Active Speakers

[Gordon]

I'm sure you are right jb. Once you have a system that is comfortable [as in a favourite pair of shoes, say, or the company of a valued friend perhaps] and shows no vices you forget it and get on with the music. Constantly looking over your shoulder at what might be wrong with it is no way to enjoy it but if you find you don't I suppose it's time to change. If people like to experiment with hardware then I'm sure it's enjoyable as a way to explore the variety and revisit old favourites too. I kept an old valve set of Quads for years in the loft until I realised that I had not even looked at them for a long time so they went to an audio fair and were sent to a good home. Can you still get KT66s? Still miss my Quad electrostatics - don't suppose they count as Active do they? I don't think I'd like to go back to that first Leak Stereo 30 though!! A bit of a revolution at the time [Germanium transistors !!] but I doubt it would pass muster now - 10 watts in 15 ohms IHFM!!! Arrghh!! They did replace it with a silicon transistor version, the Stereo 30 Plus, which is probably better sounding.

When I was lot younger I was an avid reader of HiFi News and every month my wife would roll her eyes because she could see the potential for some requests to the treasury for expenditure!! Browsing visits to the local dealers for chats stopped a long time ago. Anyway there is only one left in spitting distance now.

[Nevalti]

For anyone uninterested in achieving the best sound, they are of course very sensible.

How absurd.

An understandable post if you have nothing more constructive to say.

I noted that there are several members who advocate active speakers. Some of those members have previously recommended brands which you can not audition before buying(!) but can only buy direct from the factory. I don't recall any detailed explanation for their choices other that 'active=good' or similar over-simplifications. I felt, reasonably I think, that it was fair and reasonable to express an opposite view in this thread 'Active Speakers' in the interests of balance and debate. It would be sad if people innocently followed the 'active' route without understanding the drawbacks as well as the undoubted benefits.

The term 'modern radiogram' is not very far from the truth; add in a tuner module for £4.40 and you are there! Said of course to prompt people either to think about it or to reply and explain why they are different and better than radiograms of old. I do know that many/most(?) active speakers have the potential advantage of active cross-overs but that is not a magic answer to all problems.

I have stopped well short of using words like 'absurd' but anyone spending a large sum of money on active speakers, or any other audio equipment, without comparing them with other items, really does deserve that description.

[Beef Oven!]

An understandable post if you have nothing more constructive to say.

I noted that there are several members who advocate active speakers. Some of those members have previously recommended brands which you can not audition before buying(!) but can only buy direct from the factory. I don't recall any detailed explanation for their choices other that 'active=good' or similar over-simplifications. I felt, reasonably I think, that it was fair and reasonable to express an opposite view in this thread 'Active Speakers' in the interests of balance and debate. It would be sad if people innocently followed the 'active' route without understanding the drawbacks as well as the undoubted benefits.

The term 'modern radiogram' is not very far from the truth; add in a tuner module for £4.40 and you are there! Said of course to prompt people either to think about it or to reply and explain why they are different and better than radiograms of old. I do know that many/most(?) active speakers have the potential advantage of active cross-overs but that is not a magic answer to all problems.

I have stopped well short of using words like 'absurd' but anyone spending a large sum of money on active speakers, or any other audio equipment, without comparing them with other items, really does deserve that description.

I think that it is absurd to suggest that people who buy active speakers aren't interested in achieving the best possible sound. Many people are unwilling, or have grown out of, spending inordinate amounts of time and silly sums of money on Hi-Fi equipment, trying to get something which, in all practical terms, is unobtainable. I think I was a mug to have spent so much money on Hi-Fi equipment down the years, when I could have spent the money more wisely (on better whisky perhaps). I think you also fall into the mug category, since by definition, despite all your time effort and money, you do not own the best Hi-Fi set-up that you could have bought.

[MrGongGong]

I think that it is absurd to suggest that people who buy active speakers aren't interested in achieving the best possible sound. .

More or less every electroacoustic studio I have been to is full of ATC and Genelec active speakers.
The people who make that stuff are often the most critical and demanding of listeners, in my experience, far more so than those involved in other forms of music.

The Studio at the ROH has Nautilus speakers (mmmmmm) with a pair of Genelecs as the "cheapo" comparison pair

[Nevalti]

I think that it is absurd to suggest that people who buy active speakers aren't interested in achieving the best possible sound.

That is a distortion of what I said but that may have been accidental on your part, so I won't accuse you of deliberate misrepresentation.

Many people are unwilling, or have grown out of, spending inordinate amounts of time and silly sums of money on Hi-Fi equipment

Resorting, once again, to childish insults, and from a position of total ignorance, is hardly likely to influence anyone. I'm sure you can do better than that.

.....trying to get something which, in all practical terms, is unobtainable.

Gross assumptions again! Is my listening and tinkering pleasure unobtainable? Hardly? Do I get pleasure from making efforts? Indeed I do. Realistic expectations are always obtainable.

I think I was a mug ...

Are you quite sure that ...... never mind.

