For Stereo Listening, Whats wrong with Active Monitors

[TLS Guy]

Dr. Mark! Glad you showed up. I'd mentioned how I was moving in with my fiance' this winter, and the area for my rig is really, really tight. Almost to tight for my large Canton's..........hence I have been looking at and reading up on stand mount monitors with a small sub. Most movies that I watch are dramas and don't require a giant sound system, so music is where I spend most of my time. I've looked at the B&W CM line. Many others. Dynaudio. But the passive Quads began intriguing me, and then I noticed the active Quads.
Can you tell us your opinion of the Quad 11 and 12 active, and passive, if you'd care to take the time to look at them? Thanks in advance, Maestro.

I can't comment. There a know dealers round here for Quad, so I can't audition them. However, the actives in particular have a good reputation. I suspect they will be somewhat warmer than your Cantons. If you go for the active speakers, you will get the benefit not only of the speakers, but Quad amplification.

 

[gajraaj]

Seems there is quite some life in the discussion now.

I was ablet o listen to a few setups today. Brussels has very few things to offer

So I listened to

Canton ERGO 620 (Euro 650) - Passive
Monitor Audio BR2 (may be not sure of the model) - Passive
KRK RP6 G2 (euro 410) = Active

Out of these, I liked the KRK the most. Canton was nice but one its too expensive for my budget and two, its passive.

I am leaning towards the KRK RP2

Most likely, I would go back tomorrow with my own CDs and listen to them again. I might have an opportunity to listen to some Mackies too

What do you guys think of the KRKs?

 

[Boerd]

Seems there is quite some life in the discussion now.

I was ablet o listen to a few setups today. Brussels has very few things to offer

So I listened to

Canton ERGO 620 (Euro 650) - Passive
Monitor Audio BR2 (may be not sure of the model) - Passive
KRK RP6 G2 (euro 410) = Active

Out of these, I liked the KRK the most. Canton was nice but one its too expensive for my budget and two, its passive.

I am leaning towards the KRK RP2

Most likely, I would go back tomorrow with my own CDs and listen to them again. I might have an opportunity to listen to some Mackies too

What do you guys think of the KRKs?

The only thing I don't like about the KRK is that they are vented - I'd rather have some sealed active speaker (like the NHT-pro-00 I recommended you).
Between the speakers you listened to (above list) I'd chose the same as you.
I think is a good idea to go with your own CDs - I hope you'll be pleasantly surprised.
All this being said I have no experience with KRK (never owned one) ...

 

[djreef]

These guys are offering some interesting looking stuff. Shame I stumbled on this after the Aussies moved on rates.

http://www.aslanacoustics.com.au/aslan acoustics spkrs.htm

Beautiful cabinet work.

DJ

 

[lsiberian]

TLS I've always heard you as a proponent of passive crossovers between the top 2 drivers. I see your opinion is shifting. As a budding speaker designer/builder i enjoy your conjecture on these topics.

Cost seems to be the greatest limiter

 

[TLS Guy]

TLS I've always heard you as a proponent of passive crossovers between the top 2 drivers. I see your opinion is shifting. As a budding speaker designer/builder i enjoy your conjecture on these topics.

Cost seems to be the greatest limiter

Yes, I think it is shifting. It is true that the lower the crossover point the more deleterious the passive components are. I have been reluctant to commit a fairly large costly amp to driving a tweeter. It would be far easier for a manufacturer, to design an amp just for a tweeter. Really the bandwidth of the amp needs limiting. The issue I'm getting at is tweeter damage. I know you can put a cap between amp and tweeter to deal with big thumps and LF spikes of one sort or another, but than negates some of the advantages of going active.

It would be a simple matter to design an LM chip timer circuit to eliminate turn on thumps, and I have designed those type of circuits before. However I worry about other thumps breaking through and destroying an expensive tweeter. It only takes one to get through, just like a bullet.

So that has been the reason for my hesitancy. As you probably know, I'm trouble adverse, and don't like points of failure.

I think this is an area where modern manufacturing techniques could get this job done well at competitive cost.

If I were Emotiva, say, then as soon as I had the problems of the pre/pro behind me, I would be moving full speed ahead into active speakers. This is an area where it is a steep climb, but not impossible for the DIY enthusiast to design and build a neat and reliable self contained package.

I'm certainly giving it a lot of thought, however even with just my own resources, I'm certain I would incur significant R & D cost to make something good and presentable.

