How Do You Buy High-End Speakers?

[herbu]

This is how it goes depending on equipment, this does NOT apply to ALL Active Crossovers

ad -> Input lvl -> Input mute -> Input Band EQ -> Input Delay -> / > Xover

Channel 1/2 or high / low (depending what crossover you have and 2/3 way 2 way + sub etc) after above

-> output delay-> Band EQ-> output level-> output mute ->limiter -> DA ->

It's much more flexible than passive by an enormous amount.

Yikes!!! C2K, I really appreciate your input and patience, but you're gonna have to dumb it down a bit for me... unless the sequence above was just to illustrate there is A LOT of stuff going on in crossovers. If that was your intent, you are indeed covered in glory, sir.

Dennis said:

I thought active crossovers would completely take over because they have so many inherent advantages over passives. That hasn't happened yet, but the clock is ticking very loudly.

If the clock is ticking very loudly, does that mean sometime in the future I'll have to understand the above well enough to configure it myself? Boy, I hope not! I'm capable of controlling the volume of my subwoofers knowing I can go back to the Audyssey setting if I want. I might be willing to bi-amp my towers and control the woofers separately like ADTG. I really don't have any desire to learn enough to control/adjust all the other stuff above.

So assuming there are other consumers out there like me, what would active crossovers mean to us? Would it simply be an architectural change within the AVR or amplifier?

 

[c2k]

Acu,

Passive and active have the possibility to fail.

But you can have a custom shop build you system without crossovers. And of course use your own amp and crossover box. The pro audio industry as well as many concerts have been using active for a very long time. If there was a problem they would not be using active.

As for amps. Personally im not worried about mine. If you want just have it external. Funk Audio can do integration or an external if required. There are also many crossover compnents you can use. As for electronics failing, ones that are designed properly rarely fail. You can see this in computers, I have seen many motherboards lasting 10 or more years. Active crossover are not as complex.
As for parts being avaliable after 10 years. That would depend on the manufactor if you are looking for something specific. OEMs used by companies that have a strong reputation maybe able to replace at cost.

Acu if your worried about parts. Just get some extra although i highly doubt you will get the chance to use them. I know Nathan can build them for you and have them in an external enclosure. Of course this comes at a cost

Typing on the phone. If I miss something I'll try to add later.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If the clock is ticking very loudly, does that mean sometime in the future I'll have to understand the above well enough to configure it myself? Boy, I hope not! I'm capable of controlling the volume of my subwoofers knowing I can go back to the Audyssey setting if I want. I might be willing to bi-amp my towers and control the woofers separately like ADTG. I really don't have any desire to learn enough to control/adjust all the other stuff above.

So assuming there are other consumers out there like me, what would active crossovers mean to us? Would it simply be an architectural change within the AVR or amplifier?

The reason passive is more prevalent is because in most cases it sounds every bit as good as active. The rate of speaker driver failure is significantly less than the rate of electronic amp failure. The cost of a passive speaker is also less. And passive is usually simpler.

If active were always better, every high-end speaker would be active.

The only reason I would actively bi-amp a speaker is if I think I would actually gain something in SQ. In speakers like the XTZ Devine flagship tower where you could actively amp all 3 drivers (tweeter, midrange, and woofer), I personally would choose to actively bi-amp only the woofer and leave the tweeter & midrange passive. XTZ also agrees. In most systems, you usually don't want to mess around with the midrange and treble too much.

 

[crossedover]

The reason passive is more prominent is because in most cases it sounds every bit as good as active. The rate of speaker driver failure is significantly less than the rate of electronic amp failure. The cost of a passive speaker is also less. And passive is usually simpler.

If active were always better, every high-end speaker would be active.

The only reason I would actively bi-amp a speaker is if I think I would actually gain something in SQ. In speakers like the XTZ Devine flagship tower where you could actively amp all 3 drivers (tweeter, midrange, and woofer), I personally would choose to actively bi-amp only the woofer and leave the tweeter & midrange passive. XTZ also agrees. In most systems, you usually don't want to mess around with the midrange and treble too much.