I think you also fall into the mug category, since by definition, despite all your time effort and money, you do not own the best Hi-Fi set-up that you could have bought.

Ah, carefully considered insults again.

Does doing things which give them pleasure, make someone a mug? Is someone who enjoys trying hard a mug? Most of the world enjoy doing things which give them pleasure. Does that make them mugs? Most also admire people who make efforts to improve and tend to think less of people with the attitude - 'Oh, that'll do, I can't be bothered to improve it". What should we call that sort of person? In-'active'?

Rather than issuing childish insults because I highlighted some drawbacks of active speakers in this Active Speakers thread, why not tell us why Active is better. Tell us what you use, why you use it, what are its particular qualities, what it cost you, what you compared it with before you bought it, what was it clearly better than, how you are intending to upgrade it or how you intend to keep it forever, how you have given up seeking anything better, etc. Active speakers have some distinct advantages and disadvantages, so set out a case for Active rather than issuing petty insults to those who question your preferences. Isn't that the point of this forum?

[Beef Oven!]

More or less every electroacoustic studio I have been to is full of ATC and Genelec active speakers.
The people who make that stuff are often the most critical and demanding of listeners, in my experience, far more so than those involved in other forms of music.

The Studio at the ROH has Nautilus speakers (mmmmmm) with a pair of Genelecs as the "cheapo" comparison pair

What a coincidence, I've recently bought a pair of Genelecs. A friend of mine from the Greenham Common brigade recommended them

[Frances_iom]

. Still miss my Quad electrostatics .

still have mine from the early 70's tho Quad amp replaced by an Arcam - but they are big + take up much room

[Beef Oven!]

That is a distortion of what I said but that may have been accidental on your part, so I won't accuse you of deliberate misrepresentation.

Resorting, once again, to childish insults, and from a position of total ignorance, is hardly likely to influence anyone. I'm sure you can do better than that.

Gross assumptions again! Is my listening and tinkering pleasure unobtainable? Hardly? Do I get pleasure from making efforts? Indeed I do. Realistic expectations are always obtainable.


Are you quite sure that ...... never mind.

Ah, carefully considered insults again.

Does doing things which give them pleasure, make someone a mug? Is someone who enjoys trying hard a mug? Most of the world enjoy doing things which give them pleasure. Does that make them mugs? Most also admire people who make efforts to improve and tend to think less of people with the attitude - 'Oh, that'll do, I can't be bothered to improve it". What should we call that sort of person? In-'active'?

Rather than issuing childish insults because I highlighted some drawbacks of active speakers in this Active Speakers thread, why not tell us why Active is better. Tell us what you use, why you use it, what are its particular qualities, what it cost you, what you compared it with before you bought it, what was it clearly better than, how you are intending to upgrade it or how you intend to keep it forever, how you have given up seeking anything better, etc. Active speakers have some distinct advantages and disadvantages, so set out a case for Active rather than issuing petty insults to those who question your preferences. Isn't that the point of this forum?

Actually, none of my post was insulting, it represents how we've all got sucked into the whole Hi-Fi game, exactly how the industry wanted.

I think you've misunderstood me.

I'm very happy with my recently purchased Genelecs and I'm enjoying listening to music, rather than fussing about the equipment.





.

[Gordon]

The Studio at the ROH has Nautilus speakers (mmmmmm) with a pair of Genelecs as the "cheapo" comparison pair

But B&W 800D's have crossovers, they're not active, scroll down this for picture.

Note the comment about how hard they are to drive. £18k a pair and a fork lift to deliver - 102 KGm each, 224lbs, 16 stones in old money. Notice the comment about human hearing in the section on tweeters! Although the sensitivity is not unusually low - 90dB from a Watt in 8 ohms at 1 metre - their power rating is 1kW so they will deliver 120dB acoustically if you clobber them hard!! Not sure I'd want that at home. Wonder what Abbey Road use to drive them?

However Genelec [assuming it's the model I think it is] are and they are very impressive, we used them in the lab. Very revealing of detail.

The one technical advantage of AS is the loss of the conventional crossover and there are some obvious practical benfits too for those to whom those benefits may apply. As this thread has illustrated, other factors, rather more prosaic perhaps, come into the buying decision.

That technical thing may well lead to improved performance. These two top grade but very expensive speakers demonstrate [not prove] that either way can work if the designer goes about his work appropriately. The relative simplicity of the 800D crossover is interesting:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=B%26W+800D+Crossover&tbm=isch&source=iu&imgil=29HJI10dWMYWKM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcTgg7P__PJvd8ZB21jg_hGInAA12_StXwKqBKv-jSCAPEY2-7Zwwg%253B600%253B404%253BqPuUiLiUlEQRoM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.stereophile.com%25252Fcontent%25252Fbampw-800-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements&sa=X&ei=a1feUuuTKsib0AWF04GACw&ved=0CDcQ9QEwAg&biw=1119&bih=778#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=29HJI10dWMYWKM%253A%3BqPuUiLiUlEQRoM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.stereophile.com%252Fimages%252F511B800fig3.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.stereophile.com%252Fcontent%252Fbampw-800-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements%3B600%3B404

There are some responses there too, and look at those coils!!! I don't think that it is inevitable that AS's are "better" - either measured or heard - but one has to consider what it is one is looking for in the whole specification.

