I Was Considering Active, Then I Watched This ...


high-amp
Didn't miss Steve's points at all. He actually said there were things he liked better about the LS-50 wireless sound wise, but wanted the passives instead so he can choose his own amp. He said he liked the Elacs, but would not buy them because they are active. He is completely dismissing them because of preconceived notions about them and not how they perform against the competition within their price range. Keep in mind, comparable price for passive includes preamp, amp, and cables in addition to the speakers. I have a treated listening room and the sound is hands down better with room correction engaged. I have had many combinations of passive systems and the active one I have now is better.
Steve is a veteran and is to be respected.  For monitoring applications, active is fine.  For ultimate results, outboard amplification is preferred...because you choose the amp!!  It’s that simple.
One damning truth for me is that in 15 years of shows I don’t recall any active speaker (Legacy audio being the exception; hybrid) making my top 3 of show, ever. Until they actually DO outperform they are for me a waste of my time.

The AXPONA 2019 demo of active/passive did nothing to change that opinion. It was actually a fairly good demo of why one does NOT have to go active. :(

I will add this; In order to confirm or falsify my impressions from the show, I sought a set of larger active/passive speakers from a big name company, high profile. They were on board - until they saw the shipping cost. They balked, and the community lost a potentially very insightful article about pro/con of active/passive.

It seems people can’t interpret "reviewer speak" all that well, so I will for you. Steve said the active did a few things better; translated, UNIMPRESSIVE. Precisely. My conclusion as well.

Active speakers in use for smallish rigs, space constrained, budget constrained. Sure. For more serious, big rigs? I’ll leave that to someone else. :)


IMHO, the development of active speakers, particularly high-end actives, has resulted in the single greatest advance in speaker technology, design, and sound reproduction quality since the advent [sic] of the acoustic suspension speaker design some six and a half decades ago. Sorry if it spoils the "fun" of the gearheads who are more into trying to listen to an amp or some interconnects or whatever than to the music, but the quality of the sound reproduced — the music — is ALL I or any listener should care about. In my experience actives in the home, the studio, and in sound reinforcement have a very clear and very audible advantage over almost any passive setup at any given price point.

I should note that I'm agnostic when it come to pure analog vs. DSP controlled speakers. I've used pure analog Swiss-built active PSI Audio monitors for mastering for the last ten years and I've no reason whatsoever to "upgrade." The PSIs disappear sonically; they add or subtract nothing perceptible of their own and have pinpoint imaging, speed, and transparency. They give me the sense that I'm listening past them down the wire to the source, to the original performance. And isn't THAT what anyone who is listening to the music wants? OTOH, I've heard (expensive!) DSP driven speakers in sound reinforcement settings that were likewise breathtakingly clean and transparent at high volumes with no perceptible fault or latency. I've no doubt it's the same in the studio or the home. Take your pick.