SL2 active or passive

I’ve often wondered what driving my SL2s active would be like. I know that they were designed for active use but they do sound fantastic passive on the end of the 300DR etc.
Box count is a major factor as well as the cost of going active but one thought did occur; swap the 300DR out for 2x250DRs and then a 242, PS plus another set of speaker cables would, I think, be all that was needed.
Has anyone here gone from 300DR passive to 250DRs active into SL2s? If so I’d be interested in the findings.

I’ve not heard SL2’s but going active on IBL’s and Isobariks was transformative. The downside is of course box count as you say and the inabilty to realistically dem them unless you happen to know someone with the system you are aiming for.

They were designed as passive speakers that could be made to perform even better when activated.

IIRC, it was the NBL that were basically designed as active speakers first and then a passive crossover (or two) was designed later in development.

1 Like

I went the other way namely from 2x250dr into sbl’s to 300dr into Focal Kantas passive speakers and the result was stunning - a much better soundstage, detail imaging and overall control. I know the speakers are a different animal to the sbl’s so I am not really answering your question but I have vastly improved my sound by going passive with these upgrades. Having said that the active system before was very good and did improve over the original passive system I had.

1 Like

Very interesting. Thanks for the insight @Granted

I did initially try my SL2s passive, but going active with them turned them into a completely different, and hugely superior, speaker. I can’t comment on whether a pair of 250DRs, active, will trump a single passive 300DR, but I’d be very surprised if they didn’t. Passive crossovers, no matter how well designed, will always be a bottleneck.

I am running SL2 active right now - and I would say ‘active’ always brings something to the party regardless of power amp. I run 250DR in a 2nd system and this a very good amp anyhow.


On the old forum was a nice topic about active sbls using Nap 250’s Vs passive Nap 300. I believe the Nap 250’s won.

Dave, if you do an internet search for “HiFiCritic SL2” or look on the TomTom site you should find a comprehensive review by Martin Colloms on your proposed choices.
He comes down on the side of the passive 300 due to the amps inherent superiority, but he does rate the active option, and not surprisingly suggests that the SL2’s justify the cost of 2X300 active operation,


1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.