Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

@erik_squires 

Thanks for the reply, my bass has sufficient dynamic range and is smooth. You answered my question, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. I really don't need to go beyond the two subs I have now. Thanks!

@erik_squires wrote:

I’m not sure if in this thread I already said it but here:

My main speakers use passive crossover which allows me to use a Luxman amplifier which I love. My next project is a 3-way self-powered center channel. That will allow me to avoid a lot of part soldering, and optimize the components in the time domain, and the final system in the frequency domain while sitting on my entertainment center.

I don’t understand the zealotry of either approach.

The active speaker will be a lot quicker to assemble, and give me time alignment features I need due to the driver arrangment, as well as higher order crossover angles, All of this helps with creating wide-dispersion. My main speakers, by using a single channel per speaker, let me select exactly the sound of an amplifier I want, and keep things simple.

For home, there’s no clear cut winner. In a professional, high power situation there’s no contest, line level crossovers and DSP wins every time.

We’ve been there at earlier junctures already, but nonetheless:

Depending on one’s view of "simplicity" you could in fact have the best of both worlds here. I recently went from 3 different amps - both with regard to brand, topology/principle and all - to 3 amps from the same manufacturer and series/model (MC² Audio T-series, class A/B) in my outboard configured fully active setup; that is, two similar amps, and the third one from the same series but just slightly less powerful. For all intents and purposes they’re sonically alike.

I’d heard the installations series amps (S and T-series) from the manufacturer at a few prior occasions, both through passive and outboard active speaker setups, and was stricken by what I figured to be their contribution to the overall sound as both even-handed, versatile and unflappable sounding, while combining insight and an organic imprinting - over the entire frequency range. They do what they have to do and get out of the way, so to speak.

To me this was an indication of amps that had "the whole package" to fulfill my sonic preferences and specific setup context, and so set out to try their inclusion and do away with the previous mantra of "different amps dedicated to their specific driver and frequency range" to instead take on the approach of similar and versatile amps. You think 575 watts/8 ohms dedicated to a direct-connection (sans passive XO) horn/driver combo with 111dB sensitivity from ~600Hz on up is shooting above the target? I say leave aside theory and take an unbiased listen - how it sounds to your ears is all that matters, as you know quite well. Suffice to say the experiment turned out well, so much so that I’m not looking back.

And this brings me to your situation: you could combine your treasured amp choice, outboard actively, with all the opportunities given with a DSP solution. If an overabundance of wattages trouble you the amps needn’t be as powerful when actively configured just by virtue of being freed of looking into a passive cross-over, not least considering they’re divided into their specific channel-to-driver element and covering a limited frequency range instead of full-range.

The element of simplicity, the lack of which worries you, could be maintained, certainly insofar you chose what’s essentially the same amps for the respective driver/frequency sections. Merely multiplying similar sections here in my view isn’t complexity per se, and remember: you’re replacing one element (i.e.: the passive XO), which in itself presents a plethora of challenges to the amp, with another element that’s simply moved outboard to signal level and gives the amps far better working conditions. More cables, yes, but they needn’t be different to one another either.

What I don’t understand is the need for division here. Indeed I’d wager you can have your cake and eat it too, while challenging your stance that there’s no clear cut winner in a domestic scenario with regard to passive vs. active implementation.

Powered speakers sound great....but. your listening not to your high-end amplifier but the powered speakers plate amp. Passive speakers, you're listening to your audiophile system. I think powered speakers are like having tone controls on a pre-amp or integrated. If that is what you like. Oh, powered is impressive, but does it sound real? Natural? 

@pcrhkr Look at it this way if you spent 500k on your system buying an amp and speakers from different companies one thing you know for sure is that those speakers and that amp aren't made for each other and could sound much better and be made more efficient if they designed synergistically. Audiophiles like to play around more than they want to own the best sound systems, no engineer thinks speakers/drivers and amps shouldn't be made for each other, so why isn't this the case, answer because audiophiles like to play with gear more than listen to it, I think.