Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Help choosing : Audioengine A2 vs. Swan M200Mkii
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help choosing : Audioengine A2 vs. Swan M200Mkii

post #1 of 16
11/14/09 at 5:50am
Thread Starter 
I'm in need of help for suggestion.

Setup:
PC > Asus Xonar DX > line out stereo
got Fiio E5 if that's gonna make a difference.
in a room that's quite spacious, so need to consider how the waves being reflected.

Audioengine A2s $199 - retail
Swan M200MkII $230 - TheAudioInsider

A2:
+ small size
+ cheaper
+ 30 days guarantee
- bassy for some people
- hot!

m200mkii:
+ knobs to control bass and treble
+ separate cable to transfer signal to the other speaker
+ clarity
- large
- some people experience lack of bass

Other suggestion are welcomed. Budget $200
Loved my HD280 when it was properly sealed.
Have Head-Direct RE0, not loving it that much since i couldnt get a proper seal on it. I might sell it though.

Thanks
Reply
post #2 of 16
11/14/09 at 1:49pm

Fairly opinionated rant

I have A2's and owned Swans M200 (Mk1) previously (somehow they vanished in my move overseas). I unhesitatingly recommend the Swans. The ones I had were fantastic and are sorely missed. They were a remarkably beautiful-sounding and clear pair of speakers which 'should' cost much more than they do.

The A2 is no substitute at all unless you like the kind of bass it puts out. I say 'kind' and not 'amount' because while it delivers a lot of bass, it's not genuine low bass but a kind of midbass thrum and boom added to everything, and added to excess.

This is probably very good for some kinds of music, but for jazz, vocals, classical and the kinds of pop/rock that I like, I found it very unpleasant. With aggressive EQ I was able to bring it under some sort of control, but I never really _enjoyed_ the result. Variations in positioning, height, and angle did not help appreciably in my case. I simply did not like these speakers.

You'll find lots of people, though, who like the A2. Mine may even be a minority opinion.

Aside from the sonic differences, be aware that the A2's volume knob is on the rear. As it's difficult to reach, you'll probably find yourself adjusting volume at the source more often than with the M200. Most combinations of playback software will make it easy for you to do this, but be sure that's not a problem in your situation.

As for the M200, it really is pretty big. Measure your desk space to be sure they won't crowd you too much.
Reply
post #3 of 16
11/14/09 at 5:08pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
As for the M200, it really is pretty big. Measure your desk space to be sure they won't crowd you too much.
i would probably put them(m200) in a separate table. or at least distanced from where i sit, so i can get the low frequency thumps better.

How well can you tune your m200 ?

will the knobs settings suffice to give that extra bass? or does it need equalizer?
Reply
post #4 of 16
11/14/09 at 5:35pm
I didn't play around with the tone control knobs all that much, but they're roughly as effective as tone control knobs on your average old-school stereo receiver. They'll dial up the bass a bit, but they don't make this neutral-ish speaker into a bass monster.

Depending on what 'that extra bass' means to you, you may simply not get it out of the M200; you might need a sub. If you're looking for that much bass plus good-sounding midrange and treble, then you might look at the Swans S3W (about $60) plus some kind of a sub that matches your budget.
Reply
post #5 of 16
11/14/09 at 8:28pm
Thread Starter 
Let say I game a lot, and i wanted the vibration from the explosion. Will M200 be able to reproduce that?

I listen to lots of different music, but some of my favs are Hardfloor(house music), big band jazz, accoustic instrumental music.

Do you have any other suggestion for speaker?
Reply
post #6 of 16
11/14/09 at 8:38pm
If you want low bass you'll need a subwoofer, 55hz isn't bad and fine for music but for movies it'll lack that low bass. oh I'm not talking about having a subwoofer banging and booming away. You should not be able to hearthe subwoofer. Gaming doesn't have low bass most is around 40hz.

A subwoofer doesn't do vibration. It vibrates your house.

Quote:
so i can get the low frequency thumps better.
uh oh boy racer crowd.
Reply
post #7 of 16
11/14/09 at 8:44pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iriverdude View Post
If you want low bass you'll need a subwoofer, 55hz isn't bad and fine for music but for movies it'll lack that low bass. oh I'm not talking about having a subwoofer banging and booming away. You should not be able to hearthe subwoofer. Gaming doesn't have low bass most is around 40hz.

A subwoofer doesn't do vibration. It vibrates your house.



uh oh boy racer crowd.
So, what would be best to do then ? Will $200 gives me a decent subs and satellites?

Also, i saw a deal on Polk Monitor 60 that was being sold for 109 + free ship. However, I'm not familiar with all of this receiver thing that i have to connect to.

Mind helping me ?
Reply
post #8 of 16
11/14/09 at 8:49pm
Quote:
Will $200 gives me a decent subs and satellites?
Not a chance. I'd spend $200 on speakers, and $200 minimum. I'd look into a quality 10/12" subwoofer such as BK XLS 200.

