@lonemountain wrote:
A very interesting mix of perspectives in this thread! I agree with you Phusis, a lot of ways to "get there". It does baffle me why audiophiles disike amps inside the speaker, as though this is somehow more detrimental to sound than the massive hunk of copper hung on the amplifier’s outputs, completely hiding the speaker.
(some of following is a rant not aimed at you) As compared to a passively configured speaker here, yes, I fully agree with you. For my own part, in principle, I don’t dislike when amps are built inside active speakers, it’s the claims of amp-driver matching via bundled solutions I find can be taken out of context for what it really is, and what could as well, fundamentally, be accommodated in an outboard active setup, if you even had to.
I mean, one may have way more than enough power from the amp connected to the HF section in a active outboard setup, but it sounds great so why "match" the HF section with a less power savvy amp - does it actually make a difference for the better in perceived sound? Maybe the added headroom could in fact be the better bi-product of something that is "more than enough."
Whereas in a bundled solution a MFR wouldn’t want to shell out more dough than necessary on the amps used, and so amp-driver "matching" not least comes down to power differentiation to the different driver sections, also to save space inside the speaker in addition to thermal considerations which may dictate more efficient amp principles for those reasons alone.
Amp-driver matching as claimed here is often very dubious, because what does it entail? "Oh, we can’t tell you being it’s a business secret." Bollocks. What’s ’fundamental’ with active config. is getting rid of the passive cross-over for amp-driver direct control; THAT in itself is the main takeaway to savor and apparently too straight forward a boon to speak of, and so additional matching parameters, by some, are esoterically flaunted and heralded as core aspects that supposedly make the real difference.
Give me a break, and not least some perspective. Those of us choosing an outboard active solution mayn’t have the R&D capacity of a MFR, however we aren’t bound by a business model that adheres to a bottom line and that has to take size restrictions and market specifics into consideration - not to mention convenience. Most importantly we get the fundamentals of active configuration whilst having free reigns to choose whatever components we prefer in further matching actions, from whatever brand in whatever size, design principle, shape and price we see fit to our own ears; you still get the core and most important benefits of active, yet on a potentially unlimited physical canvas to paint on.
Something tells me a primary reason why active ATC speaker models are so coherent and well sounding is due the consistency of their excellent, in-house and carefully manufactured drive units being coupled to what’s essentially the same, quality class A/B amp sections, just scaled in accordance to the driver sections they’re feeding. That’s how it’s been for years - decades even - fairly unchanged and with no crass PR efforts or claimed "cutting edge" new tech nor dubious matching parameters to sell their product. They may be old school in that respect, but to hell with that: to this individual’s ears they’re still among the very best out there of the bundled solutions (along with Meyer Sound).
