Anyone, Snaxo vs Exakt ?

Huge posted:

What you are talking about is an active system, not an active loudspeaker; and in overall system terms 'active' is a very wide ranging term (any system with active components, i.e. including all systems using electronic amplifiers, but excluding phonographs!)

Generally I should stick with my own advice and just agree to differ with you ... but I'm going to make a few comments first.

I'm not talking about things generally being active vs passive.  I'm talking about a specific phrase "active speaker".  So lets forget about everything other than the speaker and the directly connected components (the crossover and power amplifiers).

You say that "Its only a "passive" speaker system if it has a passive crossover."  That's not correct.
A loudspeaker is passive if it only has passive components.

A passive speaker can be powered.  A specific example - the AudioEngine A2 and A5.  These are powered (there is a amplifier built into the cabinet) but they are still passive in that a single amplifier channel is passed through a passive crossover to feed a tweeter and a bass speaker.

The defining characteristic of an active vs passive speaker is NOT that it has amplification built in.  Its that it uses an ACTIVE crossover rather than a PASSIVE crossover.

Equally an active speaker doesn't have to have amplification built in.  The ATC SCM300ASL is as much an active speaker as the lower end ATC SCM150ASL despite all the electronics being in the external P4 amplifier.  A Genelec 1237A is still an active speaker even if I unscrew its back panel and mount the electronics in a rack separate from the speaker enclosure.  A Naim Ovator S-800 is a passive speaker, until I remove its crossover and feed it with SNAXO and a set of NAPs ... then it becomes an ACTIVE speaker because I have given it an ACTIVE crossover.

If your definition were correct then not only would it violate the definition of 'active', but then full range single drive unit speaker systems would also have to be classified as active as they don't have crossovers.  Furthermore, in this definition, as phonographs don't use crossovers they too would be classified as 'active'!

A single drive unit speaker is NOT an active speaker because it doesn't use an active crossover (or any crossover).

A phonograph is not an active speaker because it is NOT a speaker.

Anyway ... I disagree with your definition of what makes an active speaker ... but will agree to differ.

jfritzen posted:

Allante93 posted:

I bet Linn's Exakt technologies, can only be used with Linn's Exakt digital front end, I think that's what Jfritzen, and Sunbeamgls was trying to point out!

 

Exaktly!

Although a pure Exakt front end (ie a DSM without DAC and analog outputs, only Exakt outputs) is comparatively inexpensive. 

If you see the Exakt DSM and Exakt Box as one unit, then you have a digitizing pre amp with built-in digital crossover and 2xN way analog outputs. 

Naim's front end/Snaxo/500s/Briks

Vs

Linn's front end/Exakt/ 500s/Briks

Snaxo vs Exakt!

To level playing the playing field, Room correction should be bypassed.

Who's Active Technologies, dominates the 21st Century?

Naim vs Linn !

 Any thoughts?

Allante93!

If you want to compare active crossovers, Briks should be one of the few (the only?) speakers that are supported by both Exakt and Snaxo.

Eloise,

I still don't understand how a loudspeaker system which is constructed from passive components only can be considered active as it has no active components!  Taking a passive crossover out of a loudspeaker system doesn't change that; it's still a passive device.

However as some people in HiFi circles have decided to use the term 'active' for devices that are themselves passive, but intended for use with external active components, then...    I suppose I'll have to accept the contrary use of the term 'active' by some people when actually describing some types of passive device within this context.

However having worked with both passive and active transducers I'll still object!

Eloise posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

ATC is another manufacturer of active speakers (that is the  amps are part of the speaker) - as opposed to active crossover speakers which sometimes mistakenly get called active speakers

.....

Any speaker system which uses an active (as opposed to passive) crossover is an active speaker system.....

.....

I think we agree(?) I was specifically referring to active speakers as opposed to active speaker systems. Active speakers are literally that - they have the amps and active cross over built in before the power amplifier and are fed typically by a high impedance balanced source. In many professional setups you want to discourage long speaker cable lengths for obvious reasons - its far easier to drive them with a balanced signal feed from a desk or preamp.  An active speaker system however can have an active cross over and amplifiers such that remotely drive  passive speakers with the internal cross over removed or a speaker that is Active System ready... but of course you may also suffer the disadvantages of long speaker cables this way - and also possibly using an amplifier that is no optimally designed to interface directly to the particular  speaker transducer. 

The founder of ATC, Billy Woodman - is a believer of active speakers where the cabling between speaker and amp is kept as short as possible and each amplifier is optimally designed to drive each transducer... which is why his company focusses much of their effort on Active Speaker designs.

Simon

And right off topic we go...

I did listen carefully to the full Exakt Active system feeding the new Titans vs an NDS single 555PS, Statement S1 Pre Nap500 (non-DR) driving the new Titans Passive - before I purchased my S1 Pre.

I did want to check-out what was possible following another path entirely, as it was a serious outlay for me and if you got more the Linn approach then I would have reconsidered.

