Are active speakers worth it now?

@erik_squires i genuinely wasn’t trying to advocate for a “yes, they are worth it” or a “no, buyers are being gouged” position.  I was just trying to see, because you have actually done the work, to what i am guessing is a pretty high level of success, as how much R&D is involved in going from passive to active. And we know that a manufacture will try to recapture R&D cost (plus profit margin on it) quickly. (For extreme examples, see pharmaceutical pricing in the US.)   

So, for example on your point about crossover network, cabinet and drivers, is it the case that one can pretty much just add in an amp (after deciding which one matches best), or are there modifications (even modest one) to those features that going active requires? And if no material modifications are likely needed, how hard is it / how many trials are needed to choose the right amplification?

I'm not sure about good value but I do know ATC makes some incredible active speakers if buy in a heartbeat 

+1 ditusa - Active all the way so long as all of the electronics is external to the speaker enclosure.

@erik_squires said

From the buyer’s perspective, a Dynaudio Confidence 20 is a speaker and amplifier together.  Is that worth $24,000 a pair, which I believe is a $12,000 markup based on the passive model? 

This is a case where being a buyer I might say no, I’d rather spend $4-6k on my stereo amplifier and get the passive version, or would I?

For the record, the Confidence 20A is active, as I own a pair of Confidence 20s, which are passive.  And at this level, I am happy to pick my amplifiers!  So another thought on this topic is that active speakers should be a value...

Worth noting here is that in the Confidence 2A's, Dynaudio places the amplifiers in the STANDS, allowing great heat sinking, easier maintenance, and not messing with the internal volume of the speaker.  hmmm maybe I should hear them!

 I was just trying to see, because you have actually done the work, to what i am guessing is a pretty high level of success, as how much R&D is involved in going from passive to active.

@fastfreight 

Having designed both types of crossovers, and upgraded passives to actives, I can say the following: 

• Time to measure and gather the electro-acoustical parameters of the drivers in the cabinet are about the same
• The active crossover is much easier and faster to implement.  While easier, neither is trivial to do well. 
• The DSP version wins for the built-in digital delay.  It’s a lot easier to pick and choose your filter slopes without regard for phase matching.  For instance, Troels often uses a stepped baffle when he wants to use 4th order filters, the alternative is a lot more parts for an all pass circuit.  

My implementations used off-the-shelf Hypex plate amps, which have too many features for a sellable product.  Where I think active designers need to spend more time is in getting a plate amp/dsp combination with exactly the right form factor, features and connectors they need.  It’s not just the silk screen that needs to be altered, but I’m sure companies like Hypex and Pascal have entire teams to do this for you.