Having read, on this forum, with interest about the change, by some members, to active speakers away from passive speakers: the following thought arrises.
Apart from being able to reduce the hifi box count, by one box or down to just having one box, are there any other reasons that drove the swap?
Sound quality obviously.
I donāt have a slim active system with the amps in the speakers, but have a traditional active system. The direct control of power amps of drivers is very beneficial for the sound quality and it almost feels like a source upgrade.
Active is far more than about box count - the primary benefit being direct drive of speakers - no compromises from crossover, and direct control over the driversā voice coils. That applies to all active systems, though of course only active speakers with the amps built into or physically attached to the speakers do that with decreased rather than increased box count. Active speakers have the added benefit of certainty thar the amps are suited to the speakers. That does not mean that they are necessarily the best possible amps, but suitability is guaranteed, as is adequacy of grip and power for the speakers in question.
Of course as with any speaker an active speaker is only good if you like the sound character of the speakers. Active drive of speakers not themselves available active can enable a far wider range of speaker options, provided that the crossover can be bypassed, and if a dedcated active crossover is not available also provided that you are comfortable with setting up an adjusable one.
Fully active systems have an amplifier channel per driver which has efficiency benefits as well the possibility of optimising the amplifier to the driver. Passive systems tend to reduce the output to the tweeter (often the most efficient driver) in order to balance output across the frequency range - this can lead to āwastageā of the amplifierās power. Passive crossovers can also introduce phase and timing distortions too.
Of course, a full range driver based speaker system can involve many of the benefits of active systems (direct amplifier to driver connection/no phase distortions) but has the added benefit of being able to use existing amplifiers which can be chosen to match the system. My DIY open baffle system uses an 8 inch SB Acoustics FR driver (run direct from the amp with no filters/network) but with 4 additional channels of amplification/active filtering driving the bass section. FR drivers come with their own set of limitations too but these vary between different FR drivers and the application they will be used in.
Before upgrading my PMCs to active I was running them passive with a Nova. So already it was one box and the two speakers. When I swapped to an Atom HE and put the active boards in the speakers, not only was the system a bit cheaper, it was very much better. The active setup has incredible speed and grip while at the same time sounding more relaxed and natural. Somehow the music just flows better. There is also the upside of removing the whole āwhich speaker cablesā shenanigans, however the downside is that the speakers need connecting to the mains. Luckily I already had sockets close to each speaker.
The benefits are obvious and all well stated above.
As with anything, there are also trade-offs to be considered. Depending on room and personal concerns these may range from irrelevant to deal breakers.
The last point also highlights a benefit though. Because the amps in an active speaker are tailored to the drive unitās requirements, active speakers generally perform well above the price level of a passive speaker and power amp. You often need to building a monkfish where the power amp is more expensive (and obviously very good and suited to the speaker) than the speaker to beat the active equivalent. So active can save save a lot of money or make you money go further.
The FAQs on the ATC website explain why they favour active operation. The write-up runs to several paragraphs so I wonāt try to paraphrase it all here but itās worth a read.
Personally, I first heard active ATCs at a show some years ago and couldnāt get the sound out of my head. Several dealer demos later I decided a big part of the appeal to me was stability and physicality of the stereo image which made connection with the musicians that much more intense. I was looking to replace my 272-based system and knew it had to be based around active ATCs. Box count reduction was entirely incidental.
As I type, Iām listening to Angela Hewitt playing piano transcriptions on her wonderful Fazioli piano. Sheās just there in the room along with shivers down my spine.
Roger
This thread explains exactly why I have gone active so I have nothing to add other than hearing ATC20asl speakers at my dealers was the first time I ever walked into a room and thought āI want thatā. Iāve heard several high end passive systems (CH Precision, Accuphase, Linn) over the last couple of years but never had that feeling.
Over the years, have enjoyed āactiveā in several guisesā¦
Previously
Currently
There is something really quite unique about the sound - sound quality - of an active speaker system. By designing dedicated power amps, cross over electronics and drive units, all in a complimentary way.
Scale, speed, timing, control, etc.
Attempted to record a more thoughtful description hereā¦
Looking at both ATC and PMC speaker ranges, itās currently possible to compare passive ( perhaps c/w decent Naim NAP ) and active versions of a speaker and decide for yourself.
BW
R
After using passive speakers for decades, I switched to a pair of active ATC 40 without even listening to them beforeā¦ I know
a person who has SBL in active with four 135 (even if itās different from the ATC) and the sound confessed to me that I had to go, and I donāt regret anything! I will no longer be able to go back to the passive, the sound of the active at something more, the speed, the live sound, natural, dynamicā¦
I went active with a pair of Dutch & Dutch 8cās, the ability to match them to the room with REW was a complete game changer for me, the best sound I have ever achieved yet with a reduced box count and far less monry than the large Avalon Acoustic speakers/Karan monoblocs that they replaced. Can be controlled with ROON as an added benefit.
I have active PMCs with an NSC 222. I got the pre-amp and passive speakers second-hand at decent prices, so only had to pay retail price for the active upgrades. I can say that it blows away my old Nova/PMC combo, and itās not close. More open, spacious, clear, dynamic, weirdly more bass ā¦ literally everything. (Not a fair comparison but the only one I have.)
The benefits of an active crossover and dedicated amps have been covered. Compared with an integrated amp, it also separates the electrically noisy components without raising the box count, which mattered to me. In effect, it looks much the same as before but sounds a whole lot better.
I should add that I loved the Nova / passive PMC set-up too. It was really good. Just because the new one is better doesnāt mean the old one was bad at all. Great system.
I downsized from a full set up to Nova and passive PMCs first and then to 222 and active ATCs which are on another level but the PMCs are also great speakers. Ultimately, let your ears be the judge.
Thank you to everybody for their input.
It has been an interesting read.
If I ever downsize, I will investigate using active loudspeakers.
Opinions are quite divided on this topic.
Iāve no doubt that active offers a much better presentation. The question for me is - once I get over the thrill of those improvements (which will inevitably happen), will I start to realise that the music is somewhat less engaging? Thatās been my experience a couple of times to date with Linn and vintage Naim so I remain sceptic.
So I had an intresting conversation with my Naim/PMC dealer today about going active.
Their advice was to stay with my current power amp and thus stay passive. By all means try it he said, butā¦ā¦the MF Nu Vista 300 is still way better than the PMC active modules. ā Im happy to take nearly Ā£2k from you, but youāll not be backā¦..ā were pretty much his words.
GraemeH swapped a 300DR for the active module and preferred it. I wouldnāt take the dealerās word for it. Itās worth trying for yourself, surely.
I may well still try. It was an initial conversation about prices and how to hook up the supercap to the active box. It was just interesting that there was minimal push from him who is a biggish PMC dealer.
Can you tell me a bit more about your experience of going active? I cant remember what amps you had before.
I had another dealer turn their nose up turning the Twenty 24i active. Now clearly I need to get a ( home) demo and make my own mind up butā¦.and @GraemeH too please.
My intrest in active to to reduce the height of my rack and in some way simplify what I have. But that canāt be at the expense of the sound.