I'd like to know member's experiences (and opinions) concerning Powered vs. Unpowered PA systems (in typical stereo configuration). Other than Nearfields in the studio and small spot monitors on stage, I had never used powered speakers in a gig setting. I recently upgraded my PA by replacing two unpowered Cerwin Vegas/Mackie 808s powered mixer with two EV SXA250 powered speakers with small mixer. First mixer I tried was Fran's vaunted Edirol M10-DX but found that combination too 'digital' sounding for my liking. Switched to an old Samson 16 ch line mixer and voila', much 'richer' analog-sounding output. Only problem, I wanted the flexibility of having the speakers at least 25' away from the mixer and that produced a noticable hum with the unbalanced cables I was using. Solved that problem by replacing those cables (mixer to speaker) with medium quality balanced cables. Never had that problem with passive speakers (and speaker wire is a heck of a lot cheaper than good quality balanced signal cables. Have not really encountered any other problems but now I am forced to use additional powered speakers if I need monitors or expanded coverage. With the passives, I could run additional passives directly from the power amp or even from the back of the mains.
I'm still ambiguous about which I prefer but would like to hear some other views. Please exclude Bose and other line-array clones. BTW, the old Cerwin Vegas sounded much better with a mixer and old QSC power amp than they did with the Mackioe 808s, but the Mackie was just so much more convenient. It (808s) is available if anyone is interested. Thanks.

chas