Bang & Olufsen does it...

[Marvel]

That temporary solution lasted a long time. I just wasn't into listening loud anymore, so the good five watt thing worked for me.

So, to a large degree I actually agree with Don - I totally get where he's coming from. You could buy some very expensive loudspeakers and they would be powered with some comparitively speaking - relatively inexpensive electronics, netting some really "good" sound.

I'm just listening to tunes...

Our college got some powered QSC sepakers. They get set up in various venues in a week, month, etc. Our A/V guys love them, and the A/V director is happy with them. They serve a need and sound quite good.

We have a small Yamaha system too. A small mixer/amp that fits into the back of one of the speakers. It works great for the inteneded use.

Dean... drop down to some SETs and relax. []

Bruce

[pzannucci]

So, to a large degree I actually agree with Don - I totally get where he's coming from. You could buy some very expensive loudspeakers and they would be powered with some comparitively speaking - relatively inexpensive electronics, netting some really "good" sound. However, this solution, while being perfectly acceptable to most, would be anathema to many, and here's why: the conventional approach more times than not just stomps all over it. IcePower sounds "good", Hypex sounds "good", Tripath sounds "good" and DSP sounds "good" too -- but those technologies just don't deliver at the same level as some expect or are used to. End to end digital sounds mechanical and contrived in comparison, but I guess if you're listening at 120dB, it doesn't matter much.

DeanG,

You are correct though I can't 100% agree with "End to end digital sounds mechanical and contrived in comparison." SACD and real High Res downloads have made people think twice.

The real key to any system is matching. I belive in most any system the implementation outweighs any technology. How many amplifiers have most of the folks on this forum gone through? I won't even go down the road of how many receivers.

Remember folks questioned that PWK used inexpensive drivers. PWK got very good sound for the buck because of implementation. Same applies with components though some of these, especially the big Ice or Hypex amps are/were not inexpensive.

Again, up to the implementer. If you feel Class D (not digital) provides too lean a presentation, you build (or tweak) your speakers, or even eq them to fix that issue and take advantage of the clarity. If you have bloated sounding boxes, many of the Class D offerings would be great. Too lean of speakers or bright, tubes are a wonderful match except for maybe in the bass.

If you were a speaker builder including the amps, you will find many eq them to squeeze out extra performance beyond the original cost (I think Paradigm did also in their powered 20's? that people loved). Take care of the masses and you can make money commercially.

In the end it is painful to support/fix a product like this though aren't most subs powered and many using SERIOUS electonics for room correction? Guess those vendors added the support cost into the product.

[Don Richard]

I suppose a company could simply offer two versions of the same loudspeaker, powered and conventional

Some of the pro sound companies do that - Danley offers powered and passive versions on some of their speakers, and so does JBL. I'm not 100% sure but I think Genelec does the same on some of their studio monitors. I think that's a good approach because it gives the buyer a choice between quicker setup times at a gig or simpler troubleshooting and repair if something breaks in the middle of a gig.

There are different considerations in the home market. Most audio hobbyists, myself included, would prefer the passive speaker that would allow upgrading and swapping of amplifiers to the all-in-one-speaker. With smaller speakers made to work well in smaller rooms or in apartments the powered model could be more attractive to some buyers. Most speakers made for computers already have built in amplifiers and are an example of where the integrated approach is probably best.

Mustang guy and pzannucci hit on a good idea. Someone could design a powered retrofit to work with Klipsch speakers that would replace the passive crossover. It wouldn't be too hard to put a Mini DSP and some small amplifiers, for instance T-amps or analog MOSFET amps or a mix of the two into a small box. There could be switches on the box that would configure the crossover points, delays, EQs and limiter settings for different models of Klipsch speakers. I just don't know if there would be enough sales for any money to be made though.

[Max2]

Im not knocking Class D, as it holds more advantages for the majority applications and is basically the future of Amp offerings. The Ice setups I have heard are a little gritty at times. (H&K, Rotel and B&O) Im sure a top shelf mega power ASP hooked up to some Magnapans would sound way better than my much more dainty BeoLab 8002's, but IMO both would sound even better with a fat, heavy and room heating Class A amp.

[SiliconTi]

I have owned 3 pairs of speakers with built-in amps - two B&O, and Advents (NLA). The B&Os have been trouble free, the Advents, I ended up dumping due to issues.

 

It is a fine line. All things considered, unless the amps are "off the shelf" parts, I'd avoid adding them in.

[The Dude]

On ‎3‎/‎8‎/‎2013 at 3:58 AM, CECAA850 said:

Instead of pre-wiring the room with speaker wire, you'd have to put electrical outlets where you want to put your speakers AND run RCA's

I wired my basement this way, along with speaker wire, lets just say I wanted options.