I went ahead with the S1 Pre as it was a rather silly comparison - and a sad relief to hear, even under demo conditions.

The Exact had everything going for it in terms of set-up, room-cancellation, specific custom digital crossover for Titans... but I found it difficult to listen to the music on that system. At best it was dry and lacking in any sort of fine low-level detail - at worst I heard serious problems of 'crawling' digital alias noises. The latter did get largely fixed on day two of the demo but still left a rather stark and sterile sound.

The Passive Titan system was thrown-together with no care in set-up (I found out later they forgot to undo the transit-bolts on the NDS) but still out-performed the alternative Aktiv Exact - as in I could sit down and listen to music and relax without thinking 'what's wrong' or 'what on earth have they done' or 'they released to market THIS' ...

The idea is nice, but implementation is everything.

you don't listen to ideas and illusions - although I think some people come close.

Listen and decide - as usual.

DB.

james n posted:

And right off topic we go...

Sorry 

General comment Simon - not aimed at any individual. 

General, yes, but also accepted here.

Darke Bear posted:

I did listen carefully to the full Exakt Active system feeding the new Titans vs an NDS single 555PS, Statement S1 Pre Nap500 (non-DR) driving the new Titans Passive - before I purchased my S1 Pre.

 

Do you remember what the power amps were in the Exakt setup?

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

...

 

 

May be my words could have been better. I wasn't questioning your credibility.  What I was trying to say is that, regardless of anyone's job or experience, its best to understand what it does (and that doesn't require an understanding of how it is done) before declaring that its just a re-hash of existing approaches.

It's OK, it was just the repeat that 'got to me', but yes I do understand the effects, forms and mechanisms of DRC.

I did the research so I could select components and calibrate my system (my room correction comprises a combination of acoustic and digital components).

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

Darke Bear posted:

I did listen carefully to the full Exakt Active system feeding the new Titans vs an NDS single 555PS, Statement S1 Pre Nap500 (non-DR) driving the new Titans Passive - before I purchased my S1 Pre.

I did want to check-out what was possible following another path entirely, as it was a serious outlay for me and if you got more the Linn approach then I would have reconsidered.

I went ahead with the S1 Pre as it was a rather silly comparison - and a sad relief to hear, even under demo conditions.

The Exact had everything going for it in terms of set-up, room-cancellation, specific custom digital crossover for Titans... but I found it difficult to listen to the music on that system. At best it was dry and lacking in any sort of fine low-level detail - at worst I heard serious problems of 'crawling' digital alias noises. The latter did get largely fixed on day two of the demo but still left a rather stark and sterile sound.

The Passive Titan system was thrown-together with no care in set-up (I found out later they forgot to undo the transit-bolts on the NDS) but still out-performed the alternative Aktiv Exact - as in I could sit down and listen to music and relax without thinking 'what's wrong' or 'what on earth have they done' or 'they released to market THIS' ...

The idea is nice, but implementation is everything.

you don't listen to ideas and illusions - although I think some people come close.

Listen and decide - as usual.

DB.

Wow, that's disasterous.  It would be interesting to hear the views of others too. Sounds like there was something seriously wrong in that set up. Perhaps the dealer's lack of set up of the NDS is a clue to their general capabilities?

Personally, I think there is a long way to go in the dealer network with Exakt and particularly SPACE implementation training. 

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

Isn't this (phase correction) similar to Devialet's SAM? 

DB,

Interesting post as I have heard an Ekat system a couple of times now and at it is mighty impressive, even with an LP12 undergoing analogue-digital-analogue conversation and 'correction', but after a while it all becomes too dry and somehow too precise to me as it looses that something that I have in my current system. 

After saying that I can understand  how attractive it is and I must admit I love the concept. I take my hat off to LInn but it is not in the same direction or "furrow that I have been ploughing" all these years.  

What I have also noticed is that many new products, from both Linn and Naim, seemed to be going for a 'new' sound, in a different direction and furrow to me. Perhaps I am a bit of an old  luddite with my LP12, Superline  and Naim amps enjoying that full on live performance hitting me in the gut and soul!

Would be interesting if I was starting all over again whether I would be in a different furrow and ploughing along with Linn?

Richard

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

I used the minimum phase plot to align the delays in the crossover - dead simple!
With the miniDSP 2x8 series the audio clock is 192kHz, so sample accuracy is pretty good, certainly good enough for a crossover that's driving analogue components.

Eloise posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

Isn't this (phase correction) similar to Devialet's SAM? 

SAM seems to be about time alignment and bass boosting at lower volumes and below 200Hz

Exakt (from this perspective) is phase error correction within and between drive units across the entire frequncy range.

I can understand why many may not enjoy it. It is a very different presentation. It is definitely a further refinementof Linn's pursuit of what they consider to be accuracy over Naim's pursuit of a more robust and less constrained sound.