 

[lsiberian]

Yes, I think it is shifting. It is true that the lower the crossover point the more deleterious the passive components are. I have been reluctant to commit a fairly large costly amp to driving a tweeter. It would be far easier for a manufacturer, to design an amp just for a tweeter. Really the bandwidth of the amp needs limiting. The issue I'm getting at is tweeter damage. I know you can put a cap between amp and tweeter to deal with big thumps and LF spikes of one sort or another, but than negates some of the advantages of going active.

It would be a simple matter to design an LM chip timer circuit to eliminate turn on thumps, and I have designed those type of circuits before. However I worry about other thumps breaking through and destroying an expensive tweeter. It only takes one to get through, just like a bullet.

So that has been the reason for my hesitancy. As you probably know, I'm trouble adverse, and don't like points of failure.

I think this is an area where modern manufacturing techniques could get this job done well at competitive cost.

If I were Emotiva, say, then as soon as I had the problems of the pre/pro behind me, I would be moving full speed ahead into active speakers. This is an area where it is a steep climb, but not impossible for the DIY enthusiast to design and build a neat and reliable self contained package.

I'm certainly giving it a lot of thought, however even with just my own resources, I'm certain I would incur significant R & D cost to make something good and presentable.

This requires some further research.

What you propose is the following

Crossover -- Small amp --- tweeter
`--Medium amp -- midrange
`--Large Amp -- woofer.

Am I reading that correct?

If so perhaps we could find a design for a low powered amp. Something like this may work. http://sound.westhost.com/project72.htm
Though I'd need to analyze the design more.

For the medium and woofer I'd think something larger would be preferred.

Perhaps I need to study amps more.

 

[TLS Guy]

This requires some further research.

What you propose is the following

Crossover -- Small amp --- tweeter
`--Medium amp -- midrange
`--Large Amp -- woofer.

Am I reading that correct?

If so perhaps we could find a design for a low powered amp. Something like this may work. http://sound.westhost.com/project72.htm
Though I'd need to analyze the design more.

For the medium and woofer I'd think something larger would be preferred.

Perhaps I need to study amps more.

If it was a three way speaker, the midrange amp would likely have to be as big or bigger than the bass amp.

If I were doing an active three way, I would R & D a midrange driver that could handle good power with crossover points at least 400 Hz to 4 kHz apart, to have one driver handle the speech discrimination range.

I would design a limited bandwidth class A amplifier of somewhere between 10 and 20 watts power for the tweeter.

Probably good amps in the 100 to 200 watt range for the mid and LF sections.

 

[lsiberian]

TLS You've officially peaked my interest in this area. I will need to educate myself on amplifier design. But I believe building a circuit for this scenario may be very possible.

I never thought anyone would bring back my interest in the electrical engineering side again(after that nasty physics course), but now I'm intrigued.

 

[jostenmeat]

Dr. Mark! Glad you showed up. I'd mentioned how I was moving in with my fiance' this winter, and the area for my rig is really, really tight. Almost to tight for my large Canton's..........hence I have been looking at and reading up on stand mount monitors with a small sub. Most movies that I watch are dramas and don't require a giant sound system, so music is where I spend most of my time. I've looked at the B&W CM line. Many others. Dynaudio. But the passive Quads began intriguing me, and then I noticed the active Quads.
Can you tell us your opinion of the Quad 11 and 12 active, and passive, if you'd care to take the time to look at them? Thanks in advance, Maestro.

Sorry to intrude on the present discussion, but I'll give you my impression of the Quad 22L towers. I find them downright veiled compared to BW. Perhaps due to "warmth", but it gives up too much, IMO. I also prefer Dynaudio, but I didn't do a side by side comparison as I did with Quad/BW. The best thing about them is the finish. Also, they might* be the shortest towers that I have seen, so if you sit close, are a tall person, in a tall chair, that sits upright . . . well, you're looking at monitors anyway. With a smaller cabinet of a bookshelf, I'm not sure how much cabinet resonance you will lose, perhaps increasing its transparency, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Just my very subjective opinion. I found these speakers when hunting down Quad dealers, hoping to find their electrostats, saw these instead, remembered they made the TAS best of '06 list, wanted to see if I could pay less to get more . . .

Monitor Audio BR2 is similiar to Quad in that it has a pretty warm signature, giving up some midrange transparency. However, with MA's bronze line, my anticipation wasn't very high as it's their entry line, but I did have very high hopes for Quad. I know it's hard to temper my impressions when my expectations lean strongly one way or another . . .

KRK, I've only heard excellent things. Surely, not quite the value, but some Dyn monitors would be pretty sweet.

 

[lsiberian]

If it was a three way speaker, the midrange amp would likely have to be as big or bigger than the bass amp.