[OldTechie]

Wonder what Abbey Road use to drive them?

According to Grahams Hi-Fi Abbey Road has over 30 amplifiers from Classé Audio. The manufacturer is owned by B&W Group. I guess they will get one of these per speaker http://www.classeaudio.com/ctseries/ct-m600.htm. That's another 40Kgm per unit!

The trouble with speakers is that they are really all very poor when measured. If you look at the frequency response of the top quality B&Ws it is not something you would accept from a second-rate mid-fi amplifier. And the frequency response is only the tip of the iceberg of errors that can be measured with impulse response etc. Microphones are generally a bit better, but most add a characteristic sound to the original so recording engineers have preferences for different microphones for different purposes. The only way to hear an orchestra without significant acoustic degradation is to go to a concert.

I had active loudspeakers for a long time because anything I could afford to buy seemed to be a compromise and I wanted to have a go myself. It's much easier to tweak the response at low level with small components than to find the appropriate large inductors, capacitors and high power low-value resistors to mess around with a passive crossover. However, once one of my Linsley-Hood power amps had burst into oscillation and destroyed one of my KEF B139s and the other had decayed with old age, I gave up and bought some reasonable commercial speakers.

Genelec was not my choice. We used them a lot for studio purposes at my last place of work but I found I liked their smaller ones more than the big ones. Our sound people preferred an elderly pair of Rogers LS5/8s for main monitoring. With a liking for organ music, a pair of small speakers with limited LF was not what I wanted. The manufacturer I chose does active speakers, but not at the price I was prepared to pay and their passive crossover is competent. What I want for home use is not necessarily what I would buy for studio use. In a studio, the loudspeaker must provide the monitoring to ensure that the user does not get their mix wrong or let distorted signals pass unnoticed, and that is not necessarily the same thing as providing the greatest listening pleasure. The Rogers LS5/8 (BBC Design) is not what I would choose for home use because the active crossover is noisy and would be a problem for low-level listening (and is no longer available.) So I'm back without an active crossover, though I do have the power amps screwed on the back of the speakers for convenience.

One of the loudspeaker we used to use for video edit suites was the Philips Motional Feedback unit. This had a pickup coil on the bass speaker used to include the mechanics of the speaker in a feedback loop. They sounded quite nice and were an economical source of a monitor speaker with built-in amplification. That's a concept that requires an active approach.

It's not wise to claim that one solution is always superior to another - especially with loudspeakers which are all the result of a designer's choice of compromises.

[MrGongGong]

But B&W 800D's have crossovers, they're not active, scroll down

I know
I was only mentioning them because they were referred to and thought it mildly amusing that in place of the Aurotones or NS10's (complete with spare tweeters for the time when they pop out !) they have a pair of Genelec 8020's for comparison.

I do think it's telling that the folks who make electroacoustic music seem to choose Genelecs or ATC's (though, as others have said, I find the ATC's to harsh for long periods of listening). If you listen to music that has the massive frequency range that acousmatic music often has AND actually make the music by listening to loudspeakers rather than by trying to make the speakers sound like the room or hall you recorded in, then i'm sure one does develop very critical ears indeed.

I'll find out what they use at IRCAM.

[Nevalti]

.... So I'm back without an active crossover, though I do have the power amps screwed on the back of the speakers for convenience.......

Perhaps straying slightly off-topic but I have often thought that an excellent set-up. Space efficient with a likely advantage of short speaker cables. I fell in love with the PMC OB1i speakers and, struggling to find the right amp, I was very tempted by the idea of the Bryston piggy-back amps but unfortunately I couldn't find anywhere to audition them. I ended up getting a Bryston 4B SST so the piggy-back Brystons would probably have been fine.

It is a great shame that so few manufacturers make amps suitable for mounting on the back of speakers. I presume that not many people particularly want amplifiers cluttering up their lounge.

It's not wise to claim that one solution is always superior to another - especially with loudspeakers which are all the result of a designer's choice of compromises.

Agreed.

[Gordon]

According to Grahams Hi-Fi Abbey Road has over 30 amplifiers from Classé Audio. The manufacturer is owned by B&W Group. I guess they will get one of these per speaker http://www.classeaudio.com/ctseries/ct-m600.htm. That's another 40Kgm per unit!

The trouble with speakers is that they are really all very poor when measured. If you look at the frequency response of the top quality B&Ws it is not something you would accept from a second-rate mid-fi amplifier. And the frequency response is only the tip of the iceberg of errors that can be measured with impulse response etc.

Thanks for that link to Classe. Brutes aren't they?

Yes indeed the FR of speakers is less than flat and that is measured in an anechoic chamber. What it's like in a living room is another thing.