That's why I would like to hear Exakt with Naim amps into Kudos or PMC - I think there could be a good middle ground there.

DB, Fanfossflyer, I also was slightly disappointed with the Exact system I heard, given the cost - again a little dry and lacking in vitality; but then it was a little time ago and it was base model components (I forget which ones).  My conclusion was "A good idea but not quite there." and it may need more development.

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

I used the minimum phase plot to align the delays in the crossover - dead simple!
With the miniDSP 2x8 series the audio clock is 192kHz, so sample accuracy is pretty good, certainly good enough for a crossover that's driving analogue components.

The miniDSP may correct for phase issues at crossover, but have you considered phase errors by frequency within each drive unit? That's quite some problem to solve.

sunbeamgls posted: 

Wow, that's disasterous.  It would be interesting to hear the views of others too. Sounds like there was something seriously wrong in that set up. Perhaps the dealer's lack of set up of the NDS is a clue to their general capabilities?

Personally, I think there is a long way to go in the dealer network with Exakt and particularly SPACE implementation training. 

Being at the same demo; I was likewise unimpressed, but I did get the feeling that insufficient time had gone into setting the system up. Not a reflection on the folk from the various manufacturers involved on the days,  just that at hi-fi shows you never get more than a glimse of a system's capabilities, it's all a bit hectic. I can't imagine anyone committing to buying systems of this calibre without a proper lengthy home trial.

sunbeamgls posted:

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

I used the minimum phase plot to align the delays in the crossover - dead simple!
With the miniDSP 2x8 series the audio clock is 192kHz, so sample accuracy is pretty good, certainly good enough for a crossover that's driving analogue components.

The miniDSP may correct for phase issues at crossover, but have you considered phase errors by frequency within each drive unit? That's quite some problem to solve.

I'd specifically not want to correct such effects as it'll have a detrimental effect on the frequency response <> phase relationship - consider the maths of digital filters to see the reason why.
This will be even more so if you try to correct room effects as well (and there's little point unless you do this).  In practice I've also found that actually trying to do this in a DSP has wide ranging detrimental effects.

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

That's cool, but don't ignore the accuracy of the clocking and the phase correction, none of which seem to be available elsewhere, but happy to be corrected if there is a prior solution. Of course, making all the functionality, including the above, as a speaker specific template seems to be unique too.

I used the minimum phase plot to align the delays in the crossover - dead simple!
With the miniDSP 2x8 series the audio clock is 192kHz, so sample accuracy is pretty good, certainly good enough for a crossover that's driving analogue components.

The miniDSP may correct for phase issues at crossover, but have you considered phase errors by frequency within each drive unit? That's quite some problem to solve.

I'd specifically not want to correct such effects as it'll have a detrimental effect on the frequency response <> phase relationship - consider the maths of digital filters to see the reason why.
This will be even more so if you try to correct room effects as well (and there's little point unless you do this).  In practice I've also found that actually trying to do this in a DSP has wide ranging detrimental effects.

Yep, like I said, its hard.  Have you heard the results they've achieved in the past 3 months?

sunbeamgls posted:

Yep, like I said, its hard.  Have you heard the results they've achieved in the past 3 months?

Not that recently, last time I heard it it was way outside the price bracket I was considering and the price performance ratio also wasn't in it's favour; also the overall presentation wasn't to my taste.  Various experiments I conducted with DSP techniques (both real time DSP and using file pre-processing) suggested that while there was a lot of room for improvement there are definite mathematical limits to what can be achieved with these techniques.

I'd be interested to hear one of the most recent system to see how close they've managed to get to the mathematical constraints inherent in such complex multidimensional techniques.

From my experiments even pre-processing a file to compensate for a seating position 6" lower than ideal (by compensating for the effect that has on driver integration) gave more problems in loss of 'perceived realism', distortion of instrumental timbres and 'perceived resolution' than was gained in the smoothness of the driver integration, even though the changes were quite small.

jfritzen posted:

If you want to compare active crossovers, Briks should be one of the few (the only?) speakers that are supported by both Exakt and Snaxo.

J, it's not about me, all Active Fans, including yourself, is curious as to whose Active technologies are superior.

The Bristol Show, put Active Titans, with Naim Amps, but with the Berhinger XO.

But yes, it appears the Briks is the only way, o e can make a fair comparison. Now Naim can rig something up, they rigged an Snaxo Giya G2.

Allante93!

In theory, the Linn exact system should be better in that it can be precisely adapted to the specific drive units in the individual speakers you have.  However, that comes at the risk of more noticeable mathematical artefacts being created, particularly as the drivers age.

On the other hand with analogue crossovers, although there are likely to be more 'artefacts' due to the lower precision of the matching, these are of a more 'natural' sounding form as the analogue systems can't have such sharp frequency response / phase response features.  With a well designed speaker systems these artefacts will still be less than +/-2.5dB anyway; and, in practice, non-idealities in the room response will usually be much larger than this.