Is this a crazy idea.

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.

Sorry active speakers sound "pro" to me and it gets on my nerves.....maybe I will find ones I like but not quite yet.

Don't get me wrong. Just because a speaker is an active design (especially tbe many pro audio "active speakers" I've heard at Sam Ash) doesn't mean it sounds good across the board! It has to be a good speaker, fundamentally. You can't take crappy drivers, a slip-shod cabinet, and poor design, then make it an active setup, and expect great sound over all. No! All things equal however, and active is clearly superior. All powered subs are basically "active". That's why the dynamics and power handling are superior there!