Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › 2.0 Speakers Compilation: Best for <$500
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2.0 Speakers Compilation: Best for <$500 - Page 9

post #121 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by AhhHoNG View Post

Thanks! What should i buy to make a 5-10 inch lift? can i buy a plastic rectangle container?


IMG_0555.JPG

post #122 of 260


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AhhHoNG View Post

Thanks! What should i buy to make a 5-10 inch lift? can i buy a plastic rectangle container?


I used plastic containers with mine when I had them. I now have the CX5s and use 2 bricks, and these foam pads I made at work....which i could make you for free, and make thicker if anyone would be interested. Also made to the size you want. Costs me nothing. 

041.JPG008.JPG010.JPG


Edited by tmars78 - 9/24/10 at 5:32pm
post #123 of 260

I built a pair of wood stands and they came out great.  However the most important thing you want to do is minimize vibration from the speaker to your desk.  I'd get some foam pads or professionally built Auralex Mopads and put them on top of stands.

post #124 of 260

How's the Swans T200B compare to the speakers on this list? Or Adam A3X?

post #125 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmars78 View Post


 


I used plastic containers with mine when I had them. I now have the CX5s and use 2 bricks, and these foam pads I made at work....which i could make you for free, and make thicker if anyone would be interested. Also made to the size you want. Costs me nothing. 

 


Thanks but i bought my own plastic container haha. And we are obviously at different place of the world.

post #126 of 260
post #127 of 260

If i am not wrong, the Adam A3X would sound identical to the A5X except for its bass response right?

post #128 of 260

I decided on the KRK RP5's.. got them from Guitarcenter for 137.99 ea. Im very satisfied with them, they sound quite abit better after 120 hrs of burn in. I was a little disapointed at first, but they have really came into their own, I ended up putting them on some Auralex Mopads, made a huge difference, my desk was very resonant. They are very loud and clear, good soundstage and imaging, my only complaint is the bass could be a bit cleaner down near the bottom range, it can be a little muddy at times, it improved drastically with the Mopads, and probably would be even better with room treatment. I've got them hooked up to my Heavily modded Teradak Chameleon, they sound pretty damn good, no speaker in this price range is perfect, and I really like the front ports and RCA input. Alot of monitor's lack unbalanced RCA inputs. I upgraded from some Klipsch Promedia's and these are in another league all together, not even close. I did notice with these that speaker placement is absolutely critical, moreso then most other speakers i've owned, you really need to get the tweeters at ear level or you miss out on alot. I think it's a common trait with near field monitors. 


Edited by MikeW - 9/27/10 at 4:56pm
post #129 of 260

It hurts me inside how cheap Americans can get these kind of things for. In the U.S. you can get the RP8s for like $450 a pair if you look hard enough. In Australia the cheapest you can get is the equivalent of around $710 U.S. Ridiculous.
 

/shakes fist


Edited by matthewh133 - 9/27/10 at 5:27pm
post #130 of 260

Had a second listen to the Tannoy Reveals 501a's & discovered some things I really didn't like about them. They seem to have low power & significant bass boost EQ built into them making them clip very obnoxiously at volume levels that other speakers had no problem playing at. It was the deep bass frequencies that was causing this & the woofer was moving close to its limit which is what makes me think that they have some killer bass EQ in there. Even my little speakers had no issues with lack of volume compared to these. I will admit though that even with the mods they don't put out the bass like the other speakers I tested , However in my room they do very well delivering tight clean bass that really doesn't sound all that rolled off. Where they do need help at home here the sub fills in nicely. With my current settings on the sub the sub is very discrete only coming in where needed & not over doing it so it sounds very well balanced. Too much bass  below 50Hz would sound tubby & my system with current setting is anything but tubby sounding with the sub on.  It is very tight & clean with excellent extension when the sub is on

 

As a reference for balance I use my Ety ER4P earphones which I found nearly perfectly balanced in live verse recording testing & here the modded speakers do quite well, only lacking in the very deepest bass. below 50 Hz. The speakers sound slighly warmer in the lower mids & upper bass than the ER4P's & a little less forward in the upper mids & lower treble. Detail is there but not as pronounced on the speakers. Speakers are more listenable in the long run than the ER4Ps as a result. I can get them to sound even closer to the ER4P if I set the acoustic space control for more output above 250Hz  & have improved detail but for the listenability I leave then set where they are. Human voices sound thier best to me on my system with my current settings.They sound too thin otherwise.  Given this result I believe many manufacturers  going for what sells & impressive bass sells whether or not it is balanced instead of what truely accurate & that seems to include Tannoy. Mid bass level on my current speakers compared to the ER4P is pretty much a deadon match from 50-100 Hz at matched volumes. This is without the sub.

 

My favorate speakers at Guitar Center changed to the  KRK Rockit RP5's. They sound the closest to accurate & thier bass output is not excessive at the bottom compared to the rest of the bass. 