I'm quite sure the reason that passive is more prevalent boils down to cost in most cases. High end passive crossovers are not the norm in consumer audio. Great crossover designers can work with both. There are inherent advantages to active for an absolute purist, not to say that passive won't achieve similar results. Active cost more money on the whole and the requisite for more complex gear is needed and that's why in CE THEY still dominate

 

[c2k]

Also would require more amps. Even high end businesses want money in their pockets.

Of course the designers that have tried active and passive on the same system can tell you exactly

I really do hate wasting potential amp power and control.

 

[TLS Guy]

I'm quite sure the reason that passive is more prevalent boils down to cost in most cases. High end passive crossovers are not the norm in consumer audio. Great crossover designers can work with both. There are inherent advantages to active for an absolute purist, not to say that passive won't achieve similar results. Active cost more money on the whole and the requisite for more complex gear is needed and that's why in CE THEY still dominate

In most cases I don't think it makes a difference at the higher crossover points, as long as the tweeter is more sensitive than the woofer. If not an active is mandatory. If the crossover needs to be complex, that is another reason to go active. As crossover points lower, the case for active becomes overwhelming.

I no longer consider a speaker with a passive crossover below 350 Hz in the reference category. I think one of the biggest gains from an active solution is the ability to get the BSC spot on including voicing to room and position. A passive BSC solution is always crude compared to an active solution. I think this aspect alone is a huge contributor to the superb balance of this system here. The other advantage is the ability to mix signals to a single driver. This is something else I do in this system and is not possible with a passive solution. The advantage here is the ability to better distribute power between drivers.

As class D amps improve I think active speakers will become much more common and possibly cheaper. However commercial designs use inductors with smaller gauge wire and electrolytic caps, that I would never use.

And yes, it takes a lot of amps. Three amps to each of my mains. However there is not passive solution for this system. The tweeter crossover is passive however, otherwise it would be four amps per speaker. At this 2.8 KHz crossover there is a good passive solution and I doubt an active version would make a worthwhile improvement.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I no longer consider a speaker with a passive crossover below 350 Hz in the reference category.

You are so amusing. So how do you feel about my second favorite moving coil speaker, the KEF 207/2? There it is again, a passive crossover at 120Hz, although KEF also put one at 350Hz for the upper midrange transition to that 6.5" driver. Since I know someone with these speakers I've heard them multiple times, and I still marvel at how neutral they are on solo piano, even with such complexity right in the heart of the music. I will admit they're uglier than sin, but who am I to talk? Are you really going to rule out the 207/2 just because of that 120Hz crossover?

 

[TLS Guy]

You are so amusing. So how do you feel about my second favorite moving coil speaker, the KEF 207/2? There it is again, a passive crossover at 120Hz, although KEF also put one at 350Hz for the upper midrange transition to that 6.5" driver. Since I know someone with these speakers I've heard them multiple times, and I still marvel at how neutral they are on solo piano, even with such complexity right in the heart of the music. I will admit they're uglier than sin, but who am I to talk? Are you really going to rule out the 207/2 just because of that 120Hz crossover?

It would be a better speaker if that 120 Hz crossover were active and probably the one above that.

It is the huge inductors and caps required for a 120 Hz crossover, especially a fourth order one that not only cause insertion loss, but highly significant distortion. There are four high value inductors and four high value caps in that 120 Hz crossover. I'm sorry, but that is much better done active.

If that were not so, you could just make subs with four passive components and a power amp. You don't do that because you get a lousy sub.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm quite sure the reason that passive is more prevalent boils down to cost in most cases.

I can see cost as a huge factor for speakers costing under $2K.

But I don't see it as a factor for speakers costing over $10K. When guys buy $10K, $20K, $30K, $100K speakers and use $3K, $5K, $10K, $20K amps, is cost really a factor? I think not.

There is not just one main factor.

Warranty affects sales. When you put amps inside the speakers, the warranty decreases from 5 years to 3 years, etc. Sure they say the drivers get 5 year and electronics get 3 year, but people will effectively see the "3 year" warranty. Digital electronics/DSP/EQ failure rate is just inherently higher than speaker drivers. We see Bryston decreasing their warranty from 20 years on analog amps to 3 years on digital electronics.

