[Joe Frances]

At this point in time, is it a bad idea, or simply hopelessly retrograde, or financially foolish, to consider buying high end passive speakers and building amp/s, DACs, turntables, etc... (to say nothing of expensive cables and wires) around such speakers?  Another way of asking the question: are powered speakers the right way to go if one is planning on building a long-term retirement system? A third way of saying it:  in five years will powered speakers totally dominate the audio industry?  I am asking everyone I know or can ask because I don't want to make stupid decisions with my cash.  Thanks.

[Anonamemouse]

I predict that in 6 years I will be able to tell you what the market has done in 5 years. But I kinda doubt that active loudspeakers will dominate the market by then.

Active loudspeakers do sound more dynamic, because every unit has its own amplification. Unfortunately the filtering usually is done through DSP, which at this point in time still is not perfect. So for *my* ultimate active loudspeaker I would like to see the filtering done analog. A friend of mine owns a loudspeaker company, he has played with this, he let me hear the differences, no DSP for me.

If you do have the resources I suggest you go active, but before you buy make sure you know what is available. Listen, listen more, keep listening. Trust your ears.

[James Tanner]

Hi

In my opinion Active done correctly (DSP and quality amplifiers on each driver directly) will never dominate the market. 

But for those folks that are tired of the passive merry-go-round  ... trying one speaker after another to improve the performance of their audio system Active is the only option IMO. So much of what we do as audiophiles are side-ways steps - lets try this amp or this speaker or this cable etc.

Folks DSP and direct connection of amplifiers to drive units can provide so much more accuracy in signal delivery that once you hear a quality Active system you can never go back!

james

[James Tanner]

This just shows the advantage of the accuracy improvement of the Sound Power and Frequency response improvements attainable with Active systems to say nothing of the vast improvement in dynamic contrasts, inner micro detail and a host of other advantages active systems provide.

james

[JLM]

Hi

In my opinion Active done correctly (DSP and quality amplifiers on each driver directly) will never dominate the market. 

But for those folks that are tired of the passive merry-go-round  ... trying one speaker after another to improve the performance of their audio system Active is the only option IMO. So much of what we do as audiophiles are side-ways steps - lets try this amp or this speaker or this cable etc.

Folks DSP and direct connection of amplifiers to drive units can provide so much more accuracy in signal delivery that once you hear a quality Active system you can never go back!

james

+1!  Passives sound muddy, muted, and dull compared to my JBL 708P 2-way monitors (constant directivity tweeter, 8" ported woofer, lots of built in controls, $4000/pair USD MSRP).  At age 62 they are my "last great" speakers.

The Bryston active approach that uses external amps is crude, expensive, complex, and bulky, so yes I don't see it gaining wide spread popularity.  But even typical active monitors with built-in amps and no speaker cables may never become the norm for audiophiles to satisfy the urge to keep hunting, have a large trophy case (equipment rack full of big expensive gear) to show off, and the general human tendency for lust.  Typical "all-in-one" active monitors don't address any of those traits. 

Note that not all active speakers use DSP.  Analog versions of DSP would be massively inefficient (big, expensive, power hungry, and have limited abilities).  The trend now for all digital systems is to go to software based DSP (such as REW or Dirac Live) where you have graphics and full control. 

[macrojack]

The system for the near future will be something like my OPPO Sonica combined with something like the JBL 705P speakers I have ordered. Not expensive at all by our audiophile standards. The DAC/streamer costs $800 and the JBL 705 are $999 each. Consider how close you are to SOTA with that rig for so little money.

Of course, you can take it further or spend less depending on your personal requirements. I signed up for Spotify Premium a couple of days ago and will consider moving to Tidal or Qobuz. As for now, I use the Sonica app on my Iphone 6 to bring up music instantly. It is amazing to me that the music begins immediately with no lag whatsoever. It's like the music was waiting on pause. It takes much longer for my tonearm to drop than for the song I chose to start in this system.

 I know that the Sonica is no longer being manufactured but I feel sure there are now comparable price/performance options out there. Further, I assert that the practicality and performance, coupled with convenience and WAF encouragement, will eliminate the anachronous clutter of the systems so many of us cling to under obsolete presumptions.

Enter the future. It is digital. It is active speakers. It is fun. It is the point from which diminishing returns proceeds.

