Abandonning Powered Speakers - Why?

A good powered speaker often cost a lot more. i.e. a ATC SCM20ATSL retailed cost $7500 yet the passive version is only $4000. If you need portability and worry free then you should get the active. That's why most of ProAudio gears are active. The passive is more for experience audiophiles who likes to mix and match with different amps and preamps ( Especially for home use.) or they already have very good amps.

There are big sonic advantages to be gain by the elimination of passive crossover components and employing active line level crossovers to dedicated amplifiers in either a biamp or triamp configuration. If your design must have a crossover, then active is the best way to go. Trelja's above comments are quite telling if he represents the typical audiophile. It strikes me as unwise to ignore superior design elements in order to pursue sonic finger painting. If you really want to change the sound of you system it's far better to get an equalizer and/or a compressor.

As always, what really is important in a product is the actual implementation not the inherent superiority of any design.

Audio is a business and the sellers know that the sickness of the audiophile is in the equipment and sound variations. An all-in-one doesn't usually fare well; whether it be powered speakers, integrated amps, or CD/Preamps. Why do you think one of the most profitable ventures are in cables??

On the other hand, in the pro market, active speakers are more commonplace. I've been in several recording studios where the monitors sounded great. What they had in common was they were using Mackie HR824 actively bi-amped two-way Studio Monitors. Compared to "audiophile" prices, they are not cost prohibitive. You can find a pair for around $1,000 (used). It would seem to me that speakers such as these should be high on the list of those looking to build a system on a "budget."
They sound great, have excellent high and low extension and, if you spread them apart, they will throw a wide deep sound-stage. I'm looking for an excuse to build a 2nd or 3rd system around them. In fact, what I want to do is use my Mac G4 1.25 GHz Powerbook as the transport. I've hooked this up to an external DAC (sound card) that takes a USB digital feed from the computer and listened to CD's I ripped to the hard drive uncompressed using AIFF (These were CD's I purchased). It sounds great. I could take a R & L analogue out from the DAC, plug it into the Mackies and have a great sounding 2nd system. I can also play DVD's and the 15" widescreen monitor looks really good. Right now, I am using an M-Audio USB Audiophile DAC, which cost $175. The sound of CD's ripped uncompressed to my hard drive fed digitally to and played through the DAC is better than a lot of mid-fi CD players I've heard. I'm curious to see how much better it would sound with a higher end DAC like the Apogee. Anyway, I'm rambling. The theory behind active speakers is sound and though some inveterate tweakers (Audiophiles) may resist the advantages inherent in the design, plenty of other audio enthusiasts and professionals embrace it. I would encourage everyone to audition speakers like the Mackies, Adams, Genelecs, Behringer, etc. Active Studio Monitors.

Of course, "monoblocks" are almost the same thing.