Failure rate affects sales. There goes your company reputation for reliability because some amps malfunctioned. I hear about amp failure inside subs enough times to see that it would be a problem inside speakers. Okay, not all speakers, but enough of them to give companies headaches and loss in sales.

Complexity decreases sales. Most consumers aren't up to dealing with active systems. It may seem basic and simple to us, but not to most consumers. Active systems with internal amps/XO/DSP may be simpler than external amps/XO/DSP. Don't even try to sell the Linkwitz Orion active speakers because each speaker requires FOUR external amps (that's 8 external amps per pair of speakers) and the wiring/connection process isn't exactly simple for most consumers.

Amps increase sales. Why would Harman want to lose amp sales of Mark Levinson, Lexicon and JBL Synthesis by putting small class D amps inside their speakers? Same goes for B&W and Rotel/Classe.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...how do you feel about my second favorite moving coil speaker, the KEF 207/2? There it is again, a passive crossover at 120Hz, although KEF also put one at 350Hz for the upper midrange transition to that 6.5" driver. Since I know someone with these speakers I've heard them multiple times, and I still marvel at how neutral they are on solo piano, even with such complexity right in the heart of the music. I will admit they're uglier than sin, but who am I to talk? Are you really going to rule out the 207/2 just because of that 120Hz crossover?

Like Dennis says, if it sounds good, it really is good. No, really, honestly, it is good. The measurements show it. The subjective listening proves it.

But I would personally rule it out from my list because I would need subwoofers with those speakers, which means it does not meet my personal requirement.

 

[Swerd]

Failure rate affects sales. There goes your company reputation for reliability because some amps malfunctioned. I hear about amp failure inside subs enough times to see that it would be a problem inside speakers. Okay, not all speakers, but enough of them to give companies headaches and loss in sales.

I can only imagine the increased failure rate of drivers, woofers, mids, and tweeters that would occur if the average home theater owner of today had manually adjustable active crossovers . A lot of well-meaning owners would destroy their speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I can only imagine the increased failure rate of drivers, woofers, mids, and tweeters that would occur if the average home theater owner of today had manually adjustable active crossovers . A lot of well-meaning owners would destroy their speakers.

That would be cataclysmic for sure.

 

[j_garcia]

My exact process goes like this:
1) listen to a bunch of speakers and determine the ones I like the best.

2)

Companies that want to sell me $10K speakers should probably be pretty accommodating about a way for me to listen to them. Guessing if I have that kind of problem, I will fly out to their demo room somewhere to listen to them.

 

[Irvrobinson]

It would be a better speaker if that 120 Hz crossover were active and probably the one above that.

It is the huge inductors and caps required for a 120 Hz crossover, especially a fourth order one that not only cause insertion loss, but highly significant distortion. There are four high value inductors and four high value caps in that 120 Hz crossover. I'm sorry, but that is much better done active.

If that were not so, you could just make subs with four passive components and a power amp. You don't do that because you get a lousy sub.

I can tell you, from measurements on the Salon2, and listening to both the 207/2 and the Salon2, that they do not have "highly significant distortion", anywhere. It might be that I'm misunderstanding you, and the distortion will only occur when one or more the passive components saturate, but I've never heard it or heard of it.

You know, Mark, seriously, you're one of the most valuable resources on this forum, and what you did for Afterlife2 shows you to be an incredibly kind and generous person, but you really should try to temper your biases a bit. Yes, the Salon2 and the 207/2 both have proprietary drivers that could well go out of production, and perhaps the choices their designers made were driven more by marketing than by rigorous engineering integrity (as GranteedEV described), but hardly any of us can do what you do, and these two speakers probably come as close to practical perfection as most of us can buy, at any price.

 

[mwmkravchenko]

It has been interesting to read the comments in this last part of the thread.

There are some misconceptions and some opinions.

So to add to the opinions I'll throw in this. The following is fact. I'll put a big opinion where I make commentary on the facts.

Loudspeakers are done in passive crossovers for two simple reasons. Cost and familiarity.

