Any thoughts on passive v. active speakers?

I have had a pair of dynaudio bm5 II about 10 years ago... They were alright even though they sounded a bit boxy, and limited in dynamics when played louder than normal conversation level. I would have preferred the equivalent hifi version with a beefy nad integrated.

The speakers I'm considering have no box and the DSP is supposed to optimize your room.

They are bi-ampable so I could use my Krell there and keep my Cary & Atma-sphere up top.

Sounds good on paper, but how are they in the real world? Probably a lightyear ahead of where I am now.

Rogerstillman, does the no box loudspeaker w/ DSP that you are considering have a model name and manufacturer?

Zd, to say that engineering expertise and technical resources is irrelevant is an extreme statement. If high fidelity sound reproduction is the goal, then the manufacturer and the consumer just can't be that far apart.

From an engineering perspective how does R. Vandersteen justify the powered woofers in his upmarket loudspeakers? Wouldn't the same rationale apply to the midrange and treble drivers? From a marketing perspective it could be sales suicide since audiophiles basically reject fully powered loudspeaker systems. I'm just saying that the rejection is not based upon sound quality, but upon the perceived lack of upgradeability.

Onhwy61, I was looking at the Emerald Physics speakers.