Active VS Passive???????

  • Thread starter Thread starter Be Loveless
  • Start date Start date
Be Loveless

Be Loveless

New member
I think that I have read every Monitor post on this site and have come to the conclusion that, aftera listenting of course, Ima gonna go for the Yorkville ysm1ps. What is the pro /con of the passive (ysm1) versus the active (ysm1p) of this or any monitor. Please leave price out of the equaton. If I buy the passives I still have to purchase a new amp so I'm not going to save any money. Is thier an advantage to the passive/amp combo vs. the active set?
 
I find passives are "generally" better sounding boxes. With a quality amp, you also have the option of running several sets of monitors by utilizing a switcher.

That's not to say that I don't use both actives AND passives. However, if I could have only one type, PASSIVE would win without a second thought.
 
Okay thats 1 pro for passive. Now, I challenge someone to give me a pro for actives beside the convienience of not matching up an amp. Is bi-amping advantageous or just a gimmick? Oh ,and Massive what would you consider to be a "quality" amp. Keep in mind I'm looking to spend Less than $500.00 for the set up and thats already pushing my budget.
 
Pro for active - Biamping IS a good thing, but I find most biamped active monitors a bit on the "hyped" side of natural.

Amps on the cheap - Hafler TA series.
 
I feel like my heads gonna explode trying to make this decision. Most folks are saying to listen as many as you can but if I don't like the sound of a particular monitor how do I know if maybe thats the way the recording that I'm listening to really sounds? For example I checked out a pair of BX8's today. It seemed to me that the highs were a little too crisp and the bass a tad blurred, but maybe thats the way the recordings that I listened to really sound or is it the monitors? How am I supposed to tell? I like the way CD's sound on the home stereo speakers I am using now but I know they are not accurate. What are my ears supposed to be looking for? :eek: :eek: :eek: :confused:
 
Wow, obviously John knows way more than me but I'd have guessed that having a bi-amped active would represent more for your money - in fact, I asked people this very question a few months ago when I was looking at some passives and a Samson Servo amp ... everyone then told me to go active (which I still haven't been able to afford yet!).
 
Be Loveless said:
I feel like my heads gonna explode trying to make this decision. Most folks are saying to listen as many as you can but if I don't like the sound of a particular monitor how do I know if maybe thats the way the recording that I'm listening to really sounds? For example I checked out a pair of BX8's today. It seemed to me that the highs were a little too crisp and the bass a tad blurred, but maybe thats the way the recordings that I listened to really sound or is it the monitors? How am I supposed to tell? I like the way CD's sound on the home stereo speakers I am using now but I know they are not accurate. What are my ears supposed to be looking for? :eek: :eek: :eek: :confused:
Click to expand...
My head already exploded. I'm trying to put the bits back together and it seems the more I learn about friggin monitors, the less confident I am about making a decision. It's over for me, I give up, I'll just put off monitors for a while....

I used to listen to my home stereo equipment with some eq on it. That eq is crap and it probably isn't smoothed out, probabaly all jagged cut up freq. bands,.... so then I just put it all on flat. Then I kind of forgot about it and as I listened to a lot of stuff that way, I got used to it.

I think getting used to it is the key here. So what I'll probly end up doing is getting a pair that I can afford, that I know has close to the whole range 45hz to 20khz and get used to it.

But everyone here has an opinion on monitors like they have on what kind of music they like. I know what you mean..... :eek:
 
There is this HUGE misconception that the only difference between active and passive speakers is one has amps built in, the other does not. Yorkville, and many other manufacturers offer similar model number speakers, claiming one to be an active version and the other to be passive. In my opinion, this is somewhat of a deception on the side of these manufacturers, as the two models are very different animals - and only share cabinet design and possibly the same drivers. The crossover is entirely different, yeilding substantial differences in response and sound. Which is better? Generally, active...but it's not always the case. For all the technical stuff behind these differences, check out the following articles from Rod Elliott.

http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

If Barefoot is around, I'm sure he can add more to this discussion as well...
 
Thank you all for your thoughtful and informative replies. I have bitten the bullet and purchased a pair of monitors that I though represented the test material to my personal liking and had discernable stereo imaging. Strangely enough this turned out to be the Behringer Truth. I figured that if I got a set of lemmons I would just keep returning them until I get a pair that work. Fortunately this has not been the case.
 
Cool! Good buy - lots of people think they're very good, Behringer certainly claimed to have made them a cut above their usual standard. Have fun!
 
wow, Truth same price as Event tr5. 5hz lower on the freq response spec. if that means anything I don't know. 300 sure is a nice price for decent studio monitors. I hope I can go somewhere and find them both to compare.
 
LooneyTunez said:
There is this HUGE misconception that the only difference between active and passive speakers is one has amps built in, the other does not. Yorkville, and many other manufacturers offer similar model number speakers, claiming one to be an active version and the other to be passive. In my opinion, this is somewhat of a deception on the side of these manufacturers, as the two models are very different animals - and only share cabinet design and possibly the same drivers. The crossover is entirely different, yeilding substantial differences in response and sound. Which is better? Generally, active...but it's not always the case. For all the technical stuff behind these differences, check out the following articles from Rod Elliott.

http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

If Barefoot is around, I'm sure he can add more to this discussion as well...
Click to expand...

Actually the yorkvilles are not active, theyre powered. Powered speakers have very little advantage over passives bec they both use a passive crossover so the only thing you get are built in amps that may or may not be well matched to the speaker. Active speakers have active crossovers which should generally means better, smoother and more efficient handling of power around the very critical crossover area (anywhere from 1.8-3K) but doesnt always.
 
I just noticed that the Tr5's top freq. response is 19k vs. the Truth's at 20khz. What's the deal w/ that and does this matter?
 
JuSumPilgrim said:
Actually the yorkvilles are not active, theyre powered. Powered speakers have very little advantage over passives bec they both use a passive crossover so the only thing you get are built in amps that may or may not be well matched to the speaker. Active speakers have active crossovers which should generally means better, smoother and more efficient handling of power around the very critical crossover area (anywhere from 1.8-3K) but doesnt always.
Click to expand...

According to the Yorkville web site, they are active not just powered. :)

http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=33&cat=20&id=118
 
I thought that they were Actively Powered for Passive listening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top