Speakers with built-in amp or without?

[ramisyuanbo]

Hi everyone, i'm new here and in need of your recommendations.
 
I'm looking for desktop speakers with a budget of 2k-4k RMB (300-500 $) 
.
I have a Xonar Essense STX in my PC. Currently i'm using an AKG K702.
 
I looked at HiVi M200MKIIII, which look quite good to me.
 
But i wonder if i could find a speaker + Amp choice within my budget?
 
I'd appreaciate you recommendations a lot !

 

[obobskivich]

I don't know what's available in your part of the world (and I don't know what your part of the world is - China?) - but within the $500 range it's probably going to be a bit of a challenge to find an amplifier and speakers brand new without majorly cheaping out on one side or the other. I'd stick to active monitors unless you can shop used, because you might be able to find a great deal on speakers and/or amplification going that route.

 

[wahu]

Get active monitors for that price.
 
KRK rokit 5 - They sound great and have a punchy quality.. Get them then save up for a subwoofer.

 

[robm321]

speakers with built in amps are usually chalk full of synergy. If you can find a decent set in your price range, that would be the way to go. 

 

[Mauricio]

Quote:

speakers with built in amps are usually chalk full of synergy.

WTH does this mean?
 
Go with active monitors.  Look to Yamaha, JBL and KRK.

 

[obobskivich]

WTH does this mean?

Usually active monitors have amplifiers designed with that specific speaker in mind. Often with the crossover in mind as well, and you can get some very nice active bi/tri-amplified sets from M-Audio, Genelec, Mackie, etc for substantially less than doing it with passive speakers or outboard components. Especially since the (apparent) demise of the NHT Xd.

 

[estreeter]

Obo, its Malaysia. I suspect that KL would blow your mind - it blows mine every single time I get out of the cab.  

 
I'm less thrilled that most of the speaker info is buried in the 'cables' graveyard:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/590918/best-active-speakers
 
Noobs may not be immediately aware of the speaker-related posts there - I have made the suggestion that we need a speaker sub-forum but thus far it has sunk without trace. 

 

[Mauricio]

Just keep in mind that a "speakers with built in amps" are not all active designs, and therefore not necessarily "chalk full of synergy".  An active design is scarcely similar to a powered design.

 

[robm321]

^ Why would they build an amp in a speaker if it weren't to drive that speaker? 
 
Active speaker (includes amp to drive speaker)
 
Passive speaker (requires external amp to drive)
 
Right?

 

[Mauricio]

Here we go again.  There are fundamental system design differences between an active speaker and a powered speaker.  Believe it or not, a powered speaker is more similar to a passive speaker than to an active speaker.  You may wish to inform yourself about the differences in this thread.

 

[obobskivich]

What he's getting at (afaik) is the difference between "powered" and "active" - it's semantic.

Active - built-in independent amplifiers per driver (or set of drivers); speaker is actively multi-amped.

Powered - built-in amplifier per speaker; speaker uses passive crossover.

IME, powered speakers are things like computer speakers (or what we used to call computer speakers ), active speakers are everything else (e.g. basically everything talked about in this thread) - like monitors. There's nothing "evil" about either approach, but there's some on-paper benefits to active multi-amplification when it's done right (and in an active monitor, hopefully it is (in the case of something like Genelec or Mackie we can assume it is)). Basically - both can be done properly (as can passive speakers and outboard amplifiers). Like rob said though - with an active speaker you're talking "lots of synergy" - everything has been thought through from the factory.

I would not say that active monitors are always the best case scenario though - just because the amplification and crossover is done right, doesn't mean their output abilities reflect the needs or desires of their installation.

 

[Mauricio]

No, the differences are not semantic, just like the differences between, for example, fuel injection and carburation, between a supercharger and a turbo, all-wheel-drive and four-wheel-drive are not semantic.
 
The defining characteristics of an active speaker are:

1. one amplifier per driver;
2. active crossover;
3. the crossover sits before the amplifiers.

This fundamental system design is wholly absent in a powered (and passive) speaker.

 

[obobskivich]

There's no need to argue this back and forth - it just becomes a semantic discussion. Car analogies are also usually a slippery slope and inaccurate, FWIW IMHE. If you really want to pick at nits though, your list of "defining characteristics of an active speaker" defines any active multi-amping system; this can be based on passive or powered speakers. Works out fine either way.

 

[Mauricio]

Quote:

There's no need to argue this back and forth - it just becomes a semantic discussion. Car analogies are also usually a slippery slope and inaccurate, FWIW IMHE. If you really want to pick at nits though, your list of "defining characteristics of an active speaker" defines any active multi-amping system; this can be based on passive or powered speakers. Works out fine either way.

 
Oh really?  According to you, an active crossover "can be based on passive...speakers"?  Right, you know what you are talking about...
 
What I presented before is not a car analogy.  It is an example of how fundamental system design differences cannot be reduced or papered over as "semantics".  No one--except you, it seems--will assert that the differences between carburation and fuel-injection are merely of a linguistic semantic nature.  A helicopter is not an airplane if you do away with semantics.

 

[robm321]

Yep semantics, and a waste of time. This is a discussion on high end audio, so its assumed we are not talking about PC speakers *sigh*