klipsch vs ascend acoustics

[shadyJ]

Curious, have you had conversations with any of these brands as to how they plan to support/service potential amp issues down the line, like how many years out they will support the amps in terms of service/replacement?

I assume they would support it just like any other electrical device. Most of these speakers have 5-year warranties. Look at it another way, for the same price as these powered monitors, you could get a much worse passive speaker and an entry-level amp that would have about the same long-term reliability. But over the working lives between these products, the powered monitor can give you far better sound quality.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I bought my son a pair JBL 305’s in white for Christmas. They’re sooooo good. So good. Hooked up an old JBL 12” sub(just coincidence) when he was home for Christmas and damn.
Almost got the 308’s but he’s in a dorm so...
In any case, they’re uncanny in their imaging and presentation. Was thinking of getting a pair for my BR 5.1, but I think I’m gonna do an RSL update in there.

 

[redboat77]

i am trying to decide between the klipsch RP-160M or the ascend CBM170 for my new fronts in my 2ch music setup. i have a klipsch sub now. thanks

Dennis Murphy's kit speakers, recommended in an earlier post, are probably an excellent choice. If putting those together is too much of a hassle, take a look at the NHT C3 speakers. These are currently a good deal at $782/pair on Amazon, and the price fluctuates lower sometimes. They measure really well and have received excellent reviews.

 

[Pogre]

I assume they would support it just like any other electrical device. Most of these speakers have 5-year warranties. Look at it another way, for the same price as these powered monitors, you could get a much worse passive speaker and an entry-level amp that would have about the same long-term reliability. But over the working lives between these products, the powered monitor can give you far better sound quality.

So why is it so difficult to build passive speakers that perform as well as active ones? Is it in the active digital crossovers vs traditional passive being that far superior?

It'd be interesting to see some passive speakers in the price range designed with no internal crossovers, meant for bi amping and you could provide you own amps and dsp capable of applying whatever recommended crossover settings needed. It wouldn't be for everyone but wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

 

[lp85253]

Amir’s reviews are definitely informative but need to be taken (like all reviews) with a grain of salt. Just looking at whether he recommends something is a p!ss-poor way of choosing gear.

amir is a lot more opinion than measurements anymore .. he thinks he's a hot shot rock star..

 

[ryanosaur]

So why is it so difficult to build passive speakers that perform as well as active ones? Is it in the active digital crossovers vs traditional passive being that far superior?

It'd be interesting to see some passive speakers in the price range designed with no internal crossovers, meant for bi amping and you could provide you own amps and dsp capable of applying whatever recommended crossover settings needed. It wouldn't be for everyone but wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

Sadly, it would be a very niche market, I'm afraid. Hell, even I'm not that experienced taking measurements with REW, yet. Consider the difficulty people have just doing that! Now, ask them to program a 2- or 3-way crossover!


Regardless, to the first part of your question, the challenge with the passive XO is that every component effectively drains potential power. so a very stylish LR4 Crossover is going to inherently limit power more than the 2nd order version. This is probably only a tiny corner of a bigger puzzle, too. For example, adding resistors to normalize Impedance...

I am trying to weigh the long term goal of my fantasy build being all active or a hybrid with powered low end and passive uppers. You see it in such speakers as Def Techs or some of Troels Graveson's designs (especially his 4- and 5- way builds.
Towards that latter example, he switched over to using the Hypex Fusion Plates. Check Madisound or Hypex if you want to see their capabilities.
Regardless, even using lower powered or less expensive DSP Amps for each speaker can get stupid expensive. And the range is pretty extreme. (JTR, as an example? )

 

[ryanosaur]

Sadly, it would be a very niche market, I'm afraid. Hell, even I'm not that experienced taking measurements with REW, yet. Consider the difficulty people have just doing that! Now, ask them to program a 2- or 3-way crossover!


Regardless, to the first part of your question, the challenge with the passive XO is that every component effectively drains potential power. so a very stylish LR4 Crossover is going to inherently limit power more than the 2nd order version. This is probably only a tiny corner of a bigger puzzle, too. For example, adding resistors to normalize Impedance...

I am trying to weigh the long term goal of my fantasy build being all active or a hybrid with powered low end and passive uppers. You see it in such speakers as Def Techs or some of Troels Graveson's designs (especially his 4- and 5- way builds.
Towards that latter example, he switched over to using the Hypex Fusion Plates. Check Madisound or Hypex if you want to see their capabilities.
Regardless, even using lower powered or less expensive DSP Amps for each speaker can get stupid expensive. And the range is pretty extreme. (JTR, as an example? )

As I think about what I wrote, @Pogre , I suspect better information could be shared by the likes of @TLS Guy , @Verdinut , and @highfigh among others, regarding how a Passive Crossover limits the potential of the Drivers in any system from a simple 2-way to a monster 4- or 5-way.

