Passive mixer/active speakers vs. Active mixer/passive speakers

guitom · #1 11-02-2012, 10:45 PM

It seems these days everyone is recommending a passive mixer and powered speakers. Is this better than an powered mixer and passive speakers? Is there an advantage to this setup that I don't understand? Like price, weight, sound?

jomaynor · #2 11-02-2012, 11:10 PM

The big advantage of passive mixer & powered speakers vs powered mixer & passive speakers is in the sound, and also in its flexibility for configuration upgrading, if needed.

Powered speakers are biamped (one small internal amp for the highs and another internal amp for the mids/lows) and they have built in digital signal processing (DSP) for smoother crossover frequency transition. Translated as: all other things being equal, they will sound less harsh and boxy. One is also less likely to fry a high frequency driver with a powered speaker.

Bobby1note · #3 11-03-2012, 02:17 AM

I agree with Jomaynor,,, the components of an active speaker, are specifically designed and tuned to work together, the only downside as far as I'm concerned, might be a little added weight, and having to run power-cables to the active speakers. That said, passive speakers require amplifiers and DSP's, so that creates extra baggage as well, especially if you're bi-amping or tri-amping. Powered speakers are pretty well Plug n' Play, and probably a better/safer choice for someone who's starting out.

I prefer passive mixers. I just don't care for the idea of being locked in to the built-in power-amps to power the same speakers everywhere I go.. I prefer the capability of using the same mixer, with multiple (different) speakers.

There's arguments to be made for both,

jricc · #4 11-03-2012, 01:48 PM

I like my acTive Carvin head/mixer and passive speakers. Trying to find power for both speakers is a pain for me. But...I can see both sides of The argument.

krisls · #5 11-03-2012, 04:59 PM

Did a bit of comparing recently when I had to suddenly get a small PA mostly for solo/duo guitar vocal stuff.

Over the years it has been almost exclusively passive speakers with either power amps and desk or powered mixer, but recently speakers such as the QSC's have really made themselves known. I guess the easiest way to put it is bigger headroom with a more hi fi sound.

That said I went with a powered mixer passive speaker deal which was partly cost, considerably cheaper, and for my uses the differences where not huge. Were I much more flush I may well have gone the more expensive but somewhat crisper sound of the powered speakers, 10's rather than 12's weight about the same and the passive mixer. I would probably have done the A&H zed12fx with QSC k10's . I bought a Yam EMX512sc and a pair of Quest 250's at almost half the price of the AH/QSC's.

The sound difference is there but not huge and a few extra power cables and such really isn't an issue at all. I will say were the cost equations closer I would have gone the powered speaker route.

Kris

sdelsolray · #6 11-03-2012, 06:13 PM

For solo acoustic guitar, I use a active mixer, passive 3-way speakers with internal inductive crossovers and a separate two channel Class A/B power amp. The sonics are great and the behavior is even and predictable.

clintj · #7 11-03-2012, 09:35 PM

Lot of good points here. My band went with passive speakers, passive mixer, and a rugged power amp. It was, in our opinion, the most robust setup we could get. Easiest to upgrade later if we needed, as well. The downside to powered speakers is finding somewhere to plug them in. I've yet to play somewhere that had too many power outlets. With a powered mixer or passive + power amp, you can run a heavy extension cord and have everything centrally powered. The downside to powered mixers is that if you fry something internal, your gig is dead. Then you have to look at shelling out the money for another one if the warranty is expired and they are definitely not a trivial expense.

Bob Womack · #8 11-04-2012, 07:36 AM

Mmmm... I think there is a misuse of a term going on here. There are three classes of mixers:

Passive - These have no mixing amps. They are merely a group of inputs being combined through potentiometers. Any EQ is merely subtractive, such as you find on an electric guitar. A short on one input will kill the entire output of the mixer. These mixers usually require no power. We don't see many of these anymore.
Active - These use summing amplifiers to mix so that a short on one input won't kill the whole signal. They have powered EQ circuits to shape tone. They require power. Even small mixers these days are typically active.
Powered - These mixers contain everything you see in an active mixer plus power amps to power passive speakers. They require power.

Bob

Steve Z · #9 11-04-2012, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clintj

... I've yet to play somewhere that had too many power outlets...

This actually made me laugh out loud... a simple statement that is hilariously true.

I use 2 Bose L1 systems with a Mackie 1402 mixer and usually all off the same outlet. Thankfully the Bose and Mackie mixer don't pull that much power so using the same outlet is not an issue. The concern would be if / when I decide to add a few powered speakers for better monitor control and possibly moving away from the Bose.

I prefer Active mixers (thanks for the definition clarification Bob) and powered mixers. My second preference would be Active mixer with passive speakers and separate power amps, but I don't miss lugging around a amp rack.

guitom · #10 11-04-2012, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Mmmm... I think there is a misuse of a term going on here. There are three classes of mixers:

Passive - These have no mixing amps. They are merely a group of inputs being combined through potentiometers. Any EQ is merely subtractive, such as you find on an electric guitar. A short on one input will kill the entire output of the mixer. These mixers usually require no power. We don't see many of these anymore.
Active - These use summing amplifiers to mix so that a short on one input won't kill the whole signal. They have powered EQ circuits to shape tone. They require power. Even small mixers these days are typically active.
Powered - These mixers contain everything you see in an active mixer plus power amps to power passive speakers. They require power.

Bob

Thanks, this clears up a lot.

Herb Hunter · #11 11-04-2012, 01:05 PM

Speakers with built-in power amps, so-called powered speakers or active speakers are usually biamped. This gives them an additional 3 dB of headroom over a passive speaker powered by a separate power amplifier of the same power output.

#12 11-04-2012, 01:14 PM

I think that which is better, passive or powered speakers, depends on one's needs and preferences. I would have gone either route, but when I was looking to buy I got a great deal on a Yamama EMX512SC and a pair of EV SX100+, under $700 for all of these. So I went a powered mixer/passive speaker set up and have been very happy with it. I have used this system for a few years now without a single problem.

Cygnus49 · #13 11-06-2012, 07:41 PM

I just posted in another thread on this - we went from being happy with Fishman 220 to being happier with a couple of EVs - more gain /volume possibilities BUT... I went through an education on EQ and proper setup. Somewhat painful but necessary.

I don't see any issues with sound since we are electrifying our acoustics and playing gigs where pristine definition is not an issue (its more professional bar music). Small size, lack of weight and overall convenience for 800W each power and a small Mackie 8 ch mixer - easy setup and carting off.

TerryAllanHall · #14 11-08-2012, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jricc

I like my acTive Carvin head/mixer and passive speakers. Trying to find power for both speakers is a pain for me. But...I can see both sides of The argument.

Ditto...Have earned most or all my living w/ Carvin PA gear since 1977, and know that by using both Carvin powered mixer/Carvin passive cabs, you get a set designed to work perfectly w/ one another. Presumably you can, by careful shopping/doing your homework, mix and match and do as well, but I'm happy w/ Carvin, both for it's excellent sound and it's dependability.

I've borrowed a passive mixer/active speaker pair to compare with my rig (PA1200/LM12s) and find there's no reason to replace what I already own and have depended on for quite a while. And, if the venue gets rowdy and a fist-fight knocks over a passive can on a tripod, the cab will survive...not always the case w/ powered speakers, as many have discovered.

One system's no better or worse than the other, in other words.