[James Tanner]

I would not necessarily call it 'crude'. (The Bryston active approach that uses external amps is crude -JLM }

Quality external amplifiers do have some advantages when it comes to Discrete amplifier design over Chips,  power output capability, power supply design, size, etc. and the ability to allow the 'trophy' customer much more flexibility to decide what amplifier type to use on what part of his system as well as trying different amplifiers and crossovers in the future as we all know the audiophiles like myself prefer.

james

[firedog]

As soon as Millenials and GenXers dominate the market, actives will dominate.
Actives as a rule sound better (active vs same speaker as a passive).
The only real downside is that if you have a fault, your whole system has to go in for repair, and not one component that's easily replaceable.

[dB Cooper]

akers.

The Bryston active approach that uses external amps is crude, expensive, complex, and bulky, so yes I don't see it gaining wide spread popularity.

A walk through at a show or a browse of the Photos area shows that the 'rack of boxes' approach does have a following. Many audiophiles like the modularity (and thus interchangeability/tweakability) of this approach, as Mr. Tanner says above. More compact digital amps actually make this approach more practical, although I haven't been all that impressed by the ones I've heard.

I have heard that many speaker designers consider the crossover design the hardest part of the speaker design to get right. Not only do active speakers use power much more efficiently, it is probably easier to get the best results performance wise from an active setup.

[Jon L]

As an audiophile, when I think about buying expensive audiophile active speakers, I am stopped by the thought of being stuck with the included electronics "forever," which WILL become outdated. 

I would love for a manufacturer to make modular active loudspeakers with removable amplification/DSP modules that can be updated with future technologies and software. 

In fact, I would love to see PCM-to-PWM type of "pure digital" amp modules that take spdif or usb signal directly and use sophisticated digital DSP internally, e.g. Lyngdorf, Devialet.  Then, I can feel more comfortable parting with large sums of hard-earned money 

[adol290]

As an audiophile, when I think about buying expensive audiophile active speakers, I am stopped by the thought of being stuck with the included electronics "forever," which WILL become outdated. 

I would love for a manufacturer to make modular active loudspeakers with removable amplification/DSP modules that can be updated with future technologies and software. 

In fact, I would love to see PCM-to-PWM type of "pure digital" amp modules that take spdif or usb signal directly and use sophisticated digital DSP internally, e.g. Lyngdorf, Devialet.  Then, I can feel more comfortable parting with large sums of hard-earned money 

+1

I have owned a pair of PMC IB2i actives. What i did not like was you were stuck with the "house sound" and as you say the included electronics. These speakers converted anolog to digital back to anolog.
The amplification was internal Class D. So no matter what you did(even changing cables) you always ended up with the "house sound". When something went wrong you had to return the boards from both speakers so that
 they would be matched properly again(speaking from experience).

I now own a pair of model T actives and if find it much more refreshing to be able to change the "house sound" by changing my amplifiers, or my cables. Yes you are still limited by the Bax-1 crossover,
 but you do have a few more options. If the Bax-1 breaks, it is much easier to send a single box back to be repaired. Though i must admit it would be nice be have Removeable/updateable DSP options.

[James Tanner]

+1

I have owned a pair of PMC IB2i actives. What i did not like was you were stuck with the "house sound" and as you say the included electronics. These speakers converted anolog to digital back to anolog.
The amplification was internal Class D. So no matter what you did(even changing cables) you always ended up with the "house sound". When something went wrong you had to return the boards from both speakers so that
 they would be matched properly again(speaking from experience).

I now own a pair of model T actives and if find it much more refreshing to be able to change the "house sound" by changing my amplifiers, or my cables. Yes you are still limited by the Bax-1 crossover,
 but you do have a few more options. If the Bax-1 breaks, it is much easier to send a single box back to be repaired. Though i must admit it would be nice be have Removeable/updateable DSP options.

Hi

Yes that is the advantage of the BAX crossover in that it is modular but it is also software driven so future changes in crossover design or software is simple.

james

[witchdoctor]

As soon as Millenials and GenXers dominate the market, actives will dominate.
Actives as a rule sound better (active vs same speaker as a passive).
The only real downside is that if you have a fault, your whole system has to go in for repair, and not one component that's easily replaceable.

Actually you can send an individual driver or a plate amp in for repair. If this argument held water no one would purchase active subwoofers.

[gab]

The Bryston active approach that uses external amps is crude, expensive, complex, and bulky, so yes I don't see it gaining wide spread popularity.   

JLM - you are just back from restricted banishment land, and from the get go you trash a mans product in his own circle! Amazing.....