Do you want a radio? Because that's what a a receiver is (either in av or stereo versions)
Reply
post #9 of 16
11/14/09 at 9:18pm
Thread Starter 
i dont need radio. I just need a 2.0 or 2.1 system that i can plug to my computer or TV.

I'm planning on getting a 46" TV later on, so i'm gonna redesign the placement of the speaker. However, i need to make sure that the speaker can do its job delivering high quality sound in my tight budget.

The receiver i mentioned refers to Onko, Denon, or etc HT system thing.
Reply
post #10 of 16
11/14/09 at 9:25pm
If you don't need radio, then don't buy a receiver. If you buy active speakers you want a stereo pre-ampliifer. Otherwise if you buy passive speakers you need a stereo integrated amplifier. If you want multi-channel with passive speakers you need a av amplifier. With active multi-channel speakers then need a av pre-amplifier.

If you're into movies then I'd setup a home theatre, but this can be done later no need to sell off kit.

I take it 46" is a LCD? Is it going to be used for pc/console gaming? If not I'd buy a plasma instead, they have superior picture quality for video.
Reply
post #11 of 16
11/14/09 at 9:34pm
Thread Starter 
i'll use it for my PS3, and probably with my pc as well. Make it into an HTPC.

I prefer LCD since it's lower in power consumption, and slimmer in dimension.

Unless i can get the Kuro series which supposed to be the best for plasma.

Back to the speakers. What will be the best setup then ?
I don't think i will need more than 2 channels. I will not really use that.

Thanks
Reply
post #12 of 16
11/14/09 at 9:50pm
Quote:
i'll use it for my PS3, and probably with my pc as well. Make it into an HTPC.
Fair enough go for LCD.

Quote:
I prefer LCD since it's lower in power consumption, and slimmer in dimension.
But plasma has better picture quality. I've got a Kuro great TV. As to what's best that depends too much choice, but since you have a limited budget I'd look into a stereo integrated amplifier and passive speakers. I wouldn't put down slimness as a positive thing, a plasma isn't exactly 6' deep.

I've owned several LCD's and a couple of plasma's. For picture quality I'd rate the plasma as superior.

Why don't you think need more than 2 channels? Games, TV series and movies have surround sound.

Ignoring price, I'd rather have a home theatre than a stereo system (as long as home theatre in 2 channel is exactly what the 2 channel system is, plus bits to complete home theatre)
Reply
post #13 of 16
11/14/09 at 10:02pm
Thread Starter 
home theatre will not be a budget system in a long run. It will eat at least 300-400watts and that might not fit in my financial.

However, i agree with you about the superior picture quality on plasma. The deep black cannot be beaten by any lcd so far. However, i can live without that.

As far as home theatre, I might do that in the future, but not now. I better go with a stereo system. Buy an HT system in like another year, and use the stereo system as my bedroom sound system.

You are right that TV series all provide surround system. However, limited budget HT system equals to crappy surround sound. I prefer to wait till i have like 600$ and start building a HT system with several monitors and a center with a side subwoofers. But that is not the case right now. I have 200$ budget, and as far as i can tell. I will lead me to a 2.0 or 2.1 system, or Logitech Z-5500 for 5.1 but that's not an option. I own z-2300 before, loved it, but hated it at the same time for the unnatural bass they produce. The highs are cut, and not crisp.

what 2.0 or 2.1 system that you own that you can recommend to me?
Reply
post #14 of 16
11/15/09 at 8:46am
My stereo system is way out of your budget, but my "lower end" :-) PC audio system comprises a Arcam Alpha 9 and B&W 601 speakers. Which is still above your budget :-D Unless you buy second hand you may be able to pickup something like that for $400.

It's good you're not going to buy 5.1 system since you're on a low budget, I wouldn't waste my time with $600 5.1 speaker systems.
Reply
post #15 of 16
11/15/09 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by episiarch View Post

The A2 is no substitute at all unless you like the kind of bass it puts out. I say 'kind' and not 'amount' because while it delivers a lot of bass, it's not genuine low bass but a kind of midbass thrum and boom added to everything, and added to excess.

This is probably very good for some kinds of music, but for jazz, vocals, classical and the kinds of pop/rock that I like, I found it very unpleasant. With aggressive EQ I was able to bring it under some sort of control, but I never really _enjoyed_ the result. Variations in positioning, height, and angle did not help appreciably in my case. I simply did not like these speakers.
I bought the A2s a couple weeks ago, and this is my experience as well, especially with the mid-bass bloom. I can't use my computer as a source at work, and needed small, active speakers I could use with my ipod. These are still better than the speaker/docks I was hearing in the same price range, but I'm going to be saving my money up before looking again, and though the small size I need will come with compromises, I'd take a lack of bass over this type of bloom. I've already had co-workers offer to buy them from me, so some folks do like them.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Help choosing : Audioengine A2 vs. Swan M200Mkii