Active -vs- Passive

A

aaron.p

New member
I have been slowly setting up a Home Studio over the past couple of years (as $$$ permits). The next item I want to purchase is a (relatively inexpensive) set of Near-Field monitors. I am interested to know if there is anyone who could give me advice on active-vs-passive monitors. I am considering the Yorkville YSM-1i (passive) or YSM-1p (active).

I have an extra Sony Stereo Amplifier that I have sitting around that I could use with a set of passive monitors, but I don't want to spend the money on a set of passive monitors if my Amp will degrade the quality of the sound (i.e. does it matter which amp I use?).

If you all think that I will be dissapointed in using my own Amp, then maybe I should spend the extra $200 and get a set of Active Near Field Monitors. What do you think?

Thanks,
Aaron
 
It's my understanding that you need a high quality, expensive amplifier for passive monitoring speakers. I've been told that a nice hi fi amp will do the trick, but idealy you'd want a power amp from a company that makes products just for studio stuff, like haffler. People say that in an ideal situation your power amp would have double the power of your speakers handling ratings. So for the passive 75 watt per channel yorkies, you'd have a 150 watt at 8ohms amplifier. Well that is going to cost you a lot more than the active yorkvilles JUST for the amplifier. I mean the hafler ta-1600 is only 60 watts per channel, and if you pay more than that then your paying more than you would just to get the actives! I'm having this same debate right now myself, i have a very large post below this one that no one seems to be responding too, i guess i rambled on a little too much...

But anyways yea the actives have the amplifiers built in, and the amps were matched to the speakers to be as accurate and flat as possible. They have all kinds of fancy limiters and dip switches which you wouldn't have if you got the passives and a seperate power amp, plus they are Bi Amped, meaning there is a seperate amp for the tweeter and the midrange/bass driver, supposudly making it more accurate. Apparantly it distorts very little at high volumes, due to the fact that the amplifiers were built and installed in the speakers by yorkville, and designed for that very purpose.

Also you need some sort of volume control though. You'd need something like a passive preamp or a mixing board to control the volume of active speakers, OR if you got the passives, you'd need to get an integrated amp with a volume control on it, to control the volume, or get a regular power amp such as a hafler ta-1600 and then also get a passive preamp or a mixing board to control the volume of that! So either way it seems that you'll have to be buying some sort of mixing board/passive preamp device.

Which one is actually better? Is the active route, with all the fancy biamping, crossovers, limiters, matched amplifiers, and all that crap really going to give you a much clearer, flatter sound, that will distort less at high volumes? I have no fucking clue. Maybe the passive yorkies with a good power amp would be exactly the same? this is something i'd like to know as well, but from the reading i've done it seems that logically the actives "should" be a little bit better, if not a lot. AND, once you buy the passives, a power amp, and then some sort of device to control the volume they'd most likely end up being the same price or more than the actives, and if you actually get an amp which is twice as powerful as the rating of the speakers, you'd be paying a LOT more...

Any help?
 
Get the passives and use it with your sony amp. Save the cash to buy a better amp in the future. Passives allow more flexibility in upgrading.

Why dont you bring your sony amp to the shop, hook them up to the ysm passives and compare the passives to the actives yourself to see if your sony amp can do the job for the time being till you can afford a better amp. If you need to play really loud then perhaps you will be better off with actives.
 
uh not really ... I just sound like I do :)

Remember everyones opinion is just that, opinion. You still have to go listen for yourself.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea if I know any more than littledog or not.
But personally I wouldn't recommend actives.Then your stuck with the amp,even if you find you don't like it over time. Then if you want to sell it, there go your speakers too. Just an opinion. If you will be moving them around allot... get yourself the powered ones and save your back.
 
well, jfreeman, chances are you DO know more than me, which is nothing to brag about!

obviously you can do well either way. but with actives you are auditioning one piece of integrated gear to find a sound you like. With passives, once you pick the monitors, now you have to start auditioning power amps. maybe i'm just lazy. But the idea that the power amp (or amps, in a bi-amped design) have already been carefully selected to work optimally with the speakers seems like an advantage. Plus you don't have to worry about getting great cables and keeping the length short, as you are simply using good quality mic cables instead. (Something that I'm assuming most people have, or should have.)

Among others, Light recommends buying active monitors for home studio situations. He definitely knows more than me, since he designs and builds high-end monitors. He probably has a lot of much better reasons than I could give, but I probably wouldn't understand most of them!
 
Since the poster already has an amplifier, getting passive monitors makes sense for him. I feel the flexibility and upgradability of passives outweighs the theoretical benefits of actives in this case. Plus I question whether good speaker designers are necessarily good amplifier designers. It is better not to make sweeping statements that actives are better than passives or vice versa (not that you are). We should discuss specific speakers and situations.
 
But assuming you don't have/want a cheap mixing board, how would you suggest controling the volume of active speakers?
 
The pros to active monitors run along the lines of the efficiency of the amp in a bi-amped configuration and more likely than not tuned specifically for the speaker its designed to run. I have no problem what-so-ever with passive as opposed to active but there is a certain curve for powering passives which will dictate whether or not one type of amplication will allow you to achieve an accurate reproduction of sound over another. A yamaha amp may produce certain frequency peaks at certain power levels that may not translate properly on a passively crossed-over speaker.And then again it might.For years i used a huge old yamaha power amp that came out of my p.a. system to power my Urie 813's. It was a very very full range amp and delivered its power curve anytimeof day or night in any conditions..Like was suggested, take yer power amp to the dealer and hook it up to the monitors and see what it sounds like....if they wont do that for you, find another dealer....YMMV
 
On this topic, more directed to Alfalfa that is, what if i wanted to get a bigger amp than the Rotel RA-02.
I've been thinking about it, and this underpowering issue is really getting to me, and i've been thing that if i do get a nice set of floor standing speakers, i'd like to be able to power them well. If say i was gonna hook up some turn tables at a buddies house for a party or whatever, or just to jam, i'd like to be able to hook up some speakers and really pound. So i could go really loud if need be.

Could i take a step up from the Rotel RA-02? I really like the ra-02 i just wish it wasn't so damn underpowered.
 
If you aren't going to use your existing power amp, that might tilt the argument back in favor of powered monitors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top