Is this a crazy idea.


Tell me if this is a crazy idea for a vintage HT system. I want to keep it simple. Please be merciful to me when you respond.

I picked up four (4) matching JBL 4412's at a garage sale for a very good price. I'm thinking about using a vintage(they only come this way) Quadraphonic receiver for a vintage (almost) HT system.

I am toying with the idea of a using four analogue outputs from my Oppo dvd player. I would eliminate the center channel. You would have to configure the front, rear, left, right of the quadraphonic receiver as fl, fr, rl, and rr. Is this crazy or is it doable?

Balancing the speakers might be tricky but I think it might work.
128x128mjcmt
So, to answer the question, as to whether active speakers are superior to passive speakers--All things equal (same drivers, same cabinet, even same amps (minus a passive crossover network, substituting likely an "active electronic crossover", or minimalist cross-over design), an active speaker is superior, hands down, yes!!! Ofcourse, it likely needs to be designed that way to begin with, mostly.
I once heard a demo of a pair of passive NHT 1.5's vs pro active 1.5's, and the difference was not suttle! The actives stomped a mud hole in the passives, threw mud in it's face, and threw a soundstage that dewarfed the passives!!!
Yeah, I'm very much into higher efficiency actives, even modified horns, and other that offer superior transient response, dynamic transparency, and realism, you bet!
I've yeat to be blown away by ANY, even high end passive HT setup, even driven by the best amps money can buy!
The Avantgards play in this arena, but then they're 110+ db horn speakers, crossed over to active woofers!!
Geared4me, you are correct it seems, I called oppo on this, they say they can run a Phantom mode, however its just not called that I guess in the player.. very interesting..      
Active speakers are not superior, that is simply a biased opinion, sure they can be and are very good but not the best......one size does not fit all.
" just run your statements and comments on active vs passive through any high end custom speaker designer,"

So???? If ANY high end speaker designer would agree then why are such a minute fraction of makers doing an active?

This isnt a contest so you dont need to feel like you are going to win or loose if you dont shout from your soap box.
Chadnliz

FWIW, I have to agree with both you and Flrn. You are absolutely correct, actives are not the absolute and will not be the cure-all of speakers. (Cure-almost-all...) There is no such thing as "the best speaker". There is no clear winner; partially because the lines will never be clearly defined and opinions will never allow them to meet and surpass the "superior" points. It is what it is.

IMO, actives trump passives on many levels...but superior is such a relative word.

"So???? If ANY high end speaker designer would agree then why are such a minute fraction of makers doing an active?"

My 2 cents, FWIW...there is an even smaller, minute fraction of makers that make really good high end speakers. Those that do...build active!
"So???? If ANY high end speaker designer would agree then why are such a minute fraction of makers doing an active?"

IT's REAL easy. And They usually come up with about the same answers as to why the manufacture won't approve, design, or market an active speaker (and associated components). And yet, they all understand the huge benefits of active, as that would be ideal. (*yes, ideal!).
Basically it gets down to economics, marketing effectiveness, and return for their dollar!!! They must then be dealing with electronics as well, which means more involvement, and it's easier to simply build a passive speaker network. In short, it's WAY MORE EXPENSIVE to build an Active speaker setup! IT's hard enough for any of these companies to maintain profit margin, and keep the doors open, and the average consumer isn't going to be aware enough to chose the expensive one. (case in point, the NHT
active speaker system, at $8000...this is a SUPERB Speaker system, all in all, and it doesn't sell!!!--I'd put that speaker side by side with any passive Thiel, B&W, or Wilson Monitor, of the same parameters, and it DESTROYS THOSE SPEAKERS, YES!!!....however, that's my oppinion.)
And, yes, it's ALL about marketing! If you doubt, just ask
*Bose!
But yes, that's ok, I think it's wonderful that several here think passive speakers are equal to or even better often then active counterparts! (I liken this to people who read Maxim Magazine, and find all the skinny-hipped, fake-boobed chicks smokin hot!--That leaves all the "Betty-Boop-like", curvy, velupuous, "real women" are left for me!!!--no problem) LOL!
This just makes my job of promoting active setups, all the more speciliazed, and higher end!
Yes, if you like superior dynamic transparancy, powerful transient response, "hit-you-in-the-chest" dynamics, and basically realistic sound with force and body, then actives are for you, yes!
Heck, just play any serious rock and roll, 2 channel through your beloved passived speakers, then through some active ones, all sizes equal, and tell me what you think! The differences are clear to me.