ATC active vs. passive

My tube amp is Auris fortissimo, 100W Push pull. 
I’m concerned it wouldn’t be enough to power SCM150 that I’m considering. 
I have a big room, I like to listen at high volume. I am in the position to buy anything ranging from 50 to 150 both passive and active. I’m trying to make the right decision 

@erik_squires wrote:

If I were at ATC, and they asked me to "activate" an existing passive speaker it would be just incredibly tempting to enhance it’s performance when transitioning.

Exactly, because that’s what active config. offers. Which is to say: it’s not about "fairness" of comparison vs. passive, but what active qua active can offer.

So, point is, no idea of the ATC speakers attempt the same driver crossovers, polarity, etc. so hard to use them as a judge. In fact, it’s just super hard to do a real apples to apples comparison of any active vs. passive speaker.

ATC isn’t going for an altogether different "voicing" passively, but rather will aim for the crossover option that best accommodates the design passively. Conversely the active iteration will take advantage of the design options given here, like amp-to-driver direct connections, shorter cable runs, precise phase settings for each driver, amp-load independent driver sections, (line level) crossover values being impervious to load (read: heat), different i.e.: steeper slopes, etc.

So, the point isn’t really an apples to apples comparison between the passive and active iteration - in fact it’s not necessarily desirable nor possible - but rather what each design route facilitates and is inherently limited by or has an advantage through.

That being the case - with the same drivers, speaker housing and product sound philosophy - you don’t get much closer to a bearing on the overall capabilities and characteristics offered by active vs. passive here. Even with different amps over the passive iteration you will get the general idea vs. active.

As I’ve mentioned in another thread long ago, I have done a very close active vs passive comparison at a trade show - same speakers, ATC amps for passive system run passively biamped, active using the internal amps with the same output devices and design in both active and passive.. The power available in both systems was roughly equal. The active system exhibited much bette imaging and better high resolution of fine details like room sound, reverb tails, harmonics on piano, acoustic guitar, violins. I offered visitors to the room a choice to pick and not everyone picked the active - although I couldn’t understand how they couldn’t hear those improvements.

One note - the comment about amps not lasting a long time inside the speaker is simply not true - unless it’s crap amp. They are in their own separate enclosure even inside the speaker and there is no shared space. Also all ATC is class A/B, not class D. That being said, we regular service active speakers that are still working after 30+years! Many studios use them 24/7 for 10-20 years. With 6year warranty we see very little failure.

brad

Op 100watts of tube power drives the 40s beautifully 

We have driven our 40s with a 100 watt Synthesis a100 sounds fantastic 

DAVE AND troy

Audio Intellect Nj

ATC DEALERS 

@lonemountain 

Thanks for your input. 
“The active system exhibited much bette imaging and better high resolution of fine details like room sound, reverb tails, harmonics on piano, acoustic guitar, violins. ”

I understand what you said above. I recently auditioned Wilson XVX and I was blown away with every metric that audiophiles find valuable. It was the most powerful, transparent, detailed with perfect accuracy and imaging that I’ve ever encountered. However, it was not enjoyable engaging or musical. It was analytical and clinical. That isn’t what I want. That’s why I’m entranced by tubes. The beautiful sweet sound with rich harmonics is that I’m after. I’m used to high powered SET sound  

would you still recommend actives for my taste ?