Opinions and recommendations on active loudspeakers

"It can’t be that bad. "
Well it is and it is worse than that. All of the audiophile speaker designers know that removing the crossover elements from intervening between the amp output and the speaker drivers, and performing the division of the frequency spectrum within the amplification stage, is a much better way of performing these functions.
They don’t do it mostly because of resistance from the buying public.
That is also the reason why in the realm where the quality of the music potentially means your reputation and career and income, ie the recording industry, active speakers are the overwhelming choice. Active speakers are more dependable at all volume levels.

None of the above relates to cheap and nasty active. There is a quality level in active speakers also, but the best ecelon is as dependable a speaker as one could hope for. Dependable in the manner of being able to rely that the speaker is telling the truth about the musical selection being heard via the speaker.
Studio monitoring is not about ’liking the sound’. It is about hearing the good the bad and the ugly. No jokes about the movie sounstrack. A person evaluating a recording during the production of that recording doesn’t want a rose coloured view of the proceedings. They want to hear as precisely as possible the effect of any and all manipulations they are making to the signal. Anything which interferes with how accurately the producers or final master assessors are able to accurately assess leads them to be releasing mixes which are subpar compared to what can be done on accurate monitors.
The audiophile buying public are under the impression that they will get better results from using their choice of amp on passive speakers. That is not the case. The recording industry is mostly all using active speakers because they give a higher quality result than the same speaker in passive form.
There is a mountain of literature about the benefiits of getting rid of intevening passive crossovers. You should do some investigation.

Both lonemountain & theophile: Hear! Hear! Precisely.

I've been told that a passive crossover allows for more precise control compared with active.  My understanding is that ATC builds such good drivers that they don't need a particularly complex crossover to make up for driver anomalies. 

Theophile!  Wow, you should write a paper!  Very well put.  

The only thing that convinces some people that the idea of engineers endlessly fussing over mixes cannot be true is some pop mixes sound absolutely awful.  I have heard mix engineers complain bitterly from time to time about their work turned bad or even given to another engineer to "redo it".  Sometimes the producer or the people in charge change things for reasons of their own.  Most pop tunes are destined for FM airplay so sometimes the mix is set up for FM and only FM (loudness wars).  Many of Katy Perry's top selling songs are examples of that.  But some pop mixes turn out pretty good- there's some that are quite listenable.   Halsey's Badlands was mastered by Pete Lyman who does a lot of Indie work.  Interesting that on her wikipedia page for Badlands Halsey says it lacks a "proper radio hit".

Brad   

Thanks for the tip on Halsey. Actually I think many "audiophile" speakers can't handle new pop or r 'n b  etc. mixes because they are too coloured (together with the room). Especially in the bass/low mid region.