If I were doing an active three way, I would R & D a midrange driver that could handle good power with crossover points at least 400 Hz to 4 kHz apart, to have one driver handle the speech discrimination range.

I would design a limited bandwidth class A amplifier of somewhere between 10 and 20 watts power for the tweeter.

Probably good amps in the 100 to 200 watt range for the mid and LF sections.

Are you familiar with the 41hz DIY amplifiers? They use a high quality Class T amp which is a variant on a class d amp. Seems like they have some decent designs for a low powered tweeter amp and for a midrange woofer combination.

 

[TLS Guy]

TLS You've officially peaked my interest in this area. I will need to educate myself on amplifier design. But I believe building a circuit for this scenario may be very possible.

I never thought anyone would bring back my interest in the electrical engineering side again(after that nasty physics course), but now I'm intrigued.

Please stay interested, intrigued and involved.

 

[gajraaj]

Krk Rp6g2

Thanks all for the interesting insights.

Anyone with a first hand experience with KRK?

 

[lsiberian]

Thanks all for the interesting insights.

Anyone with a first hand experience with KRK?

Sorry for hi-jacking your thread. Can you give them a listen?

Usually that will tell you straight away.

 

[anamorphic96]

Thanks all for the interesting insights.

Anyone with a first hand experience with KRK?

The KRK's are great monitors. A good friend just picked up the RP6g2's and they are very impressive. Especially at lower volumes. But sound great when cranked up as well.

 

[gajraaj]

I go and listen to them today. Will let you know if I picked them up or soemthing else.

 

[TLS Guy]

Are you familiar with the 41hz DIY amplifiers? They use a high quality Class T amp which is a variant on a class d amp. Seems like they have some decent designs for a low powered tweeter amp and for a midrange woofer combination.

Sorry, I missed the above question. Yes, I am familiar with those Truepath amplifiers.

However reports of others in Audio xpress have been less than enthusiastic.

The Hypex modules out of Holland interest me the most, but they are much pricier. These have a good track record in some very exotic studio systems now.

I really would like a bandwidth limited class A amp for the tweeter.

ATC have the largest number of active speakers on offer, but they are very pricey.

Then of course there is Meridian, who for some time have blazed a trail of active speakers with digital filters in the home theater arena.

 

[Boerd]

Sorry, I missed the above question. Yes, I am familiar with those Truepath amplifiers.

However reports of others in Audio xpress have been less than enthusiastic.

The Hypex modules out of Holland interest me the most, but they are much pricier. These have a good track record in some very exotic studio systems now.

I really would like a bandwidth limited class A amp for the tweeter.

ATC have the largest number of active speakers on offer, but they are very pricey.

Then of course there is Meridian, who for some time have blazed a trail of active speakers with digital filters in the home theater arena.

For 3k one can buy the NHT Xd 2.2 fully active digital crossover 2.2 system ...

 

[lsiberian]

Sorry, I missed the above question. Yes, I am familiar with those Truepath amplifiers.

However reports of others in Audio xpress have been less than enthusiastic.

The Hypex modules out of Holland interest me the most, but they are much pricier. These have a good track record in some very exotic studio systems now.

I really would like a bandwidth limited class A amp for the tweeter.

ATC have the largest number of active speakers on offer, but they are very pricey.

Then of course there is Meridian, who for some time have blazed a trail of active speakers with digital filters in the home theater arena.

I appreciate the response. Meridian, and Hypex sites particularly peaked my interest. I'd like to find a lower cost solution than the atc. I'm thinking of benefits for DIY builders. 3-way pro crossovers are inexpensive at around 60 USD. The problem I've found is getting good amps at the right cost. I did however like the low cost potential of the 41 hz small amp. They hypex models also look promising.

 

[TLS Guy]

I appreciate the response. Meridian, and Hypex sites particularly peaked my interest. I'd like to find a lower cost solution than the atc. I'm thinking of benefits for DIY builders. 3-way pro crossovers are inexpensive at around 60 USD. The problem I've found is getting good amps at the right cost. I did however like the low cost potential of the 41 hz small amp. They hypex models also look promising.

In my view, unless you use a mid range driver with a wide enough band width to avoid a crossover in the speech discrimination band, the expense and bother is not worth it.

So I would use a two amp two way d'Appolito MTM. The active crossover allows for more complete and better diffraction compensation. With a 2.5 way passive solution, the second lower driver allows for more complete compensation without paying a power loss penalty. However an active solution would be far better for MTM, and the whole mid range shared with two drivers, instead of one, lowering distortion and thermal compression.

Also vertical dispersion is limited and horizontal dispersion optimized, which reduces speaker room interactions.