It was when you said “Hmmm… interesting.” I thought it might be setting you off on an upgrade path… hence my “and so it begins.”
It’s okay, I’ll fetch my coat. 
Actually, I have been musing over a 500 to complete my system…then this tidy and relatively inexpensive active option comes along. Can’t believe the modules will compete even with the 300 though, I was surmising.
G
1 Like
no, I do not mean that but your question was allready, retorical.
In ATC world the active vs passive debate has been going for some time. If I try to summarise, of course personal preference has to be the ultimate arbiter, active operation offers more bang for the buck and is in that sense ‘better’. The Naim amps are perhaps more refined and bring the usual Naim qualities to the fore. I would imagine there’d be similarities with PMC where the benefits of active drive come up against higher end design of the Naim amps?
There was a HiFi Critic review of the ATC SCM50ASL and its passive counterpart using Naim amps which nicely summarises the differences. It’s on the ATC website, so not sure if I can post here, but googling the publication and speaker together gets you there.
I went the active route, cheaper, fewer boxes and found that the cabling to the speaker made a big difference too. Lots of fun ahead for PMC owners and prospects. Enjoy!
7 Likes
Noticed that in the PMC specs the lower frequency range is not so good active (46Hz – 25kHz) as some of their passive Twenty5.23i (28Hz – 25kHz). The active freq response equates to that of the Twenty5.21i. Obviously we all know not to trust specs over our ears in our own room so I suspect that demos will be required to confirm performance in each applicable range if going active.
1 Like
A mistake I think? The website suggests all models have the same range, passive or active.
G
1 Like
More than happy to admit I’ve made a mistake. What I did was look at the specs for the active under the upgrade tab, only saw one set of figures mentioned, and then looked at the freq response under the various speakers in passive guise.
Also only saw one crossover frequency mentioned so assuming it is the same for all ranges despite the pictures showing different positions for insert plug depending on speakers being made active.
Am I misreading?
PMC’s mistake I meant. I compared ‘Specifications’ of each model on the PMC website. They are identical between each passive or active variant.
G
1 Like
I assumed that was passive as there is no power per driver being mentioned.
In the upgrade tab it says power for each driver is 100W. Also shows different gains possible by selecting low or high sensitivity.
1 Like
I too share your concern. I am seeking to enhance the performance of my PMC speakers without compromising the refinement the 300DR brings. Downstairs, my active class AB Focals connected to the very mellow Unitiqute2, still exhibit a slight edge in their presentation.
Conversely, PMC have been fine tuning their class D amplifiers to complement their PRO drivers for years, akin to Naim’s approach with their Mu-So line.
Nonetheless, having the option available is preferable to its absence altogether.
If you’re enjoying low box and wiring simplicity though, active speakers could be a step backwards. Three things to plug in instead of one. Two cables going to each speaker instead of one.
1 Like
Generally true if converting to active with the same speakers, but the new PMC upgrade approach replaces the passive XO with an active XO+amp module, so all that is needed is a source and preamp, for which in the Naim world an Atom HE superficially at least looks entirely suitable. Only one pair of interconnects needed (one cable channel to each speaker) and no speaker cables, but mains leads would be needed to each speaker. IIUC the modules have both balanced and single ended (unbalanced) inputs so could be used with any preamp, or even any existing Uniti all-in-one via pre out, though for unbalanced connections cable length might be an issue if the preamp is not between the speakers.
I get that. It’s still twice as many cables per speaker. A mains lead and a signal lead = 2.
1 Like
OK, point taken!
The cost of the active upgrade certainly makes the upgraded signature passive crossover for the Fact8/12 look rather expensive by comparison.
Potentially some folks may wish to go NSC222 with the PMCs in active config. Maybe even add NPX 300 if you don’t mind using two boxes. Number of options now increasing each with their own price point and minimalist (or not) configuration.
3 Likes
Indeed, and I would need to run mains and signal wires together for 3m, though I believe that’s ok with balanced cables. The other concern is that the speakers would still consume power when not playing music and they don’t seem to have a standby function. Maybe they have a wake on music function, but if so, it’s not mentioned in PMC’s blurb, so I’ve emailed them to ask.
And a mere nine minutes after writing to PMC I have my answers. It’s fine to run mains and signal together if using balanced - which I thought it would be given the amount of concerts I’ve helped to set up and we’ve never split signal and mains - and the speakers use around 7W each when not playing music.
7 Likes
Very possibly they can happily be switched off when not in use, though that does mean flicking a couple of switches before and after.
Heaven forfend!
That’s exactly what I do with my speakers and, I believe, what ATC recommend.
Roger
1 Like
222/300 into active twenty5.21i would be interesting to hear I think.
G
3 Likes