|
Bronze Member Username: KbearPost Number: 96 Registered: Dec-06 | Thought I'd throw this topic out there. I've been mulling over nabbing a pair of Quad 11L or 12L active speakers. These would be used as part of a 2.0 stereo system, source an Arcam DV135 and amp to be determined. Does anyone have any insights into active vs. passive speakers? The little bit that I read said that active speakers have one amp for the woofer, one for the tweeter, making them the easiest way to biamp. I also got the impression that the amps are designed specifically for the drivers, meaning performance should be optimized. And of course you don't need to use an amp, you can go straight from the source, though a preamp is recommended for easier control. Also, I'd also like to hear thoughts about the Quads vs. the B&W 685. Odds are I'll pick up one of the two. This will be my medium term set of speakers, long term I've got my eyes on perhaps getting a pair of Mani-2s! |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12038 Registered: Dec-04 | Dan, I think you need to do a little more research and reading on active crossovers. Active means multiple amplification, either contained within the speaker cabinet or externally. The active (powered) crossovers come before the amplifiers. The crossovers could contain a volume or gain, perhaps not,etc etc A typical starting point is to obtain acive XO's with frequencies matching those of the original passive units, as it is presumed that the designer of the speaker was competant and that you like what a certain speaker does, to warrant the large expense of making them active. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13495 Registered: May-04 | . He isn't considering "active crossovers", he is trying to choose "active speakers". The power amplifier is contained inside the speaker enclosure. Not all active speakers have two or more amplifiers. Some use only one amp to do all jobs. So check with the manufacturer before making an incorrect assumption. If the speaker has been split into sections with multiple amplifiers, the crossovers are before the amplifiers so each amp only deals with the frequency bandwidth it drives. It would be unsual in the consumer audio market for the crossover to have any user optioned controls as the idea would be the manufacturer has voiced the system to be correct "as is" in their opinion. Some active systems designed for sound reinforcement might include controls to assist in tailoring the system to a specific location but that isn't how I've seen most consumer systems designed. Usually the amplifiers are "matched" to the drivers which means you go with what the speaker manufacturer has decided is correct. This can be seen both as a drawback and as a positive. Difficult to drive speakers will have an amplifier the designer feels is the best match for the money with the speaker system in question. If their taste matches your taste, you're in business. Ideally, this should be the best of all situations. You buy long interconnects and no speaker cables and you're in business. What would another amplifier sound like with those speakers? What would other speaker cables do to the sound? You'll never know. The cons of an active speaker are generally constricted to the inability to change the amplifier without changing the speaker too. As long as you have one you will have the other, so active speakers don't do well with listeners who change equipment on a reguar schedule. The other possible drawback would be the amplifiers must be housed correctly to minimize vibrations inside the high velocity area of the speaker enclosure. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13496 Registered: May-04 | . www.beoworld.org/article_view.asp?id=42 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_speakers hometheaterhifi.com/.../feature-article-active-speakers-12-2002.html www.mackie.com/products/speakers/index.html . |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12039 Registered: Dec-04 | In suggesting going active with the Mani-2's, I had to suppose that the OP is going to modify existing passive speakers. The Mani 2's are ripe for active amps, but likely the most difficut and expensive speakers to test upon. |
|
Bronze Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 99 Registered: Dec-06 | Thanks for the replies. Nuck, the Mani-2 would simply be the high end speaker I one day aspire to own. Quad 11L or 12L is what I'm considering moving up to in the near term (good prices on audiogon), and I've been thinking it may be worth spending the extra few hundred bucks on the active version. Jan, I know the Quads utilize one amp per driver, 60W RMS for the woofer and 40W RMS for the tweeter. At least that is for the 11L. I might be wrong here, and after reading Jan's post I probably am to some degree, but I was assuming that the passive Quads and the active Quads would sound very similar, ie. have the same frequency range and sound characteristics. But they wouldn't necessarily sound the same due to amp differences, and I'd be losing the ability to customize my system via the amp. I'll read through those links now. