You are reading a single comment by @Airhead and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I've been pretty convinced by active monitors for quite a while. The shorter distance between amp and driver helps the designers. The idea that mixing and matching amps and speakers is the path to Nirvana might just be an audiophile pipe dream, it can cost a fortune too.
Biggest problem with actives is the power cord.
Airhead
Well, I was talking about SQ, but they do some weird things. I have a 1 and 3 and no other speakers. The 3 is in the same room as my access point, yet it always loses it's connection from Spotify Connect. I can manually open the Sonos app and play music from there without issue but the Spotify app gives me a big fat nope.
I'm also still using the inbuilt speakers on my TV and that's obviously gash. My apartment is tiny, relatively, so I want one pair of speakers to use either side of the television for both TV use and music. I have space for separates in the TV cabinet, but if I can do better with active, then that is absolutely preferable.
This is the post I referred to earlier. It's from a thread called Active vs Passive speakers.
If you speak with people who have owned the passive L50's and heard them with loads of different amps (even super expensive ones) and who then also heard the active LS50W's, the reaction is sometimes 'I never knew they could sound that could'. Even though they are all-in-ones.
I am one of these people. I guess this was a great example (to me) of what can happen when the speaker designer gets to choose the drivers and amps for these drivers and optimise the amplification of the drivers and the DSP crossover etc.
But to fully appreciate what I mean, you need to demo the passive LS50's first. Even with beefy Pass Labs amps or other highly rated amps and really good DAC if you like (just for demo purpose). Then compare with the LS50W's...
Of course I'm not suggesting everyone has been and will be blown away but I was and I do know many others that have.