You guys have to think of actual cost of the product. Not dealer cost. Manufacturer cost. Here is how it breaks down. Backwards from the dealer.

They double the cost in at the very east.

Distributor. They double the cost.

Manufacturer. They double the cost on expensive items and triple or better on cheaper items.

This is how it works.

So if you sell an item for ten thousand it is getting produced for how much?

Conservatively $1250. Probably less. And that is for a Pair all the way through the chain.

So we are talking $625 a cabinet all in at the factory.

Yes there are compromises at those price points. And yes every component is scrutinized and costed down. Even screws fall into that trap. I worked with a factory that had massive faults in a 10,000 piece run and they tracked it down to screws being sourced for half a cent less. The screws were not hardened properly and little bits were migrating their way into the motor gaps and fouling the voice coils. Those compromises are made by the manufacturer. The actual manufacturer. There is very little mass production done in the developed world in audio. And to get a made in America or Canada or EU sticker very little has to be done post manufacture to get it. It can be a simple as re-packaging.

I have been at the factory that makes Revel, and another that does B&W cabinets. They are classy outfits. Very high end woodworking.

So on that level of product ($10,000) you can have corners cut on the size and type of inductors that are on the hairy edge of linear performance up to a certain power level. And this leads to the choice of capacitors that are good but not great. The drivers are the thing that are most compromised usually. Because even decent passive components are pretty good sounding. And saturation of inductors and and such only really happens when you are pounding the snot out of the loudspeakers.

So yes an active speaker costs more.

And yes you have two guys on this thread that design speakers who say they work and sound better.

You even have a guy that has built his own and talks about their pros and cons.

And I agree that with the right high frequency driver it can make very little difference on whether or not you use a passive or an active crossover. However if you incorporate delay into the picture you have to go active. Because delay generated passively shifts with frequency, and delay generated in the small signal domain ( between preamp and amp before the speaker ) is more stable.

You can also do a passive crossover in the small signal side of amplification using really high quality parts. But that again requires an amplifier per driver.

Those are facts.

Another fact is that the best sounding speakers are usually built in small runs by hand by any number of small dedicated companies run out of small shops or garages. Seriously. There is not a whole lot of money to be made in audio when you are in the small end of the scale. But it is in that end where you cannot make any mistakes or compromises either. Every product is a potential make or break of your business.

Next misconception.

No designer I know would open up his hard won design of a loudspeaker so that a consumer could monkey around with it. That is a recipe for disaster. Having it tweaked in house is an option, by qualified people of course.

Amplifier longevity.

You build to a quality level for everything. And You choose the quality level accordingly.

Case in point. You can buy cheap non certified plate amps from China. They will function for quite a while. But they most likely will fail sooner than a TUV or CSA certified product. And that is because of a number of very simple things.

The quality of components that pass certification are much higher than those that do not. Specifically power and heat dissipation ratings.

Any amplifier that is ten years old, or older and on continuously will have degraded electrolytic capacitors. Be it from Mark Levinson, Boulder, jeff rowland, Pass Labs or any other high end brand that escapes me right now. It is a simple function of what wears out first. By the way they are relatively inexpensive to change out and if done will greatly extend the life spna of your amplifier. They don't catastrophically fail, they slowly dry out. An electrolytic capacitor is basically made like a roll of toilet paper. the paper has a foil on one side and a paper insulating it on the other. And it is rolled up like a toilet paper roll. To keep everything running properly you have to have an electrically conductive fluid to pass the electrons to the insulated plate of rolled up aluminum. An electrolyte. This is what slowly evaporates out and over time the value of the capacitance diminishes. The higher the heat rating on the caps the longer they will survive.

Now for some opinion.

Nathan and I have had a discussion about bringing a set of MTM's to RMAF that will be setup to display both an active and a passive option. So the opinion part will be to listen and find out what is what. Which one will sound better. If we do our job correctly it will be just discernible. My opinion will be that we will be able to have a little cleaner rendition of the midrange and little more dynamic capability.

That part we will have to wait and see about.

Yes I like to experiment and figure out things as much as the next guy.

