What are the reasons to not be considering building 3-way active speakers over purchasing 2-3x priced 3-way Passive speakers. Is there a specific and solid reason that I should not be considering to do that. I can possibly get good System for Half the price or even less. And specially for Home theater system that can be a huge cut off budget wise. With decent Drivers which have good reviews will I not be able to manage to build a better active speaker than what Passive models have to offer even at much higher price range.
Sorry, I don't understand your question!
Building something is a hobby
Buying something is fullfilling need (yes it might be a hobby too 😵)
Building something is a hobby
Buying something is fullfilling need (yes it might be a hobby too 😵)
There can be a lot of for and against here, the real question is passive or active do you save $ with diy? For like and kind build quality/output/ aesthetic either passive or active, not likely. With active you are likely to spend more depending on your feature list. Perhaps the higher end might have some gap, still you are likely to spend $2500 to replicate $4k speakers, but they can be tailored to you.
Like I can get MiniDSP 2x4(or HD version) + very low thd amp modules for a very reasonable price. And decent highly reviewed drivers as well. Not going for very high end. Trying to build a pair for under $1000.
Resale value is not important. Probably scrap it at end of life. And use it till it lasts.
Resell, and depending on what you mean by active, ability to switch amps.
The more active you go, the more you get locked in to your specific use case, which is the whole point. Tailoring the audio experience to your preferences and room. The more passive, the easier it is to move speakers around, to different rooms/houses, sell them.
The more active you go, the more you get locked in to your specific use case, which is the whole point. Tailoring the audio experience to your preferences and room. The more passive, the easier it is to move speakers around, to different rooms/houses, sell them.
Building can for some also be a necessity.
Especially when someone is limited by a budget but wants to have some proper sounding loudspeakers.
When building something yourself, you are also able to make everything to your liking.
Yes. Don't plan to move them across or rework on them unless something fails electronically. It will be set for at-least a decade.
I was thinking. Paradigm has pair of speakers at $2000. I was trying to figure out if I can build active speakers for half its price or less while sounding close to if not better.
Sorry but your comment doesn't make any sense to me, and i'm dsp/multiamp ( so 'active') user for more than ten years.
Multi amping might induce ergonomy issues ( bulk of multi amp, dsp, computer, wires, volume...) though.
For the rest well, a dsp does what you tell it to do and as far as ability to taylor things to room or preferences passive can't come close ime.
It's not like you can't do it, but it takes a lot more time to move your setup to a different room. And what if you give it to a family member? You set it up for them, then what if they want to move it to another room? Did you also teach them how to set it up?
And as I said, forget about selling it except as individual components.
I might have not been clear enough, but "locked in" just meant tailored, and esoteric to an extent. You have to tailor it to each new space, and almost nobody else will want the system as you have it, even for free in most cases.
The real question here has nothing to do with whether the speakers are active or passive. The answer is the same in both cases.
The question is whether it is considerably less expensive to build your own speakers of comparable or better performance compared to buying commercial products. And the answer is unequivocally that it is much less expensive by a factor of between 5 and 10.
This implies, of course, that you already have some woodworking skills and some basic equipment for cutting and joining wood pieces together.
When you remove all of the labor costs, overhead cost, profits, dealer markups, shipping cost, etc., from the retail price you will find the cost of the basic parts is only about 10% of what you pay for the commercial product.
Even if you pay twice as much for the drivers as the manufactures pay your total cost is still just 1/5 of what you would pay for the finished product at a retail store
One reason is you may still overall dislike the extra ADC/DAC of cheaper DSPs; preferring to keep your chain wholly analogue.
I'm sure some will say this is inaudible; I have no comment.
I'm sure some will say this is inaudible; I have no comment.
As far as I know, technically, there are only advantages to active loudspeakers, even when you make them completely analogue.
Those "advantages" that you refer to are based on the assumption that the active components are perfect. That they are completely free from any distortions, non-linearities, noise, etc. But that is hardly the case in reality.
And at the lower end of spectrum with inexpensive components like the miniDSP it is entirely possible that you degrade the overall sound more than you improve it.
No i don't think the improvements came from an 'ideal' electronic components, rather from the fact than line level duties are much less sensible to modulation because of heat/high power.
The fact an amp doesn't have to deal with passive components between it and driver is a big plus too. Power requirements are 'lower' too versus an equivalent passive system. Imd is lowered by bandpassing too...
Infact there is a whole page about 'improvements' ( practictal or theorical) vs passive implementation on P.Newell 'recording studio acoustic'.
People keep on referencing minidsp but it's not difficult to make better ( i know only the older gen so can't speak for the HD) for even less money...
It sound to me like defining a whole field by experiencing only the worst in it. Doesn't make sense to me.
The fact an amp doesn't have to deal with passive components between it and driver is a big plus too. Power requirements are 'lower' too versus an equivalent passive system. Imd is lowered by bandpassing too...
Infact there is a whole page about 'improvements' ( practictal or theorical) vs passive implementation on P.Newell 'recording studio acoustic'.
People keep on referencing minidsp but it's not difficult to make better ( i know only the older gen so can't speak for the HD) for even less money...
It sound to me like defining a whole field by experiencing only the worst in it. Doesn't make sense to me.
With the exception of some audiophile feedback-free designs, it will be difficult to find active circuitry that's so poorly designed that its distortion is not negligible compared to that of loudspeakers.
By the way, two of the advantages are:
1. The loudspeaker box can be optimized for other parameters than flat free-field response. For example, you can tune a bassreflex box for minimum cone excursion over the frequency range of interest - hence less distortion - and then equalize its response with a few biquads. You can also add a high-pass to prevent excessive cone excursions due to very low frequency signals.
2. You can experiment with the driving impedance of the loudspeakers. At least for frequencies far from resonance, electrodynamic loudspeakers distort less with current drive than with voltage drive, but normally everyone is tied to the de-facto standard that loudspeakers are driven with voltage.
(Actually, I don't have an active set-up myself, but the reasons for that are not technical/sound-quality-related.)
By the way, two of the advantages are:
1. The loudspeaker box can be optimized for other parameters than flat free-field response. For example, you can tune a bassreflex box for minimum cone excursion over the frequency range of interest - hence less distortion - and then equalize its response with a few biquads. You can also add a high-pass to prevent excessive cone excursions due to very low frequency signals.
2. You can experiment with the driving impedance of the loudspeakers. At least for frequencies far from resonance, electrodynamic loudspeakers distort less with current drive than with voltage drive, but normally everyone is tied to the de-facto standard that loudspeakers are driven with voltage.
(Actually, I don't have an active set-up myself, but the reasons for that are not technical/sound-quality-related.)
Last edited:
The only reason I can think of is more complexity for possibly little gain.
2 or 3 amps per channel.
Phase aligned electronic crossover.
It can easily be 3 times the effort.
2 or 3 amps per channel.
Phase aligned electronic crossover.
It can easily be 3 times the effort.