Edited by germanium - 9/28/10 at 4:37am
post #131 of 260

I must have a revision/late model? version of the BX-5. I have a different m-audio logo on the front and the LF switchable cutoff goes to 49Hz for me instead of the normal 56 I hear form most. Hence 2 of my caps have different values. I'll have to do some extra research and tracing before I start this mod. I didn't even know they made a revision, but that appears to be what I have

post #132 of 260



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucias_D View Post

I must have a revision/late model? version of the BX-5. I have a different m-audio logo on the front and the LF switchable cutoff goes to 49Hz for me instead of the normal 56 I hear form most. Hence 2 of my caps have different values. I'll have to do some extra research and tracing before I start this mod. I didn't even know they made a revision, but that appears to be what I have



Note, that the disabling the low frequency cotoff is not the only mods I have done to these All electrolytic couple caps have been replaced with wire, even the ones going to ground from the negative feedback loops that control the gain of the amps. This was nessessary to get the soundstage & imaging as well. These cap removals were done a quite a while ago by me but the disabling the low frequecy cutoff was just recently completed.

 

Do you have the ones you linked in your recent activity? If so then they should be just like mine. If not you may have the new CX5's which have the same switches in back but likely different values for the settings. Just checked out the CX5's specs & thier lowest cutoff freqency just says flat. I have 2 pair of BX5's of slightly different vintage & yes they have different logos but both have the same 56Hz low frequency cutoff. The BX8's have a lowest low frquency cutoff of 38 Hz so it can't be those either. Maybe some really early version had an optomistic cutoff of 49Hz?. Even at 56Hz the cutoff frequency was really optomistic by the way. A not so optimistic lowest cutoff would have been 80 Hz. Port tuning on these speakers was way optomistic at less than 30Hz according to the manufacturer. With an optomistic 56Hz cutoff for the subsonic filter combined with a port tuning of less than 30Hz  the port becomes useless as to providing any usefull support near the bottom of the mid basses usefull range. A more apropriate tuning would have been 50Hz for such a small driver as that would have provided near flat response to the cutoff frequency unless of coarse the tuning was too sharp that it causes a lumpy response instead. I do get resonable response though definately still not flat to 50 Hz with the subsonic filter removed though & there is definately more warmth to human voices  than with the subsonic filter in place so there was definately some damage being done to the usefull range of the speakers by the filter. Note however that you really don't want perfectly flat anachoic response anyway from a speaker anyway as that would result in excessive bass in real world environments due to room boundary reinforcment.

 

With the large magnet on the back of the midbass unit the need for such restictions are minimal as the back-electromotive force of the driver tends to restrict excessive driver movement when a flat signal is provided. In otherwards big magnet equals rolled off bass anyway. As the driver begins to have significant movement the amp has to fight large voltages being fed back by the driver hense instead of a real 15 volts driving the speaker you have to take 15 volts minus the back-electromotive force of the driver for example 10 volts and that leaves only 5 volts left to drive the speaker. This degree of back-electomotive feedback would cause about 10 db of roll off to the driver at that frequency. With such large magnet this scenerio is not unusual.


Edited by germanium - 9/30/10 at 5:59am
post #133 of 260

First post in this thread, but from reading this I have already bought a pair of Yamaha HS50M, IMO it outclasses the Mackie MR5 which I had the chance to audition, too. Compared to it, the Mackie at first seems to sound fuller especially the lower end, but it's overall muddier, has a narrower sound stage and a somewhat diffused presentation of each instruments. I being the instrumental music guy (from soundtrack to modern orchestra music), the HS50M serves me well. I don't think I even need a sub as in the picture being too close to the wall it produces enough low end for my taste. Otherwise adding a sub to it my give you best of both world if you like more bass. Here's the crappy picture of them and my PC from my cell.

 

P021010_15.34.jpg

 

P.S. You don't need to mention the DAC, isolation or how close they are to the wall. Will fix these sometimes. If you have other recommendation then please do biggrin.gif.


Edited by thuantran - 10/2/10 at 2:11am
post #134 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by thuantran View Post

First post in this thread, but from reading this I have already bought a pair of Yamaha HS50M, IMO it outclasses the Mackie MR5 which I had the chance to audition, too. Compared to it, the Mackie at first seems to sound fuller especially the lower end, but it's overall muddier, has a narrower sound stage and a somewhat diffused presentation of each instruments. I being the instrumental music guy (from soundtrack to modern orchestra music), the HS50M serves me well. I don't think I even need a sub as in the picture being too close to the wall it produces enough low end for my taste. Otherwise adding a sub to it my give you best of both world if you like more bass. Here's the crappy picture of them and my PC from my cell.

 

 

 

P.S. You don't need to mention the DAC, isolation or how close they are to the wall. Will fix these sometimes. If you have other recommendation then please do biggrin.gif.


You should get your monitors off your desk (reflection off desk/comb filtering) and put the tweeters at ear level. Create a virtual equilateral triangle with your monitors as the base of the triangle and aim your monitors so that the virtual axis created by your monitors cross just behind your head.

post #135 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonboy403 View Post

You should get your monitors off your desk (reflection off desk/comb filtering) and put the tweeters at ear level. Create a virtual equilateral triangle with your monitors as the base of the triangle and aim your monitors so that the virtual axis created by your monitors cross just behind your head.

I know about the equilateral triangle stuff, it is mentioned in the manual, these speakers are actually nearly creating that setup from their perspective, at the moment the tweeters are around 5cm to around 10cm lower than exactly at my ear level. So I think I only need to move it off my desk, is putting something higher under these speakers good enough as that as far as I can go with my desk space?
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › 2.0 Speakers Compilation: Best for <$500