 

[c2k]

Digital electronics/DSP/EQ failure rate is just inherently higher than speaker drivers.

I have to disagree since not all electronics are built or designed the same. For example, The pro industry has been using the active for so long and if it was really prone to failure do you think they would use it in concerts and studios? Laptops fail much of the time because of poor supplies or poor cooling. Increase the temperature or supply it bad power will lead to failure. Choosing a good design with good components would not lead to such disaster. Of course some failures can be due to bad manufacturing as well. An example would be the application of too much TIM on Intel CPUs on the Apple side which led to temperatures exceeding 95C in their "Air series" My CPUs run below 65-70C underload, 25C idle... Lasted almost 10 years.

Most consumers aren't up to dealing with active systems.

True, but if they want high performance, then their stuck but they can always get a professional to do it.

Don't even try to sell the Linkwitz Orion active speakers because each speaker requires FOUR external amps

I thought they were 3 way... but can take 1 more for more power to the woofers.

Tweeters (2x) - Seas T25CF002
Midrange (1x) - Seas W22EX001
Woofers (2x) - Seas L26RO4Y

Performance in general comes with active to increase power and control and should almost always show some results.

 

[Irvrobinson]

It has been interesting to read the comments in this last part of the thread.

There are some misconceptions and some opinions.

So to add to the opinions I'll throw in this. The following is fact. I'll put a big opinion where I make commentary on the facts.

Loudspeakers are done in passive crossovers for two simple reasons. Cost and familiarity.

You guys have to think of actual cost of the product. Not dealer cost. Manufacturer cost. Here is how it breaks down. Backwards from the dealer.

They double the cost in at the very east.

Distributor. They double the cost.

Manufacturer. They double the cost on expensive items and triple or better on cheaper items.

This is how it works.

So if you sell an item for ten thousand it is getting produced for how much?

Conservatively $1250. Probably less. And that is for a Pair all the way through the chain.

So we are talking $625 a cabinet all in at the factory.

I'm unfamiliar with the speaker industry, but in electronics, component costs are typically 20% of retail. Also, I can't speak to European brands, like B&W or KEF, but I know for a fact that Revel does not use distributors in the US for the Ultima product line. I don't think B&W uses a distributor in the US either.

Yes there are compromises at those price points. And yes every component is scrutinized and costed down. Even screws fall into that trap. I worked with a factory that had massive faults in a 10,000 piece run and they tracked it down to screws being sourced for half a cent less. The screws were not hardened properly and little bits were migrating their way into the motor gaps and fouling the voice coils. Those compromises are made by the manufacturer. The actual manufacturer. There is very little mass production done in the developed world in audio. And to get a made in America or Canada or EU sticker very little has to be done post manufacture to get it. It can be a simple as re-packaging.

Your last point is not correct for the Made in the USA label. There are US Federal Trade Commission regulations about it. See:

Complying with the Made in USA Standard | BCP Business Center

Another fact is that the best sounding speakers are usually built in small runs by hand by any number of small dedicated companies run out of small shops or garages. Seriously. There is not a whole lot of money to be made in audio when you are in the small end of the scale. But it is in that end where you cannot make any mistakes or compromises either. Every product is a potential make or break of your business.

I don't know about the best sounding, but certainly they will have the highest ratio of components costs to retail price.

Amplifier longevity.

Any amplifier that is ten years old, or older and on continuously will have degraded electrolytic capacitors. Be it from Mark Levinson, Boulder, jeff rowland, Pass Labs or any other high end brand that escapes me right now. It is a simple function of what wears out first. By the way they are relatively inexpensive to change out and if done will greatly extend the life span of your amplifier. They don't catastrophically fail, they slowly dry out. An electrolytic capacitor is basically made like a roll of toilet paper. the paper has a foil on one side and a paper insulating it on the other. And it is rolled up like a toilet paper roll. To keep everything running properly you have to have an electrically conductive fluid to pass the electrons to the insulated plate of rolled up aluminum. An electrolyte. This is what slowly evaporates out and over time the value of the capacitance diminishes. The higher the heat rating on the caps the longer they will survive.

