Active Speakers Better? No, per Michael Borresen
The best sounding speaker I have had the pleasure to hear is made by Borresen.
I recently spent time with Michael Borresen in Seattle at a show. It was slow so
I was able to speak with him for a time. I asked him if he plans an active speaker.
His answer was a definitive and immediate "No". He said separates sound better.
His statement flies in the face of what passes in most audio corners as commonly recognized facts.
Sadly I am too technically challenged to convey any of his further explanation.
I invite all intelligent commentary on this question. Theoretical or not.
It doesn’t matter. It all depends and people go round and round. The active speaker argument holds up really well in professional environments which need lots of power. Thats the only place where active is 100% better. I have made passive 2-way speakers for my mains and planning a fully active 3-way for the center. In each case there are pro’s and cons and I know I’m trading off. I think asking a manufacturer why don’t you make an active version, or why don’t you make a passive always elicits this kind of response, that what they are selling is best, and that’s the way of the world. The consumer should go with what sounds best and what complexity levels of wiring and amplifiers they want to live with and fuss with as audiophiles, but anyone who tries to sell me that "technology x is always better than technology y" is not going to get an active engagement from me, it’s not worth it. A shout out to many audiophile tinkerers who enjoy configuring drivers and horns and multiple types of amplifiers and are constantly switching out to try something new. There is nothing wrong with that at all and you should enjoy it. PS - this kind of arm-chair tech discussions are exactly why I feel our community is served when more audiophiles build something themselves vs. rely 100% on marketting and media. |
I second the spirit of Eric's post. In fact, I am waiting for glue to set as I type, on a set of passive loudspeakers in the shop. It has been several years since I experienced the active loudspeaker idea. I was working with an engineer in Tucson who is brilliant with the technology of an active design, yet, in my application or use of such speakers, I still preferred the passive design that originally complimented these speakers (also designed by him). The active crossover chosen was made by a company that was popular but not impressive in build quality IMO. Bryston amps were used for power to all drivers. Balanced interconnects were used throughout, and I forget which AudioQuest speaker cable we chose. In a word, I found the result too dry for my taste. Again, the passive crossover was my preference, even though as stated before, they are rough in comparison of what can be accomplished with an active line level device. |
@lonemountain +10, that is a lot of great info, are you an engineer or designer? Interesting point about speaker and amp designers as my vendor, Paradigm, does happen to make both (Anthem amps and Paradigm are owned by the same group). |
