Active or passive?



Why/Why not for each...?
infection
Infection, Yes I've heard many of their models over the years.  They are intriguing speakers, but not my cup of tea. 

George, what I meant is that there are some active speakers I"ve listened to that I didn't like the voicing. Even in passive mode it wouldn't have mattered.  (there was a German pro speaker that also make home audio and they had fully active as well as passive).  I just didn't like the speakers, but in active mode, they sounded so much better and it was more than just the bass, but I get what you are saying. :) 

Neither way is right or wrong and that's the fun of audio.
George, what I meant is that there are some active speakers I"ve listened to that I didn’t like the voicing. Even in passive mode it wouldn’t have mattered.
I’ve done a lot of this with very reviling ESL’s >150hz with dynamic bass drivers <150hz, for me in active mode for mids and highs you’ve suddenly added two hand fulls of "active components opamps ect", compared to just half a dozen passive components in passive mode, "active sterilizes" mids and highs compared to "passive". But for bass the active is better.

Cheers George
@georgehifi  so regardless of the synergistic elements of an active highlighted by ctsooner, the inferior mids & highs, for me then, doesn't warrant ownership. 
Ok, I don't think I've heard an active in over 15 years but from what's being mentioned it appears they are still not worth buying...

I would have thought the complete control over the amp by a speaker manufacturer would offer amazing results...to the point of choosing active over passive in many cases.
I would have thought the complete control over the amp by a speaker manufacturer would offer amazing results...to the point of choosing active over passive in many cases.
Simple, I’ve always found the more "active components" that are in the signal path the more sterile and two dimensional the sound becomes.
 I would love for a source to be able to drive the speakers direct

Cheers George