver speaker with analog (or digital or no) driver EQ'.
Cheers!
-
+1 ^^^
Thanks for this.
-
+2