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12043 Registered: Dec-04 | Dan, I have the Mani2's here, and i would suggest trying active XO's on something cheaper to start. Just a thought. The Active/multi-amp thread seems to have gotten off topic with JV, I think. What are you objectives, and what are you trying to gain by going to active XO's and multi amps? |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1967 Registered: Jun-05 | Dan L. i would get the Evo2 8 or 10 over the 11L2 or 12L2 they come out of the same factory,both are built to extroidary tolerances for these price,the Quads have the high-gloss finish,but the Evo2's tweeter is way less bright and just as extended and its isolated from the cabinet.I just got back from the local dealer here comparing the Evo2 8 to the Quad 11L2 and both of the guys prefferrd the Evo2 8 and they swore by the 112L before today,they carry the Diamonds and just got the Opus2 and now their picking up the Evo2 line,and you already know about the Evo2 8 & 10 prices at STO. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12050 Registered: Dec-04 | And choices of active speakers still require a gain or volume control. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 101 Registered: Dec-06 | Dan, I have the Mani2's here, and i would suggest trying active XO's on something cheaper to start. Just a thought. The Active/multi-amp thread seems to have gotten off topic with JV, I think. What are you objectives, and what are you trying to gain by going to active XO's and multi amps? Hey Nuck, Not sure if we are on different wavelenghts. I'm not really going for anything here. The Quads caught my eye on Audiogon, and I figured while I'm at it and considering buying the 11L2 or the 12L2, I might as well consider getting the speaker in it's active form instead (the 11LA or the 12LA). So it's not a conscious choice in moving to active XO's, more just the fact that the speakers I'm considering come in both active and passive form and thus I've got that decision to make. If I got the actives I'd run the cable from my CDP to my amp, and then from the amp to the speakers. This should allow me to control volume. I'd also consider using them as PC speakers, I've got no plans to change what I'm using there right now, but I could see myself upgrading my PC sound system one day too, and the Quads could slide nicely into that role. That's it really...the only reason I'm considering purchasing an active speaker is that the passive one I was thinking of buying also comes in an active version. TW, I'm not close to making a decision here but I'm putting the Evo-2 10 on my "to consider" list. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3246 Registered: May-05 | My opinions were along the same lines as what Jan was saying. Another pro to buying active speakers could possibly be cost. They may cost less than you'd have spent on an amp to drive the passive ones. Get a good pre-amp and source and you're in business. If you're looking at them used, you may want to go ahead. You shouldn't lose much money if you don't like them. But the way the economy has been lately, who knows what anyone is willing to buy anymore and at what price. The best way to go is hear a bunch of stuff and decide from there. Active speakers have the convenience of being far more functional than passive speakers in certain applications if you decide to upgrade down the road. They can be used with your computer or with something like an unpowered Sonos system in a second room. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 102 Registered: Dec-06 | Well I went ahead and bought a pair of Quad 12L Actives. Sorry TW! I actually did strongly consider the Evo-2 10, but in the end I decided that an active speaker was a good way for me to go. The Evo-2 was tempting though, especially at under $500. That is budget speaker territory. I have my Denon minisystem now as amp and sometimes source and was planning to buy a new amp along with new speakers. But with the Quads I get a speaker and amp upgrade all in one shot for under a grand, with whatever benefits active speakers may inherently possess. Rather than have to buy an amp my next upgrade will be a turntable, then a tuner. Quad 12L Active Arcam DV135 Tuner (likely Arcam) Turntable (maybe Rega, Project, or Marantz) Hopefully this will be an enjoyable system for the next 10 years or so. I'll post some pics when the speakers arrive, impressions once I get some good listening time in. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3256 Registered: May-05 | You'll still need a pre-amp - how will you control volume and source selection? |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 103 Registered: Dec-06 | The Denon has pre amp outputs. Not sure if there is any benefit to replacing it with a more expensive unit in this sort of setup, but it will do for the foreseeable future. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 2157 Registered: Nov-05 | Good for you Dan, I have Quads for stereo and surround and am very happy. Not the actives, but I'm sure they'll be very good also. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 3627 Registered: Sep-04 | Hmm, interesting. I didn't know Quad made active variants of those speakers... |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1990 Registered: Jun-05 | The Quads are still 1 of the best buys out there Dan its still in the family,my local dealer that carries Wharfedale and Quad has the passive and active variants the last time i was there with the Evo2 8's i only heard the passives.I'll take a listen to both when i go back over to hear the Opus2 1's this week since the'll be broken in by then,this will be interresting,Congrats Dan! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 9431 Registered: Feb-05 | Good job Dan, enjoy the music! |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3257 Registered: May-05 | Didn't realize that your Denon had pre-amp outputs. Pre-amps make a very big difference. I'm not saying run out and buy one right now, but that will be the weakest link in the chain. