I'll leave most of the back and forth to all of you, with the obvious reminder that price thresholds and perceived value always comes into play, but a few quick corrections/confirmations:
Originally Posted by RMK!
Originally Posted by jbrown15
I know this might sound silly but one of the reasons I scratched Seaton speakers off my list was because with the built in amps they're just priced too high for me. I don't know if its even possible but it would be nice to see some of his great speakers without the built in amps. I haven't been following Seaton for all that long, is there a reason why he really only offers his speakers with built in amps?
One of my primary reasons (not sold on the active speaker concept) ... But being powered theoretically you should be able to get the maximum performance from the components used.
Indeed, powered speakers have never been the most popular choice of enthusiasts as they are less conventional from what we are used to and regardless of the total cost being similar or not, it's easier to stomach a few smaller purchases vs. one larger expense. It was a choice I knew would limit sales, but delivered a superior product. There are aspects of the crossover alignment and integration which cannot be executed as well passively. Delays and precise, narrow EQ are simply not practical with passive crossovers. The active crossovers also make it easier to execute the very low crossover to the woofers I use in the Catalysts of <250Hz helping the in-room and off-axis response variations. The active solution is a more expensive path, just as the smooth cabinet face with large edge bevels and premium sealed woofers I employ all add to the expense. They are also key parts of what provide the resulting performance. I would never suggest that I wouldn't design and offer a passive speaker, but that's not what I wanted to found and anchor my company with.
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5
Higher level of performance capability. when using an active crossover you do not lose as much power and the DSP allows Mark to customize the response of the speaker to the room.
Not sure about the active crossovers power loss differential
But the rest of the statement is interesting. I wonder how many Catalysts have been customized to the owners space? That would require hiring Mark to come do that and that could be a very expensive proposition. I think what your really saying is they have been "voiced" for the best sound in an average room.
The mention of power loss is related to the passive crossover components. Passive crossovers reduce efficiency at intended frequencies and ranges to achieve the desired response and have internal losses and non-linearities of their own. An active crossover doesn't re-direct or absorb the amplifier's power, but rather adjusts the level coming from the amplifier. As evidence by many great passive speakers, this is not a fatal flaw, but rather a compromise which can be minimized, particularly in high efficiency designs and with quality component choices. Of course and active solution eliminates the issue.
There are only 2 DSP settings which have ever shipped or reside at a customer's home. The first being the same as what fugueness has had in his speakers since the beginning, and the second being a recent addition of a subtle baffle wall compensation (at lower frequencies) for those building their Catalysts flush in a baffle wall behind a screen. I continue to experiment with options for user EQ, but such options have to allow the same capabilities of the current design, be practical to set up and use, and also be superior in some way to the many room correction systems currently available.