Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

One point of confusion is that most active speakers sold today use a portion of their box inner volume for housing amplifiers. The percentage of thus used up volume may range from 10% to 50%, depending on size of the speaker, number of transducers, amp technology etc.

Thus, an active speaker of a certain external volume may acoustically behave like a passive speaker of a smaller volume.

This may translate into higher level of distortions at a given output level exhibited by an active speaker, compared to a passive speaker of the same external volume.

This may also translate into the active speaker going less deep in -3db frequency than its external volume would suggest.

Rules of thumb for traditionally proportioned speakers:

Active speakers with a woofer less than 6" tend to be unsatisfactory in many respects, despite the fact that they may sound superficially well.

Active studio monitors with 8" woofers tend to sound comparably to passive speakers with 6 1/2" woofers, on the measures of distortions and bass extension.

Active studio monitors with 10" woofers usually sound wonderful, especially if they are three-way.

Active studio monitors with 12" woofers tend to rival the best audiophile passive speakers out there.

@donavabdear Thank you for showing some credits.  It's not "beneath" me yet you are the one here saying things above others like you know the music world, and you just don't.  For example: "Dolby Atmos was meant for movies not music."  That's wrong.  Atmos was INVENTED for movies, yes, and yet Atmos/Spatial on headphones is far superior to stereo in headphones.  Unintentionally they made something unexpected for music.   Big caveat:  the work must be done at the highest level.  The "highest level" is being discovered, daily, maybe by folks on this forum.  Atmos/Spatial is the evolution of stereo in headphones.  But we are in the beginning stage.  Most of what is released is low level mixing, not mastered.  Early days. I use transformer class A eqs x 50 in a great room with dCS Bartok and 3 top headphones.  Beautiful format, in the early days.

As far as Trinnov, it's 100% tunable, and I am an advanced tuner of the system.  It's doing DSP pre DA conversion, which is very subtle on my L/R mains.  It's doing far more on the rest of the room.  You are still arguing some odd point that this DSP makes this an "active system".  Everything has a DAC, and I am not anti-active. 

Again, all systems are a best case compromise, based in taste.  And any dogma is going to be wrong.   It's all about implementation.

@lonemountain Some people want it to sound like it’s supposed to, the way Fleetwood Mac decided or Tom Petty or Lenny Kravitz. ATC enables you to get that, and you cannot get that with passives. You can get close, but not "there". Realism is what drives Billy Woodman- or should I say "low distortion", the doorway to realism.

Brad

This is 100% false and totally misleading. There is nothing solid and fixed about audio except the file itself, the rest is a moving target. ATC is no better than countless other approaches. It’s a choice, a flavor. Artists mix in a mix room on 2-4 speakers and their car. Then they are done. Mastering folks like myself use all sorts of room designs and speakers/Amp/DAC/cable setups.. ATC is not a reference, there is no reference. It’s all a moving target. On any day in the same room, humidity and temperature and our mood and hunger alters even our own perception of a file. Nothing is fixed, and there is no reference. There is only the file that is a fixed thing, and the INTENT captured in the file matters most. To have that intention translate to all systems is the goal of mastering. There are some lovely ATC mastering rooms, but they are not superior, or giving musically superior results.  Just like active vs. passive, there is no right answer, no dogma here.

@phusis , trust me on this one. Adding a processor like the Trinnov or DEQX is in no way shape or form a "plug and play" solution. They try to market them as being simple to set up, but if you are perfectionistic they are not. You have to experiment and learn to get the most out of them. It must have taken me 2-3 years to get my TacT tuned the way I wanted the system to sound. Most of this was learning manage the power of such a sonic tool and get the most out of it. It is far more complex and involving than any "active" speaker I am familiar with. You are right about amps. Any amp can drive any driver, the question is how well. That choice can be made by any knowledgeable person. I do not like my choices being made by other people. 

@sokogear Then we will agree to disagree. Yes, Ekornes is the parent company's name. I bought mine purely on the look and reputation of the brand. Glad to hear yours was bullet proof, if not sokogear proof:-) We are very happy with them so far. Eventually the batteries will die and will have to be replaced but that is the price you pay for not having power cords lying around. 

@donavabdear , I think smart people hate being bored. They always have to be doing something. The piano produces a very complex sound from the percussion of the hammers to the vibration of the strings and soundboard, but it is all sound. It is the job of a HiFi system to reproduce sound, for better or for worse. Because there is so much variability in the way any piano will sound in any room it is hard for us to distinguish real from reproduced if the recording and system are good. Even in extremely distorted form on a terrible system you will still recognize it as being a piano. You can even tell if it is a synthesizer piano or a real one. This in no way reduces the coolness of your digital player piano. 

@brianlucey , and that is the art of mastering. Some are good at it, others not so much. It is why a lot of us prefer the old 2 or 3 mic live classical recordings. IMHO the goal should be to fool the listener into believing they are hearing a live recording. In some cases the artist may desire a surrealistic result like Pink FLoyds The Wall and art certainly has it's place. I hear mastering mistakes all the time like pianos and drums that stretch from one side of the stage to the other. Voices on echo and instruments not or some instruments on echo and others not. That makes them sound as if they are in two different environments at the same time. I do not know if this is bad mixing or the result of listening to the systems you are using. These mistakes seem to be much less frequent on live recordings even though most of these are multi tracks from the sound board.

@mijostyn  they are not "mistakes".  You have an idealism and perfectionism basis to music that's not real life.  Two speakers can't do the live event.  Atmos is better but cant.  It's an unreachable goal.  What's creative and joyful in pop music since Bing Crosby relied on the early Altec "birdcage" mic to have vocal power and a career or Madonna relied on early Eventide vocal tuning ... was the freedom and possibilities of doing things that were NOT REAL LIFE.  Your worldview is limited.  I feel sad you're missing out on so many joyful possibilities.  There is no reproduction. No perfect anything.  It's all art.  Craft.  Personal.  Music is a global and timeless language of connection. Not perfection.