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1993 Registered: Jun-05 | Yep,I'd say Stu is right. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 115 Registered: Dec-06 | I'm going to have to buy some interconnects now. I really don't know how much of a difference these will make. My only experience was with upgrading speaker cables for my Tannoys and I felt there was a definite upgrade in bass quality (tighter and punchier with Chord Rumour 2 vs. the cheap Monster cables that the dealer threw in when I bought my system). So I'm kind of leaning to buying something not too expensive but not the cheapest option either. The Quads are neutral, dynamic, detailed, and revealing, being active near field monitors. Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to listen to them in my own place yet so I don't know precisely how they sound in my room. Any suggestions on a good interconnect? I think I'd like one that would hopefully add a tiny bit of smoothness and warmth. I guess a copper wire would be a better option than silver (and cheaper too). I can probably get any of the following: Atlas Explorer Atlas Equator Superior Chord Crimson Chord Cobra 3 Chord Siren Nordost Wyrewizard Spellbinder QED Reference Audio 1 Van Den Hul The Name Van Den Hul The Bay Analysis Plus Oval One Analysis Plus Blue Oval Audioquest Copperhead Audioquest Diamondback Audioquest King Cobra Kimber Cable Hero |
|
Silver Member Username: WattsssupBarrie, ON Canada Post Number: 311 Registered: Aug-06 | Of the list, I've only played with the Kimber Hero on a few occasions in my system (a friend has them). While I haven't compare them to much, I've compared them to the cheaplys you get at radio shack and the Aural Thrills interconnect that I use (a small company who builds their cables and sells on agon and ebay). I'll give you my take on them. The Heros were better in every sense than the Radio Shack stuff. So I shall say no more about the shack stuff. Against the Aural Thrills, they were more open, perhaps provides some additional detail and showed a larger soundstage. A fairly different cable than the ones I am used to. The Thrills on the other hand, produce better imaging, are smoother and feels more intimate to me. I can see how some people would prefer one and others prefer the other. My friend and I agreed with each other on our impressions of the cables. While a tough choice for the various differences above (i.e. can't have it all), we each slightly prefered our own cables. So it's all up to opinion. Hope that helps some. Marc |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3294 Registered: May-05 | Just a random thought Dan... Are you going to live where you are for a long time? If not, you may want to wait until after you move. Are you going to get a pre-amp? I say that because interconnects get pretty expensive. When you get a pre-amp, you should look for one with balanced outputs (XLR) if your speakers have XLR inputs. They do far better over long distances than RCAs do. If you're going to keep the pre-amp close regardless of where you are, then disregard my post. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 117 Registered: Dec-06 | Thanks for the info Marc. I have never heard of Aural Thrills, I'll look into them on ebay. Stu...the preamp...yes, I do plan to buy a new one eventually. When however, I'm not sure. Also not sure about when I'll move next. But I tend to like having my entire system in one small place so I don't see that changing. I dismissed balanced cables because of this fact but I may re-consider. Not because I plan to use long runs, but because the prices are about the same, at least at Audio Advisor. However, I'm pretty sure I've read that XLRs usually cost more than RCAs. If I opt to go for XLRs in the long run I'll have to settle for an entry level RCA for the time being I guess...Audioquest G Snake or the like. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 121 Registered: Dec-06 | While you guys are going nuts about the Evo2-10s, I am considering doing my own speaker swap. I figure I should try to determine if the Quads are really what I want to use for the next 5-10 years. I may get the chance to borrow a pair of PMC TB2i to do an in home demo. They are a demo model so I can get about $500 off the regular price. I was even considering buying the EVO2-10 but opted against it because I still have my Denon UD-M50 as amp. At 30w I feel it might not be wise to power a 6ohm/87db speaker, although Wharfedale says 30w mimimum is needed. I'm powering Tannoy Mercury F2 at the moment and they are 8ohm/88db. The Denon doesn't seem strained and it doesn't get hot. The PMC are 8ohm/90db. You'd figure I'd be alright, but PMC recommends 40w minimum. I'm assuming it's more a recommendation to get the most out of the speaker, but not to actually run them. What do you guys think? I know I should upgrade the amp, and I will, but I can't do it yet, especially if I get the PMC. Anyhow, I'm looking forward to hearing the TB2i. I heard the smaller cousin a while back, the DB1i, and I really loved them. Should be fun putting them up against the Quads, and if I can I'll definitely post my thoughts. I'm also likely picking up a Marantz DV7001 for HT use. It's the only model I could find that gives me what I want (DVD-A and SACD multichannel playback, upconverting DVDs, upsampling CDs). I'll do a shootout with the Marantz and my Arcam DV135 for music playback. That's assuming I can swing a good deal on the DV7001, it's a store demo I'm going to check out tomorrow. It's a discontinued player and Marantz is now focused on Blu Ray, as are most consumers probably. I think I should be able to swing a good deal. This hobby is going to ruin me financially! After this, that's it for a long time!! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 9852 Registered: Feb-05 | What's wrong with the Tannoy's? PMC's are great speakers but hopefully you would be planning to buy another amp as the Denon would not even come close to getting the best from them. I use a 40 watt per channel amp with the Evo's and it works well. However I really am curious what you don't like about the Merc's. They seem a good match for the amp. BTW for budget interconnects the Analysis Plus Oval Ones are hard to beat. I'm a big van den Hul fan and have them connected to my source in both of 2 channel systems but The Name is not as good as the Oval One...move up the ladder...at all...and I prefer van den Hul. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 122 Registered: Dec-06 | Art, I've really grown to like the Tannoy's a lot. I'll be moving them to the HT and I may even use the Denon amp in that regard (I don't see myself doing 5.1 any time soon). Which basically frees up the stereo for an upgrade (something I wanted to do regardless). That was the Quads, and now that I have those I just want to make sure I really want them. I should be able to sell them for about what I paid for them if that's the decision I reach. I did read some opinions professing how active was not as good as passive, which is what got me thinking to do the comparison of these two speakers that are in the same price range. Once I determine what type of speaker I really want then that should clarify the direction to go with the amp. I guess the Quads were a bit of an impulse buy, and now I want to do this a little more deliberately. Thanks for those interconnect tips. I bought my subwoofer cable from hificables.co.uk, it was a good experience. I'll probably go through them again. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 578 Registered: Jul-07 | Dan, congrats on the Quads. I've read very good things about them. One thing I would suggest is not jumping into any cable purchases until you have had an opportunity to setup and listen to the Quads with what you have, and have settled on what you think of them. It's easy with this hobby to get focused on the "best" individual components, and lose sight of the system you're putting together. The "whole" really is greater than the sum of the parts, so take your time and enjoy putting it together. Listen to what you have and then decide what qualities you might want to change, and that will help guide your next steps, whether that's cable choices, speaker placement, stands, component isolation, room acoustics, or whatever. And make sure you leave enough in the budget for beer money. That makes everything sound better. It's my favorite "tweak". Happy listening. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 124 Registered: Dec-06 | haha, thanks Chris. Yeah, I'm going to cool it for a bit. I've got an inexpensive interconnect from Audioquest now and I'll be using this for a while before I buy something new. I'm still going to test the PMC I think and determine what I like more, the 12L that I have now or the TB2i. But I may opt to keep the Quads for a year or two, then save up and buy the PMC. We'll see. If the PMC blows me away relative to the Quad then I may bite the bullet. I did just now get back from picking up my Marantz DV7001. This thing is a monster, it's a lot bigger than I imagined. Nice build quality. It's an upper end DVD player I guess, so I'm sure it'll perform well. 25% off as it was a demo model. I'll post pics one day and put it up against my Arcam in a listening test in the DVD or CD forum. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3333 Registered: May-05 | Dan, Are you trying the PMCs at home with your Denon amp? If so, the Quad vs PMC comparison is not going to be very accurate. The Quads have a very good amp built in, whereas the PMCs will have an amp that is pretty inferior (relatively speaking). Putting them on equal footing will be pretty difficult. Is there a way to bypass the Quads' amps without destroying the speaker? If so, that'll give you a good A/B comparison. If not, can you also borrow an amp from the dealer? PMCs are a very revealing speaker. In fact, they're ruthlessly revealing. They'll only sound as good as what's in front of them. With the right gear they'll sound magical; with the wrong gear they'll sound horrible. I haven't heard your Quads, powered or passive. But I've heard enough to know their house sound. They're very different than PMCs. Quads are typically a more gentle, polite, and mellow speaker. Their soundstage is pushed back a bit. They're usually neutral to slightly warm, and a little smooth. They're not the most detailed speaker, rather they have a nice soothing flow to their music. They're a forgiving speaker. PMCs are pretty much the opposite. They're an aggresive speaker than can get in your face with the wrong gear. They've got phenominally deep and controlled bass, yet are a bit lean sounding. If anything, they can be preceived to be a touch bright. Their's no added smoothness anywhere. If your recording and/or connected gear has flaws, you'll hear them. If everything's perfect, you'll know. They're a very unforgiving speaker. Easily one of the most unforgiving I've ever heard. Both speakers are musical to my ears. They achieve it in different ways. I personally prefer PMCs presentation over Quad's, but there are systems where I'd take a Quad over a PMC. I say all this because I think the PMCs are wrong for the Denon system. I wouldn't pair them up with NAD/Rotel/Marantz level gear either. I'd look at Rega/Arcam/Creek level gear as a minimum. The TB2s should ideally be in a Naim/Bryston/McIntosh level system. If you're serious about PMCs and want to get your money's worth, you need to have gear behind them that are up to the task from a sound quality perspective. That doesn't come cheap. They're not difficult to drive from an electrical perspective, they're difficult from a sound quality prespective. Just my 2 cents. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3334 Registered: May-05 | I guess what I was trying to say is that if you're not going to get a great source and amplification behind the TB2s, they're not worth the money. A less resolving and less expensive speaker will sound better. Probably a good deal better. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 125 Registered: Dec-06 | Hi Stu, Yes, the idea of borrowing a higher powered amp has crossed my mind and it's probably wise to do so for this test at least. The dealer carries Marantz, Cambridge Audio and Arcam, along with some much more exotic stuff. When I heard the DB1i they were powered with something by Cambridge (I think a receiver, maybe not the ideal choice but then again at the time I think I wanted HT components so that's probably what they went along with). I really loved the sound, so much weight and deep bass in such a small speaker. It must be down to their transmission line design. For the test I should probably power the speakers with something else, but as long as the Denon doesn't hurt them I would use that for a while until I upgrade the amp. In the long run I see myself going with Rega/Naim/Arcam gear, perhaps NAD or Cambridge if they work well with the rest of the system. Sounds like the PMC is the better option for rock music, which is what I tend to listen to most. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12615 Registered: Dec-04 | Dan, the Denon won't hurt anything, so long as you keep the amp out of clipping. Don't get frisky! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 9859 Registered: Feb-05 | The Quads are a very ggod speaker but yet another IAG brand being blown out and devalued due to the strange business practices of IAG. You can find Quads and Whrfedales at deep discounts all over the place...but don't be fooled these are very good speakers and with the atcive set it should be a great speaker to have around for a couple of years while you save for a better system...or just enjoy them and buy music. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 2097 Registered: Jun-05 | I have to agree with Art and Stu,Dan the PMC is the better speaker,but they still go by their herritage as a studio monitor,but with the right system their as good as anything you can buy.I remember my 1st experiance with the DB1 about 7 years agao when they 1st came out at $999 a pair,i could'nt believe how big they sounded,but to be fair they were on Brystons and Bryston powerblocked they work hand and hand with Bryston and with a Wadia CDP.If they are gonna be your future system i say go for it,if you plan on surrounding them with quality electronics,me personally i prefer the ATC's over the PMC's but they both have that studio monitoring herritage and garbage in is really garbage in is really garbage out with these speakers.If you wanna listen to music right now,stick with the Quads and save, if you get the PMC's and and plan to use them with Denon,you might as well leave them in the box until you can get something thats capable,good luck Dan, with a speaker like this you really have to be careful,its like Chess with these every move has to be right to win or else. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 127 Registered: Dec-06 | Well I called the dealer and they don't mind letting me borrow the speakers for a couple of days. I am getting too wrapped up in all this though. I think I will do the test for educational purposes but if I like the Quads I will keep them. The PMC will really have to blow me away relative to the Quads, otherwise I can simply wait and perhaps get them (or another upgrade) when I've got some money saved up. If for whatever reason I don't like the Quads I will look into other options for around the price I can get my Quads for ($1200ish), Wharfedale EVO2-10, B&W 685, Rega RS1, or I may just spring for the PMC if I really love it. I notice Audio Advisor has the NHT Classic Three for a decent price. $700ish or so. But these other options are only if I decide I don't dig the Quad sound. Another idea I'm kicking around is trading in the active Quads to a Quad dealer for the passive 12L2 and perhaps an amp (NAD C326), hopefully in a straight trade or for maybe a couple hundred dollars extra going the dealer's way. I guess I'm trying to decide if actives are really the way I want to go. I'll figure it out somehow! Question Tawaun, you mentioned the PMC go by their heritage as a studio monitor. It looks that way as judging by the looks and specs of the hifi line and the professional line the speakers are almost the same. Should I expect the same from my Quads? The 12L active is termed by Quad itself as a "studio monitor" (it's right on the box). |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 130 Registered: Dec-06 | Art, a quick question for you. I think you know all of these speakers, more or less. EVO2-10, 685, and Rega RS1 (I think this model is brand new though). How would you rate them against each other? If I opt for selling my Quad speakers I'll likely have to decide between these three, and I can only listen to the 685 (the other two I would have to have the respective dealer order for me). |