 

[highfigh]

So why is it so difficult to build passive speakers that perform as well as active ones? Is it in the active digital crossovers vs traditional passive being that far superior?

It'd be interesting to see some passive speakers in the price range designed with no internal crossovers, meant for bi amping and you could provide you own amps and dsp capable of applying whatever recommended crossover settings needed. It wouldn't be for everyone but wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

Passive crossovers cause more phase shift, which means the signal coming from one passband won't align with the signal from others and it's not only at the crossover frequency, it's at all frequencies because the components affect different frequencies to different extents.

If you were to build speakers without crossovers, you no longer need to stagger the plane for each driver, which was really the only/best way to time-align the output in the 'passive analog crossover' days. With a DSP, time alignment is a piece of cake, as are crossover frequencies and slopes, whether symmetric or asymmetric, level correction, Q, etc.

Check this out- it's really a cool system-

 

[lovinthehd]

So why is it so difficult to build passive speakers that perform as well as active ones? Is it in the active digital crossovers vs traditional passive being that far superior?

It'd be interesting to see some passive speakers in the price range designed with no internal crossovers, meant for bi amping and you could provide you own amps and dsp capable of applying whatever recommended crossover settings needed. It wouldn't be for everyone but wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

That's called DIY? If you've got your own amps and dsp not that hard to put a speaker together to use them with. How many people that have such gear would buy a pre-made speaker?

ps There is one I can think of, the JBL M2....you could choose to go your own amp/dsp route over suggested.....

 

[Pogre]

That's called DIY? If you've got your own amps and dsp not that hard to put a speaker together to use them with. How many people that have such gear would buy a pre-made speaker?

Not many. That's why I said "not for everyone".

Well, for myself I have a powerful 7 channel amp and a mini. I could have fun playing with something like that. If the sq blows a cap n coil passive speaker of similar price/build out of the water it would interest me.

 

[Pogre]

Just a funny side story, I had a friend way back in the day who didn't like to use the built in electronic crossovers that were becoming standard (at the time) with car stereo amps and some speakers. He'd go unnecessarily out of his way to build his own passive crossovers with caps n coils to bypass any electronic ones. He was also a tube amp 2 channel purist for home...

When I typed out "caps n coils" above it reminded me how we used to call him "Captain Coil". "Look out! Here comes Captain Coil!". I haven't seen that guy in 20 years man... sigh.

 

[lovinthehd]

Just a funny side story, I had a friend way back in the day who didn't like to use the built in electronic crossovers that were becoming standard (at the time) with car stereo amps and some speakers. He'd go unnecessarily out of his way to build his own passive crossovers with caps n coils to bypass any electronic ones. He was also a tube amp 2 channel purist for home...

When I typed out "caps n coils" above it reminded me how we used to call him "Captain Coil". "Look out! Here comes Captain Coil!". I haven't seen that guy in 20 years man... sigh.

Some like their anal logs....

 

[shadyJ]

So why is it so difficult to build passive speakers that perform as well as active ones? Is it in the active digital crossovers vs traditional passive being that far superior?

It'd be interesting to see some passive speakers in the price range designed with no internal crossovers, meant for bi amping and you could provide you own amps and dsp capable of applying whatever recommended crossover settings needed. It wouldn't be for everyone but wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

A passive crossover circuit is like an unnecessary middle man. As was said, it hurts the sensitivity and also has phase shifts that can be avoidable with a sophisticated DSP profile in an active crossover. You can have any kind of crossover type you want with an active system with DSP, and it all costs the same. With a passive system, for a more uncompromising design, you have to keep throwing components in there which increases cost and carries additional penalties as well. What's more is that in an active system, you can give the drivers exactly as much amplifier as they can handle, so active speakers don't have to waste one watt.

As for the idea of putting together passive speakers without crossovers where the user can supply their own, that is a pretty bad idea on the whole, no offense. The reason is that most people wouldn't know what they are doing. It would just lead to some really bad speakers and a lot of blown drivers. I would leave the filter design and DSP limiters to the pros. A layman isn't about to do better than a professional who does that for a living.

Here is a video where Gene and Matthew Poes talk about the advantages of active over passive speakers.: