Powered Speakers, are they the way? if so, what about Live Sound speakers for Home Theaters?

[ndiaz]

Hi All!

New member here!

I've been following Audioholics for a while now & love the content.

I'm in the process of looking for a house to purchase & one of the things I'm looking for is a basement for you guessed it, Home Theater.

I come from Live Sound & Production work, so I've always thought, well...the speakers I use for my work prioritize in their design, spl, coverage & of course, as much as a stable frequency response throughout the spectrum as it can within the given budget.

& for faults in the response that get in the way after proper placement, we have dsp.

Saw a video posted a while ago about "Studio Powered Monitors" & how "accurate" for the money they were for our purposes.
Which, it's been a given. Always. That's their whole thing "Accuracy, Monitoring for sonic decision making"

So, why is it that they are not the first choice? I couldn't think that running an extra cable could get in the way of choosing them over Passives. Since you only need to run it once.

Which leads me to the "Live Sound" Powered Speakers. I can't seem to find any information about how would they fare in Home Theater.

Nevertheless, I'm thinking of going this route given that I'm very familiar with them.

This is the idea:
QSC K12.2 for LCR
QSC CP8 for Surrounds
Emotiva RMC-1L for Processing
For Subs, well haven't decided what model but seems that the brand that is a no brainer is SVS. Which I already own one of their subs & I'm pleased with it.

So would love to hear what you guys have to say! I'm sure I can't be the only one going with this train of thought...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

All comes down to:

1. Cost. For most people, passive speakers cost a lot less for what they want. For example, the SAME speaker with the added amps/DSP could cost TWICE as much or more.

2. Many audiophiles already have their own amps. Why spend more on more amps inside the speakers? It's along the line of buying separate pre-pros and amps, instead of an AVR. If you already have the amps, you can just upgrade the pre-pros.

3. Amps inside speakers/subs are small plate amps. Many audiophiles don't like small plate amps to power their speakers for a variety of reasons. For one, some people feel that separate amps can be more RELIABLE than small plate amps inside the speakers.

4. If the amps/DSP inside the large heavy speakers fail, it's more inconvenient to repair/replace than a separate external amp. What happens in 10 years if the manufacturers no longer have these built-in amps/DSP?

5. Some audiophiles feel that SEPARATE is just better, whether it is for separate pre-pros vs AVR or speakers or subs, etc.

YMMV. For some, powered speakers is the way to go. But for most people, it's not the way to go. Same with anything else.

For example, I've always used passive subwoofers since I started this hobby back when I was in college. I still use ONLY passive subwoofers. Yet, probably 99.9% of all people use powered subwoofers.

Whatever works best for you is the right answer, regardless of what MOST people do.

 

[panteragstk]

Honestly, as good as the K12 speakers sound, they simply aren't intended for HT. The reason studio monitors are being used is that they aren't all meant for near-field so they can be used in a "normal" speaker configuration. Plenty of active speakers on the market that aren't marketed to the studio crowd, but could be. Same with studio monitors. They are marked to the studio crowd, but can be used in HT or general home listening just as well.

I honestly was very close to using powered monitors for my desktop setup, but ended up building a set that would have been hard to get for any where near the same money.

 

[Eppie]

Most pro speakers simply are not appropriate for home theatre. As they are designed for large rooms, they have a long throw and thus narrow dispersion. Their dispersion is not designed for your typical home theatre sized room. The model listed does say that it has 75 degree coverage, so it would be interesting to see how they fare in a smaller room. They also lack independent testing, so good luck finding accurate measurement graphs from a reliable review site. The specs say 50Hz to 20kHz but no qualifiers. +/- 3dB or +/- 6dB... who knows?

Other factors are size and appearance. Most PA speakers that I have seen are quite large compared to typical home speakers, and the industrial design will put off most people. Aesthetics are very important in the home market.

The DSP options seem to be tailored for live venues and probably do not offer enough flexibility compared to a modern AVR. I did watch the video, and for professional use the QSC looks pretty impressive.

 

[everettT]

Most pro speakers simply are not appropriate for home theatre. As they are designed for large rooms, they have a long throw and thus narrow dispersion. Their dispersion is not designed for your typical home theatre sized room. The model listed does say that it has 75 degree coverage, so it would be interesting to see how they fare in a smaller room. They also lack independent testing, so good luck finding accurate measurement graphs from a reliable review site. The specs say 50Hz to 20kHz but no qualifiers. +/- 3dB or +/- 6dB... who knows?

Other factors are size and appearance. Most PA speakers that I have seen are quite large compared to typical home speakers, and the industrial design will put off most people. Aesthetics are very important in the home market.

The DSP options seem to be tailored for live venues and probably do not offer enough flexibility compared to a modern AVR. I did watch the video, and for professional use the QSC looks pretty impressive.

Most pro speakers like that note their frequency response -6db FWIW. Those QSC have been tested before, I forget where, and measured well. Yorkville has a couple of pairs that have been measured and well too.

I think a larger medium sized room would be the minimum for them to reach close to their full potential.

 

[ndiaz]

Thanks for the replies guy!

I did go in a little search for comparable to those QSC's, since it seems the consensus is that they "aren't meant" for Home Theater.

I found the JBL LSR708i's.

Now, the cost is higher but they are well regarded for Home Theater yet the design seems to be a like. (Except for the smaller woofer) Waveguide, 2-way ect. Frequency range the same.

But they are passive & missing dsp. Pushing 108 @ 1m.

The QSC's have all those components built-in & goes 126 @ 1m

I do not know what makes a speaker "Home Theater" worthy besides being able to tick boxes such as: Measuring well in terms of frequency response & coverage.

I guess Dynamic Range is another, but these are "Live Sound" speakers, they will have it.

Now, in terms of aesthetics. I can absolutely understand. I wouldn't want them in my living room.
But they will be going behind an acoustically transparent screen since I'm trying to do this properly. lol

I've attached a PDF that shows a measurement of the smaller version of the K12's, the K10's.

I do have some questions,

What are the actual distances when we talk about "near" "medium" & "far" fields?
What do we consider a large room, to a medium room?

 

[lovinthehd]

This is the powered version of the JBL 708 https://jblpro.com/products/708p

If aesthetics aren't a concern I don't see why your choices couldn't work. Unless perhaps active speaker hiss audibility? Some have that more than others....even a thread on asr about it .

Article on room size for subs particularly here https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/subwoofer-room-size but would think on the various/room size/distances for particular speakers/designs would probably boil down to dispersion characteristics/spl capabilities.

 

[fmw]

I know a man who uses Mackie speakers in his home theater. I don't know which model. They perform quite well in his installation. I asked him to play a CD once and they handled that well also. His room was deader than mine and that would be an important factor. I think using pro audio speakers could work well depending on all the other factors.

 

[Eppie]

This is the powered version of the JBL 708 https://jblpro.com/products/708p

If aesthetics aren't a concern I don't see why your choices couldn't work. Unless perhaps active speaker hiss audibility? Some have that more than others....even a thread on asr about it .

Article on room size for subs particularly here https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/subwoofer-room-size but would think on the various/room size/distances for particular speakers/designs would probably boil down to dispersion characteristics/spl capabilities.

I agree, speaker hiss would be a bigger concern for home applications. It may not be a design consideration for Pro speakers because you are generally dealing with noisy environments where speaker hiss would not be audible. Speakers need to be dead quite for home applications and when speakers have really high SPL and very high efficiencies they make any amplifier hiss that much more audible. +/- 6dB on FR is not that great but if they run clean and quite then I suppose they could work ok behind a screen.

 

[everettT]

I agree, speaker hiss would be a bigger concern for home applications. It may not be a design consideration for Pro speakers because you are generally dealing with noisy environments where speaker hiss would not be audible. Speakers need to be dead quite for home applications and when speakers have really high SPL and very high efficiencies they make any amplifier hiss that much more audible. +/- 6dB on FR is not that great but if they run clean and quite then I suppose they could work ok behind a screen.

The -6db I mentioned is just in reference to the low end. They deal in F6 and F10 due to the nature that you explained above with such high spl.

 

[BMXTRIX]

So, why is it that they are not the first choice? I couldn't think that running an extra cable could get in the way of choosing them over Passives. Since you only need to run it once.

I think @AcuDefTechGuy hit the nail on the head with his response.

There are a myriad of reasons why the vast majority of people find this solution to be the wrong way to go.
What happens if ONE amplifier fails in one speaker? Do you turn into an audio engineer and pull the amplifier out yourself? Do you send the entire speaker out for repair? Do you buy a new speaker?

Keep in mind live sound doesn't exclusively use powered speakers, a great number of live sound setups use passive speakers, just like home theater, and put their amplifiers into a equipment rack.

The reason this isn't done in home theater is that you need to not only get low level audio signals from the source, to the speakers, without adding noise into the system, but you must also put a power outlet right next to every single speaker location in your home theater space. This is inconvenient and not actually necessary if you have your amps in a single location.

Running speaker wire to speaker locations is often a better solution since AV receivers often have integrated amplification. If you want more power, you simply get bigger amplifiers and move the speaker wire from the AV receiver, to the new amplifier. This keeps low level audio RCA runs as short as possible and allows the speaker wire, which is much less prone to noise, to be the carrier of audio signal to the speakers.

The follow-up list which discusses how live sound venue speakers aren't actually designed for the smaller spaces of home theaters is quite accurate.

A HUGE factor in my experience, is that live sound speakers are terrible at low levels. They aren't subtle, they are a sledgehammer. In a live venue, you have 100+ people listening and drinking and making a lot of noise, even when they are quiet, the noise floor of a live venue is far higher than that of a home theater. So, having a higher noise floor in the speakers is perfectly acceptable. Nobody will notice. So, there is often just a bit of hiss out of the speakers, which you can definitely hear in a perfectly silent room, but never in a club.

I would use passive speakers with good amps as my preference. I would definitely run speaker cable to all speaker locations. If I were to run additional cabling to speaker locations for future 'active' speakers, I would run decently shielded coax cable as well as balanced audio cable. The price isn't all that much to add those wires, but I don't make that my practice currently and can't imagine doing this in a home environment as a standard.

 

[everettT]

I think @AcuDefTechGuy hit the nail on the head with his response.

There are a myriad of reasons why the vast majority of people find this solution to be the wrong way to go.
What happens if ONE amplifier fails in one speaker? Do you turn into an audio engineer and pull the amplifier out yourself? Do you send the entire speaker out for repair? Do you buy a new speaker?

Keep in mind live sound doesn't exclusively use powered speakers, a great number of live sound setups use passive speakers, just like home theater, and put their amplifiers into a equipment rack.

The reason this isn't done in home theater is that you need to not only get low level audio signals from the source, to the speakers, without adding noise into the system, but you must also put a power outlet right next to every single speaker location in your home theater space. This is inconvenient and not actually necessary if you have your amps in a single location.

Running speaker wire to speaker locations is often a better solution since AV receivers often have integrated amplification. If you want more power, you simply get bigger amplifiers and move the speaker wire from the AV receiver, to the new amplifier. This keeps low level audio RCA runs as short as possible and allows the speaker wire, which is much less prone to noise, to be the carrier of audio signal to the speakers.

The follow-up list which discusses how live sound venue speakers aren't actually designed for the smaller spaces of home theaters is quite accurate.

A HUGE factor in my experience, is that live sound speakers are terrible at low levels. They aren't subtle, they are a sledgehammer. In a live venue, you have 100+ people listening and drinking and making a lot of noise, even when they are quiet, the noise floor of a live venue is far higher than that of a home theater. So, having a higher noise floor in the speakers is perfectly acceptable. Nobody will notice. So, there is often just a bit of hiss out of the speakers, which you can definitely hear in a perfectly silent room, but never in a club.

I would use passive speakers with good amps as my preference. I would definitely run speaker cable to all speaker locations. If I were to run additional cabling to speaker locations for future 'active' speakers, I would run decently shielded coax cable as well as balanced audio cable. The price isn't all that much to add those wires, but I don't make that my practice currently and can't imagine doing this in a home environment as a standard.

Active is the first next priority, whether inboard or outbroard amps are involved. Moving away from passive networks brings so much to the table, especially with multichannel audio. The ability to apply so many functions makes system and room intergration seamless.

Also, the idea of having relatively small speakers that can play full range with low distortion is really appealing to me personally. For many the cost will be the largest issue initially and not just from the speakers as people will want to move towards pre pros with more processing power and more flexible outputs.


I have really great passive speakers and love their sound, but moving forward I'll probably forgo anymore of them, with a few possible exceptions.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Dear OP, instead of PA speakers, you may want to look at Active Studio monitors, like these excellent value Kali LP-8 reviewed by James here : https://www.audioholics.com/bookshelf-speaker-reviews/kali-audio-lp-8
His words, not mine:
"...left no doubt that you could use the LP-8s as home theater speakers very successfully."

"Another strength of the LP-8 is their dynamic range; they can get loud without running into audible problems. I think they could be used for a mid-sized home theater with no problem."

And instead of $4k Emotiva, a Yamaha CX-A5200 for $2.4k is a much better deal

Accessories4less: High End Audio at Low End Prices!

www.accessories4less.com

 

[ndiaz]

Dear OP, instead of PA speakers, you may want to look at Active Studio monitors, like these excellent value Kali LP-8 reviewed by James here : https://www.audioholics.com/bookshelf-speaker-reviews/kali-audio-lp-8
His words, not mine:
"...left no doubt that you could use the LP-8s as home theater speakers very successfully."

"Another strength of the LP-8 is their dynamic range; they can get loud without running into audible problems. I think they could be used for a mid-sized home theater with no problem."

And instead of $4k Emotiva, a Yamaha CX-A5200 for $2.4k is a much better deal

Accessories4less: High End Audio at Low End Prices!

www.accessories4less.com

Thank you for this! I Like it but I’m looking for Dirac & Airplay 2.

My understanding is that Dirac is the room correction software to have.

And I’m planning on building my multi-room needs with Airplay 2. I know that it only goes up to 16/44 but for leisure purposes it will do! Besides, everybody has an iPhone now a days, no extra apps. I can also cast video with it to TV’s

 

[ndiaz]

Dear OP, instead of PA speakers, you may want to look at Active Studio monitors, like these excellent value Kali LP-8 reviewed by James here : https://www.audioholics.com/bookshelf-speaker-reviews/kali-audio-lp-8
His words, not mine:
"...left no doubt that you could use the LP-8s as home theater speakers very successfully."

"Another strength of the LP-8 is their dynamic range; they can get loud without running into audible problems. I think they could be used for a mid-sized home theater with no problem."

And instead of $4k Emotiva, a Yamaha CX-A5200 for $2.4k is a much better deal

Accessories4less: High End Audio at Low End Prices!

www.accessories4less.com

Oh & yes the Kali’s! I might go with them as well. Performance/Price is great!

Do you happen to know what are the major differences between LP8, “2nd Wave” LP8 & IN8 v2? I’m not even sure those are all the different versions…

 

[everettT]

Oh & yes the Kali’s! I might go with them as well. Performance/Price is great!

Do you happen to know what are the major differences between LP8, “2nd Wave” LP8 & IN8 v2? I’m not even sure those are all the different versions…

The "IN" is a 3 way with coaxial tweeter and the v2 of the LP, a 2 way, has a corrected frequency response from V1

 

[ndiaz]

I think @AcuDefTechGuy hit the nail on the head with his response.

There are a myriad of reasons why the vast majority of people find this solution to be the wrong way to go.
What happens if ONE amplifier fails in one speaker? Do you turn into an audio engineer and pull the amplifier out yourself? Do you send the entire speaker out for repair? Do you buy a new speaker?

