Any thoughts on passive v. active speakers?

In addition to the Grimm, Steinway Lyndorf and Linkwitz active systems I mentioned in an earlier post, here are some other active loudspeaker systems that can compete with any passive/power amp combo for their intended application and within their price ranges:

Unity Audio Boulder (amps designed by Tim de Paravicini)
Genelec 1037
Augspurger 215 Classics w/ subs
ATC SCM110
Avant Garde Zero

Anyone can couple a power amp to a loudspeaker and there are some powered loudspeakers that are that simple, but the loudspeakers I've listed are systems. They are carefully matched to achieve maximum performance by design teams with more resources to accomplish that goal than the average audiophile has available. Apparently this is a difficult concept for audiophiles to accept.

"They are carefully matched to achieve maximum performance by design teams with more resources to accomplish that goal than the average audiophile has available. Apparently this is a difficult concept for audiophiles to accept."

That's because you're leaving something out. I have absolutely no doubt that the designers of the active speakers you list, do everything they can to make the best sounding product. Its not that audiophiles won't accept a solution like this just because the speakers are active. For the most part, a decision is made based on sound quality/personal preference. Its entirely possible that even though the speakers look good on paper, a potential buyer just doesn't like them. No different than with any other component. Also, when you say that design teams have more resources to achieve the goal than an average audiophile, I don't see that as being relevant. That statement assumes the buyer and the maker, want the same exact end result. That may not be the case. An audiophile's part in all this, is to evaluate products they are interested in, and then make a choice based on they think sounds the best, and can afford.

The last time this topic came up for debate, I used this same example to explain my position. My personal preference is Vandersteen speakers powered by Ayre electronics. If I wanted to get the equivalent sound from an active speaker, I can't. No active speaker that I know of, even comes close to duplicating that combo's sound. It has nothing to do with me not wanting active speakers. If Ayre and Vandersteen got together made such a speaker, chances are I would buy it.

All this comes down to one idea. And that is, what will make you happy with your system? Different products for different people. That's how its always been, and I don't think it will change anytime soon.

Rogerstillman, try to audition an Active ATC SCM-100. You will know what a top flight active speaker can do that a passive combo cannot even at 4 times the price.

There should be no doubt that active systems allow lower levels of IM distortion. It is also fair to say "So what?"....if you believe that IM distortion isn't particularly important. The advantage is still real, tho it will - like most things audio - vary in importance to a given listener. BTW, small active desktop systems can be strikingly good values, for, I believe, just this reason. Obviously, the bandwidth and spl limitations limit their utility.

The biggest problem with active systems in my book is that the selection is limited. Further, the limited # of choices is further narrowed by the fact that most are designed for pro use and are designed to meet those specific needs. Other than the Linkwitz designs, it's hard to find an active system that is dipolar. I don't know of any that are omnidirectional.

I currently use omnis with subs (a hybrid set-up where the mid to bass x-over is active, but the mid to tweeter x-over is passive) in my main system. The passive x-over sits at a highish frequency, so there's no passive x-over directly in the mids. It's a formula that works for me.

In the past, I've gone with fully active systems and fully passive systemsin my listening room. Each has its advantages and - at the moment - I've settled on a compromise. However.....

I also use Sonos for distributed music throughout my home. Five of my Sonos zones use active monitors because I like their "bang for the buck". My own view is that active systems offer compelling value at lower price points. If you're price constrained and are happy with conventional dispersion, active systems definitely deserve a hard look, IMO.

As you spend more and your options expand, personal preference starts to muddy the decision process.

As always....Pick your poison.

Martykl, I like your hybrid crossover set up. Are you all solid state?

If you had a tube amp on the passive crossover and a solid state on the active crossover, do you think the mid/bass frequencies (or wherever the crossovers meet) would blend well?

I'm considering a speaker with passive crossovers & Digital Signal Processing. It's very popular on Audiogon right now and it has an open baffle design.

I'm very interested in these, but I'm concerned that I might loose some of the sonic qualities I like about tube sound.

Is that a valid concern or should I not worry about it?

I'm keeping my tube amp & pre-amp, but I would consider an active speaker for a second system or perhaps as a compliment to my tubes.