I wonder what you'd call the "stuff" hiding in your cherished JBL 708p? Have you had a look?

gab

[gab]

I would not necessarily call it 'crude'. (The Bryston active approach that uses external amps is crude -JLM }

Quality external amplifiers do have some advantages when it comes to Discrete amplifier design over Chips,  power output capability, power supply design, size, etc. and the ability to allow the 'trophy' customer much more flexibility to decide what amplifier type to use on what part of his system as well as trying different amplifiers and crossovers in the future as we all know the audiophiles like myself prefer.

james

+1

[witchdoctor]

As an audiophile, when I think about buying expensive audiophile active speakers, I am stopped by the thought of being stuck with the included electronics "forever," which WILL become outdated. 

I would love for a manufacturer to make modular active loudspeakers with removable amplification/DSP modules that can be updated with future technologies and software. 

In fact, I would love to see PCM-to-PWM type of "pure digital" amp modules that take spdif or usb signal directly and use sophisticated digital DSP internally, e.g. Lyngdorf, Devialet.  Then, I can feel more comfortable parting with large sums of hard-earned money 

When I think of being stuck forever I think of components that suck. If you buy something you like you are generally happy now or in 5 years. I think you have more risk in a receiver getting outdated than an active speaker.

[witchdoctor]

At this point in time, is it a bad idea, or simply hopelessly retrograde, or financially foolish, to consider buying high end passive speakers and building amp/s, DACs, turntables, etc... (to say nothing of expensive cables and wires) around such speakers?  Another way of asking the question: are powered speakers the right way to go if one is planning on building a long-term retirement system? A third way of saying it:  in five years will powered speakers totally dominate the audio industry?  I am asking everyone I know or can ask because I don't want to make stupid decisions with my cash.  Thanks.

Joe, you make a GREAT point. The problem is that it is based on logic. The high end market buys emotionally and then justifies with logic. As for not making stupid decisions I applaud your asking the right question.

If listening to music is your long term goal just go active and be done with it.
If tinkering with electronics is your long term goal go passive. Some people like spending money on gear and just need that special feeling when hooking it up, all good.

I have a 14.1 active system and the way you can customize the sound very easily is using room treatments and power conditioning (what a concept I know) I did one major upgrade in 10 years and that is upgrading to immersive audio.
Could I continue to swap out processors every 3-5 years, sure. Is it worth it? Only if I got a MUCH bigger room like a dedicated theater. Every one of my active speakers is internally biamped. When I added 5 new height channels I just bought 5 additional active speakers. When I added two additional wide channels I just bought 2 new active speakers.
If I didn't use active speakers I would need 28 channels of amplification and miles of speaker wire to biamp each speaker. It still wouldn't sound as good as active. James posted the graph of the passive T vs Active T. You can't replicate the active results just by adding amps, you need the full set of active kit.

[witchdoctor]

This just shows the advantage of the accuracy improvement of the Sound Power and Frequency response improvements attainable with Active systems to say nothing of the vast improvement in dynamic contrasts, inner micro detail and a host of other advantages active systems provide.

james

What about the cost advantages? Does the additional accuracy come at a higher or lower cost to the consumer? I would assume it is lower but just wanted your input.

BTW, JBL uses external amplification in their flagship M2 monitors and offer either passive or active models in their 7 series and let the customer decide. I guess they feel their are advantages to both approaches.

[mrhyfy]

I think it would be great if the BAX crossover had a digital input option.  It seems odd to me that "we" go to so much hand ringing over d-a conversion and then do a-d / /d-a conversion on top of that. No matter how well done.
Imagine pumping a BDP-3 directly into the BAX crossover!
Of course,  we need to sneak in some volume control and keep the existing analogue input for 8 track and vinyl fans!
IMHO

[James Tanner]

I think it would be great if the BAX crossover had a digital input option.  It seems odd to me that "we" go to so much hand ringing over d-a conversion and then do a-d / /d-a conversion on top of that. No matter how well done.
Imagine pumping a BDP-3 directly into the BAX crossover!
Of course,  we need to sneak in some volume control and keep the existing analogue input for 8 track and vinyl fans!
IMHO

Hi

Yes volume control is an issue and my plan going forward is to build a digital preamp with an optional internal card to provide a digital crossover plug in card for our active speakers.  That way you can keep the signal digital throughout the preamp without conversion.

That being said even with the conversion from analog to digital in the BAX-1 the advantages of going active far outweigh the disadvantages of passive systems.

james