I agree with your view of capacitors and aging, but ten years is pretty conservative. 15-20 years is more realistic. I completely disagree about large caps being "relatively inexpensive" to change out. On my pair of Madrigal-built Levinson amps, which had a reputation of needing new caps every 10-15 years, the cost was several hundred dollars per amp for Cornell Dubilier replacements at retail, and they are not easily replaced.

 

[Swerd]

You guys have to think of actual cost of the product. Not dealer cost. Manufacturer cost. Here is how it breaks down. Backwards from the dealer.

They double the cost in at the very least.

Distributor. They double the cost.

Manufacturer. They double the cost on expensive items and triple or better on cheaper items.

This is how it works.

So if you sell an item for ten thousand it is getting produced for how much?

Conservatively $1250. Probably less. And that is for a Pair all the way through the chain.

So we are talking $625 a cabinet all in at the factory.

That's why I like buying from Internet Direct speaker makers such as Philharmonic Audio or Salk.

Another fact is that the best sounding speakers are usually built in small runs by hand by any number of small dedicated companies run out of small shops or garages. Seriously. There is not a whole lot of money to be made in audio when you are in the small end of the scale. But it is in that end where you cannot make any mistakes or compromises either. Every product is a potential make or break of your business.

I can't really add anything to this. I only quote it because it's so very true .

Even though I left out the parts about active vs. passive crossovers, I'd say the same for that – all true.

 

[mwmkravchenko]

Your last point is not correct for the Made in the USA label. There are US Federal Trade Commission regulations about it. See:

Complying with the Made in USA Standard | BCP Business Center

Taking a bulk shipped item and repackaging it into smaller lots does happen. I even know of companies that simply push on wire connections and meet compliance. It is a slippery slope and none to transparent. And sad. 30 years ago many things were made in Canada, or in the United States. The imported products were the exception. Now it is the other way around.

I don't know about the best sounding, but certainly they will have the highest ratio of components costs to retail price.

Fair point. And a reality. Small company is not a guarantee of anything. But there are factors that can point in the right direction. Length of time in operation, client base. Happy or unhappy clients.

I agree with your view of capacitors and aging, but ten years is pretty conservative. 15-20 years is more realistic. I completely disagree about large caps being "relatively inexpensive" to change out. On my pair of Madrigal-built Levinson amps, which had a reputation of needing new caps every 10-15 years, the cost was several hundred dollars per amp for Cornell Dubilier replacements at retail, and they are not easily replaced.

Capacitor longevity also depends on ripple current across the capacitors along with temperature. Ripple current is a product of power supply design, and to a degree loading after the power supply.

And yes the big beer can Cornell Dublier capacitors are not cheap.

It's good to have an interchange of ideas. Rarely can one post sum up every aspect of anything never mind cover all possible design points. But things like these are what really goes on in the background behind all the reviewer fluff, and magazine sales.

As a wet behind the ears young man I would tell my Dad about all the latest and greatest. My Dad enjoyed a good sound system, and he would ask me a simple question that I have never forgotten.

Doesn't the stuff from the 50's and 60's have really high price tags now? And it sounds good right? So you mean to tell me that a new product comes out and all that other stuff now sounds terrible?

Couldn't answer him then, and still can't now.

There is good stuff, bad stuff, and just plain ugly stuff and there always will be.

But what was good once will be good always. (Up to a point where it still works and operates as designed of course)

 

[c2k]

I don't know about the best sounding, but certainly they will have the highest ratio of components costs to retail price.

Custom often leads to high flexibility which would often lead to better performance ratio per dollar. Of course you need a good designer and maker as well

I agree with your view of capacitors and aging, but ten years is pretty conservative. 15-20 years is more realistic. I completely disagree about large caps being "relatively inexpensive" to change out. On my pair of Madrigal-built Levinson amps, which had a reputation of needing new caps every 10-15 years, the cost was several hundred dollars per amp for Cornell Dubilier replacements at retail, and they are not easily replaced.

Depends on the Class of Amp, operating temperature, ESR, low frequency Ripple(ie, bad power supplies).