Keep in mind live sound doesn't exclusively use powered speakers, a great number of live sound setups use passive speakers, just like home theater, and put their amplifiers into a equipment rack.

The reason this isn't done in home theater is that you need to not only get low level audio signals from the source, to the speakers, without adding noise into the system, but you must also put a power outlet right next to every single speaker location in your home theater space. This is inconvenient and not actually necessary if you have your amps in a single location.

Running speaker wire to speaker locations is often a better solution since AV receivers often have integrated amplification. If you want more power, you simply get bigger amplifiers and move the speaker wire from the AV receiver, to the new amplifier. This keeps low level audio RCA runs as short as possible and allows the speaker wire, which is much less prone to noise, to be the carrier of audio signal to the speakers.

The follow-up list which discusses how live sound venue speakers aren't actually designed for the smaller spaces of home theaters is quite accurate.

A HUGE factor in my experience, is that live sound speakers are terrible at low levels. They aren't subtle, they are a sledgehammer. In a live venue, you have 100+ people listening and drinking and making a lot of noise, even when they are quiet, the noise floor of a live venue is far higher than that of a home theater. So, having a higher noise floor in the speakers is perfectly acceptable. Nobody will notice. So, there is often just a bit of hiss out of the speakers, which you can definitely hear in a perfectly silent room, but never in a club.

I would use passive speakers with good amps as my preference. I would definitely run speaker cable to all speaker locations. If I were to run additional cabling to speaker locations for future 'active' speakers, I would run decently shielded coax cable as well as balanced audio cable. The price isn't all that much to add those wires, but I don't make that my practice currently and can't imagine doing this in a home environment as a standard.

I would think that by a time an internal amp fails, better products will be available since is always progressing.

Also, "Live Sound" speakers for the most part, the good ones, are built with the purpose of lasting since they will be thrown around, expose to many different climates & pushed hard.

The hiss, I understand but some don’t exhibit that much, especially at a distance. In
tandem with the projector noise, if you were to have it in room, I think it might just be fine.

From an already built stand point, I’m with you. I would stick to amps separated & such.
Seems really convenient.

Yet the trend I have noticed in the passive approach. Is the “You buy this, then buy that, then buy this for that…” & so on. Seems a powered system will get you there faster. Starting from scratch, if the goal is performance, seems powered speakers offer that straight from the box.

In terms of the outlets everywhere, even for myself is a though one I must admit. I’m sure once is done, It will be of great benefit. Again, the projector will need one, so maybe get extras?

 

[ndiaz]

The "IN" is a 3 way with coaxial tweeter and the v2 of the LP, a 2 way, has a corrected frequency response from V1

any graphs around comparing all 3?

I’m just wondering how much better the performance is from the original to the IN8.

 

[everettT]

any graphs around comparing all 3?

I’m just wondering how much better the performance is from the original to the IN8.

There's discussions threads on ASR and Erin's measurements, in addition to the review James did.

This should have all the measurements (1st link)

Loudspeakers

The Sound of Science

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

Kali IN-5 Studio Monitor Review

Copied from my website so some of the formatting may not transfer very well. You're welcome to read the review there, in that case: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-5/ Kali Audio IN-5 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Wednesday, Apr 14, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Kali Audio IN-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review

Copy/paste from my site. Review may not translate from my site so here is the link to the full review on my site: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-8v2/ Kali Audio IN-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Saturday, Jun 26, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

There should be links in those two threads to the others or just search the site.
This should lay out the differences. I have the LP6 v2 in a bedroom as TV speakers and have been very happy with their performance, especially for the price.

 

[ndiaz]

Awesome, thank you for those links!

Quick question, is there another route to go for XLR outs & Dirac in one package besides an Emotiva RMC L1? I would love to come out swinging with Dante on my processor with the JBL SDP55, but that price

I’ve seen the HTP-1 from Monoprice but apparently it din’t measure as well on ASR & Zeos pointed a limitation about the Atmos Layout on it’s software that turned me off.