Comments on: Passive vs Active Speakers: Key Differences, Benefits and Which to Choose

By: FunnyChap

FunnyChap — Thu, 28 Aug 2025 23:38:36 +0000

Wrong, the Focal Diva Mezza Utopia’s wireless does not use compression up to 96kHz/24-bit.
Wired is used at 192kHz/24-bit.
https://www.ecoustics.com/products/focal-diva-mezza-utopia/

By: FunnyChap

FunnyChap — Tue, 26 Aug 2025 17:09:57 +0000

In reply to DH.

“What isn’t mentioned is THE disadvantage of actives: the electronics are inside, and if something goes wrong it usually means shipping the speaker back to the manufacturer for repair.”

When my Denon HEOS powered speakers needed repair, it costs more to fix and ship back and forth, so I tossed it in the trash.

So now I come close to active speaker by buying a PS AUDIO FR5 speaker that can be bi-amped so I power it with NAD C298 (for tweeters) and PS AUDIO S300 dual mono amp (for mids).
My Parasound 2100 preamp takes care of active crossover highpass and lowpass (to the 2 powered sealed subwoofers).

source=Apple Music lossless
My video:
https://youtu.be/IwdzDbRUs_0

By: michael w cox

michael w cox — Tue, 26 Aug 2025 00:47:21 +0000

I’ll take wired over wireless every time since wireless adds a layer of compression and are therefore unable to provide lossless files.

By: Steven Norber

Steven Norber — Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:02:53 +0000

With DSP circuits there is a quantitative realm that passive/LCR circuits cannot attain without significant insertion loss per the number of required parts to manage phase, time delay, EQ, etc.
With LCR circuits there is a qualitative realm that DSP circuits cannot attain with electrolytic capacitors and integrated circuits.
Electrical and acoustic measurements can be controlled and shaped (quantified) with DSP beyond that of a passive LCR circuit.
Combinations of different materials in LCR networks–e.g., polymers, films, metals–produce qualitative changes beyond that of a DSP circuit.
Measurement based results–those which are quantitative–are not designed to capture qualitative changes.
Measurements are important for developing “safe stereoing,” and as cool and sophisticated test gear is, our nervous system and interconnected audio faculties remain more than their thus far noted assembly of parts–per the mechanistic model that continues to be used–and definitively more sophisticated than the finest audio analyzers and microphones.
Both quantitative and qualitative are important, but when we defer to measurements instead of our capacity to discern what we genuinely feel–not what we “think” we are supposed to feel–then we’ve lost touch with our sentience and the discernment available within this sentience, this capacity to feel.
This does not mean that one design approach is definitively “better” than the other, or the oxymoron of “music re-production as the real thing” will ever be anything other than an oxymoron.
It only means that choices remain and we get to choose according to what matters to each of us.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:09:46 +0000

I have been an audio addict since 1972. My opinion is that you must try to purchase the best equipment in the chain. Unfortunately this can mean lots of thick XLR cables several mono block A/B amps, Aktiv crossover box or two ?. New kit is expensive. If you are over 55 then your hearing will not be as good as a 10 year old. Some of the new streamers are excellent (Did I just say this) and there are now turntables around £2.5k that perform almost as efficiently as £70k models. There are manufacturers who’s ethos is your system is for life and are continually offering upgrades on your equipment.

By: jeffrey henning

jeffrey henning — Sat, 23 Aug 2025 18:20:59 +0000

I agree with everyone that’s posted as well as the article itself in the comments made by people in the article, but do have some thoughts.

• Powered speakers are truly the worst of all possible designs. Yes, they are popular and they sound OK, but that’s it. They are not high fidelity speakers.

• I completely agree with Peter Thomas that active loudspeakers will offer the best possible sound. The one thing not mentioned is that they are also more energy efficient than passive loudspeakers. Depending upon the passive crossovers being used, actives will not waste as much power. Passive crossovers suck up 3 to 6 dB of the power input to them. There is also the matter that not having all of those reactive electronics between the amplifier and the loudspeaker driver offers flatter response and less distortion. You can use an amplifier that will work ideally with the individual type of speaker drivers in the system.

• Finally, we can introduce DSP to cover, crossovers, equalization, and all matters of time correction with active speakers. This is where the true power of active speakers are really showing how fantastic they can be. With a system like this, the performance and features that can be added to a loudspeaker system would be considered mind blowing 20 years ago. Case in point: the KEF LS50 Wireless II.

I would imagine that John Dunlavy would have gone the digital active route if he was alive to design loudspeakers today.

By: Jesus Delgado

Jesus Delgado — Thu, 21 Aug 2025 16:50:15 +0000

I would like to see a full set of measurements of the best active loudspeaker system. I was the loudspeaker technician at Dunlavy Audio Labs for many years. I worked very closely with John Dunlavy himself, and I calibrated every loudspeaker to +/- 1dB, and also design many passive crossovers that optimize the acoustic output power of the transducer drivers while still being true minimum phase. I could still design passive loudspeakers with a flat excess group delay over the entire Audio range, clean impulse response and they reproduce squarewaves.

By: Ian White

Ian White — Wed, 20 Aug 2025 13:20:43 +0000

In reply to DH.

DH,

ATC is a prime example of that. I’ve reviewed a pair of their larger stand-mounted 3-way active loudspeakers and while they were tremendously good and built like tanks, you raise a good point. It took over an hour to just take them out of their shipping crates (which are some of the best packaging I’ve seen so far) and nobody would want to do that again if they didn’t have to. I’ve listened to the same pair of speakers in their passive form and didn’t like them as much. The rest of the system was clearly holding them back.

On the more affordable end, I’ve also reviewed the Acoustic Energy AE1 which are excellent active loudspeakers, but that can change rather quickly if you select the wrong preamp or sources. The placement of the volume controls was less than ideal and I ended up just leaving them at a specific spot and using the preamp or DAC/pre to handle that for 99% of my listening.

Both used class A/B amplifiers with some serious heatsinks.

By: DH

DH — Wed, 20 Aug 2025 06:58:38 +0000

Good actives will sound better. Reputable companies that make the same model in both active and passive versions will all tell you that the actives sound better – for the reasons mentioned in the article: individually matched amps and the crossover.
What isn’t mentioned is THE disadvantage of actives: the electronics are inside, and if something goes wrong it usually means shipping the speaker back to the manufacturer for repair.