Who actually uses digital speakers?

Hey Mike / @arion

If you meant me, I’m not Eric.

Yeah, I have a pretty good idea of the magic you have to do in order to get your speakers dialed in. As a fan of active crossovers, DSP and AMTs and line sources I think you are in a very fun place to be.

Best,

Erik

Hey @arion  Since you like to jump in here and talk about your tech, I'm a little curious about something.  Your towers are relatively narrow baffles, especially when compared to the famous Infinity Reference.  Now, I don't want to set this up as an Arion vs. 30 year old technology, with questionable crossovers, but the IRS was (I believe) a dipole with a very wide baffle.

I'm curious if you've experimented with wide baffles and what you found as a result.

Among my interests is also wide baffle design speakers so that's why I'm asking.

Hi Erik, Sorry for misspelling your name, my bad.

 I try not to talk about my products specifically but use them as an example of what is possible. I think many people here are not always clear on the terminology related to DSP, ASP, active systems and room correction. It’s not our technology but it’s how we use it.

Baffle design is an interesting topic. As I’m sure you know the baffle design affects many things. Specifically to our dipole Apollo speakers we are mostly concerned with baffle width, baffle step and diffraction. The ideal width for our 120Hz line array is about 39”. In theory a flat 39” baffle will support our line array down to about 120Hz without baffle step or cancellation. That creates other problems along with being too wide for most home system. So we folded the baffle into an asymmetrical “U” shape. The inside of the back side is shaped to minimize cavity resonances. There a bit more to it but that’s the basics.

Mike

@erik_squires --

I’m way past wanting to have multiple stacks of amps in my home so when I think of an active speaker, I think of an all in one unit that has built in everything.

Self-imposed limitations there’s little I can do about. It’s kind of a classical dilemma, right; one laments not being able to choose the amps of choice with active speakers (only so many plate amp options are available), but when told you actually can have your cake and eat it too (i.e.: free choice of amps for active config. as a discreet component solution, and a potentially all-out approach with regard to components at least) the answer is no: one wants it all built-in because the amps take up place on the rack.

So my counter question to you would be: what do really want; a nice and bundled, plug-and-play speaker package, or do you want to explore where active qua active (as separates) config. can really take you? There are different ways to go about harnessing the advantages of active, but as a DIY solution of separates I find being freed of physical and hardware limitations of vital importance. I mean, how often do you see bundled, active speakers much larger than slim, moderately sized floor-standers? ATC SCM300ASL is one of the very few exceptions..

The OP was not about active crossovers by the way, but active, digital speakers. Meaning, the amp is built into the speaker and it has a digital input.

No, but I was replying to an aspect of what you brought up, even if it meant going a little off-topic, which is: what’s meant with a "digital speaker" or an active ditto that has a digital input anyway? Usually that it has a built-in DAC(/streamer) with its digital input, apart from DSP and amps, and that all that’s needed from hereon is a source. I was simply referring to and suggesting to use a discreet component, active configuration solution (with a digital input via the DAC), and that in essence it’s the same inquired about by the OP. Why? Because most are so fixated on active as a bundled solution only that you have to wonder what’s really the goal here.

Yeah, I know what I could do with digital crossovers, I’m just not about to run a stereo amp, or more, per speaker here.

There it is again ;)

I’m currently planning a fully active 3-way center channel using a plate amplifier. The only thing that stops me from building it is the kitchen remodeling that I have to do first. 😁

Ah, yes - all the other stuff that has to be attended to as well, and I’m not being sarcastic here. Hope you’ll get around to realizing active, one way or the other.

So my counter question to you would be: what do really want; a nice and bundled, plug-and-play speaker package, or do you want to explore where active qua active (as separates) config. can really take you?

For this thread my real question was whether a digital input speaker system had an ecosystem or broad adoption.  I think you misunderstood my curiosity about the industry as being a request for help changing my system.  I have the former and no real reason to do the latter.

I can build whatever I want to build, Goddess willing and the river don’t rise, with time and effort. I was more curious about whether the Meridian (or possibly earlier) innovation of a purely digital input speaker had gone anywhere.

I have to say, the idea of simplifying a stereo to 2 high end speakers and an Ethernet cable seems pretty appealing. Whether I would go that route or not is a different question than where we are today as an industry.