Amlified or Passive... Just a quick one!

Currently reading:
Amlified or Passive... Just a quick one!

Jan 26, 2006
South Wales
Been checking out plenty of subs for a while now (amazing how much time you waste looking at stupid things before you buy a car :p) and I was wondering peoples views on amplified or passive subs?

Obviously using passive sub and a seperate amp allows you a good match of power and so forth but are the amplified subs really up to the job? The one in concern will probably be a Fli 12 Active Sub... But there are a few companys that sell the passive Fli 12 with their 400 Fli amp too for a few more pounds.

So basically, which would you prefer and if possible which you think is better? Many thanks :)
Personally, I'll always go for a separate sub and amp combo - that way, you can have more options if you want to upgrade, e.g. if you start off by powering a sub with a 2 channel amp, and then upgrade to a mono amp, you can use the 2 channel for say a pair of components (y)
Yeah, sounds like a good idea (y)

I'll be putting the seats down a lot too to lug some of my gear round so it'll be better if I need to take the sub out, with the amp mounted on the side panel, just to disconnect speaker wires from the sub and not disconnect the whole forest of wires going to the amp. That thought only just came to me!

Cheers for that ::) :rolleyes:
imo, if you get the right active sub (ie something like a Vibe one) then your better off.

You have a correctly matched speaker, amp and enclosure. No need to fart around trying to deceide which amp to get. Much neater.
you sometimes find with passive set ups the put in a amp that is way underpowered for the sub so if you blow the sub up you cant go sueing them for dodgy equipment!

bit of a waste IMO loosing power that you could get! seperates better!
an underpowered amp is just as much a risk to a sub as an overpowered one. and you mean active, not passive don't ya?

I'm not saying get a cheap one, i think my 12" active sub was around £250