Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

17 of 23 speakers in my studio and home theater systems are internally powered. My studio system is all Genelec and sounds very accurate. I know the best new concert and studio speakers are internally powered there are great technical reasons to design a speaker and an amp synergistically, this concept is much more important to sound quality than the vibration systems we often buy. How can an audiophile justify a vibration system of any sort with this in mind.



I was posting about specs and @brianlucey made an astute observation about cohesion needed in atmos. I was saying how a benefit of active is making the amp/speaker chain more cohesive. A consumer doesn’t need to reinvent anything re: speaker/amp/cable matching when you go active and place them by just follow the dolby specs. I posted roughly 4 setups using the same specs the OP and I use earlier in this thread and then I see another SOA setup using those specs and an active speaker I am sure is near and dear to your heart. Any comments about Blackbird Studio C you would like to share?


Another ridiculous trolling argument. Of course it is possible for an all in one speaker to sound as good as some speakers with a separate amp. Can an integrated amp sound better than a separate preamp and amp separates? Sure, although typically within a give manufacturer, the separates will be higher end/better sounding and more $$.

If some company theoretically sold separate amps and speakers, I would be willing to bet that the non-integrated option would sound better and cost more.

For some people the convenience outweighs sound quality. An iPhone is an integrated system....

I want my system to do what I want it to do not some engineer wants it to do. I have been using digital signal processing since the late 90s and having experimented with hundreds of target curves. I know exactly what I want my system do to. 

The masses have always favored simple all in one systems. KLH made it's name doing that in the 60's. They were surprisingly good but I would have taken K horns and Marantz Model 9's. Not one state of the art system I have ever heard was composed of "active" components. 

Meyer? Give me a break! That is all marketing BS. Meyer is a modern day JBL. I suppose you could do worse.

@sokogear , I don’t disagree. I have speakers from the JBL Studio series (230) in my mancave matched with a Carver AV505 amp. I listened to the JBL LS306 studio monitors at Guitar Center that gets rave reviews. Both designs use trickle down tech from the flagship JBL M2 Monitors. I preferred the passive 230’s by a wide margin. Then you look at the price differential, the 230’s were $400, the speaker wires $200 and the amp $800=$1400 all in. The 306 were about $300 for the pair.

When I flipped it so it was equal ground, Paradigm Studio 20’s (passive) with the same amp and speaker wire vs the Active 20’s (cost of each setup about equal) the actives were better, no contest.

@mijostyn , if some people try targeting DSP curves they get a misfire. I admire your pursuit of perfection but I am way to lazy to do all that testing. If I can get 80% of the SQ with 20% of the time and budget I am good, YMMV.

@kota1  - you are by far in the minority of Audiogon people if you are happy with 80%.Most want 95+%....the next 2-3% is where the steep investment comes in. All acknowledge 100% is impossible. Probably not 99 or 98 either - It is an asymptote type curve of $$ vs. "perfect" (whatever that is) sound.