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 12

post #166 of 245

Satellite size does not equate quality. My Aego M has small satellites but pretty big sound. Bose headphones are almost pure hype. Their speakers, not so much. Though, if you look around you might be able to find better.

post #167 of 245
Agreed as far as 2.0 stereo imaging goes, I'm sure that there is better out there for $500. My JBL Control 2+ powered monitors are very nice in this regard. Where the Cinemamate system really excels is in how clean and natural it can make any surround format sound, and it's utter simplicity of operation. The JBLs are currently in storage.
Edited by grokit - 5/18/12 at 1:00pm
post #168 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by grokit View Post

I have one, it sounds great, and its simulated surround is very effective. The subwoofer is a monster, no need for bigger satellites.

 

So you think that a "monster" of a subwoofer can make up for small satellites?  Interesting proposition.  Perhaps a few basic info about sound and 2.1 systems is in order.  For reasons of stereo imaging, efficiency and distortion, a subwoofer should be restricted to reproducing frequencies below 100Hz.  Why?  For one, above 100Hz sound starts becoming directional meaning that the human ear can detect its direction.  If your subwoofer is reproducing significant volume above 100Hz, this will have deleterious impact on stereo imaging.  The imaging will be in a real sense smeared.  For two, a subwoofer's large driver becomes more and more inefficient the higher it goes in frequency, thereby taxing the amplifier into putting out more power.  This will result in harmonic and intermodulation distortion.  Capisce?

 

What does this have to do with the satellites?  The foregoing discussion calls for the subwoofer staying below 100Hz.  This means that the satellites must be capable of reaching down to at least 100Hz.  Small satellites with small drivers and small amplifiers are unlikely to be able to do so.  For all of these reasons, one should stay away from small satellites, and certainly away from satellites as small as that Bose system.  Now, any monkey engineer should know about these fundamentals of physics.  Why they persist in making these impossibly flawed systems I can only attribute to wanting to make a quick buck off less descriminating and less knowledgeable consumers.

post #169 of 245

I take it you've never listened to the Bose Cinemamate. Thanks for your opinion.

post #170 of 245

I take it that you've never heard a proper 2.1 system if you think that a "monster" subwoofer can substitute for satellites with sufficient and credible upper bass extension.

 

And it's actually not opinion, but rather unavoidable limitations imposed to the laws of physics.  You (and Bose) are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own laws of physics or to capabilities beyond that which evolution endowed on the human auditory system.  Simple as that.


Edited by Mauricio - 5/19/12 at 12:51am
post #171 of 245

I wouldn't say Bose does a "monster sub" with tiny satellites that put out bad sound. And trying to play off your opinions as physics shows a lack of understand of the physics. Yes, above 100 Hz and things become more directional, but there are still things you can do about that, both software and hardware things. This is why you can get surround-sound headphones that have only one driver per ear. Your head, after all, works in stereo but calculates directionality based on things like the dopler shift and the delay between left and right ear.

 

And speaker size is only one factor among many. It's something you can get around by materials. Like the bass guitar I heard that had a body the size of a ukelele (coolest thing ever, by the way).

post #172 of 245

Geez, get off the monster thing. I just meant that it throws off considerably impactful bass for its size. It's nowhere near my 15" sub though, that's the real monster. Anyways I'll trust Bose's R&D department, and my own ears on this one.

post #173 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougofTheAbaci View Post

I wouldn't say Bose does a "monster sub" with tiny satellites that put out bad sound. And trying to play off your opinions as physics shows a lack of understand of the physics. ... Your head, after all, works in stereo but calculates directionality based on things like the dopler shift and the delay between left and right ear.

 

...

 

Please explain how, with a stationary speaker and a stationary listener, the sound is doppler shifted.  If someone doesn't know physics, it is not I.

 

The human auditory system determines the direction of sound by two mechanisms and two mechanisms alone.  One is the relative difference in magnitude/amplitude of the sound reaching the ears.  Two is the relative difference in time of the sound reaching the ears.  That's it.  No hardware, software or DSP can change that.


Edited by Mauricio - 5/19/12 at 1:45am
post #174 of 245
I said said like, not actually using. You can simulate the Doppler shift by changing the pitch slightly. This is how surround sound headphones work and why there are bit in The Final Cut by Pink Floyd where things appear to happen behind you.

So while they can't change how you ears work, clever speakers can trick them into reporting the wrong things back to you brain.
post #175 of 245

I've lived with my Creative i-Trigue 3200 for too long now so I'm thinking about getting some 'Studio Monitor' speakers for general listening.

I've narrowed down my search to a few models that I can reasonably priced under $500 here in Australia.

Do you guys have any experiences with the following models? Also if you can comment on sound signature and why should I buy one versus the other that would be really helpful.

 

- KRK Rokit 5 Studio Monitors - $425

- Behringer Truth B1030A - $349 

- JBL LSR2325P Powered Active Studio - $439

- Alesis  M1Active 520 USB 60W - $279

- Samson GT Active Studio Monitors USB - $250

- MA-15D ROLAND CAKEWALK - $278

 

So far I'm leaning towards the Rokit and Behringer 

post #176 of 245

I'd, myself, narrow it down to the JBLs, the KRKs and the Yamaha HS50W or Yamaha MSP5 Studio.  Those three brands happen to have competent, matching subwoofers that you can add later.

post #177 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougofTheAbaci View Post

I said said like, not actually using. You can simulate the Doppler shift by changing the pitch slightly. This is how surround sound headphones work and why there are bit in The Final Cut by Pink Floyd where things appear to happen behind you.
So while they can't change how you ears work, clever speakers can trick them into reporting the wrong things back to you brain.

Let's make something clear.  The human ear did not evolve the capacity to detect sound direction based on doppler shift.  Period.  The human ear evolved to detect the direction of sound based on the relative difference in magnitude and time delay of sound at each ear.  The human ear does not detect sound direction by the shifting of frequency.  If a stationary signal emits a shifting frequency, the human ear perceives it as just that, as a change in frequency, not as a change in the location of the signal.  If a moving signal emits a single frequency, the sound is perceived as raising or lowering in frequency (depending whether it is moving away or towards you), but the ear detects the direction of said signal, not on doppler shift, but rather by the fact that the signal magnitude is increasing or that the signal is reaching each each at a different time.

post #178 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

I'd, myself, narrow it down to the JBLs, the KRKs and the Yamaha HS50W or Yamaha MSP5 Studio.  Those three brands happen to have competent, matching subwoofers that you can add later.

Good point I had almost forgot about the subwoofer, although I'm not keen on spending all that money right now, but possibly a nice addition for the future.

I originally left the Yamahas out of the equation since they are very expensive here in Australia. 

 

The other thing is I'm gonna be connecting these to my computer via DAC, I currently have a CEntrance DACport and the ODAC distributed by JDS Labs on order so do you guys see any issues with my approach? 

post #179 of 245

If you plan to control volume via the computer, make sure the DAC is capable of 24-bit depth.  Otherwise get a DAC with a preamp function that allows you to control the line output level.

post #180 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

If you plan to control volume via the computer, make sure the DAC is capable of 24-bit depth.  Otherwise get a DAC with a preamp function that allows you to control the line output level.

 

The DACport has its own volume control as it is a DAC/amp in one piece, on the other hand from what I read the ODAC has no volume control but can be controlled from the master volume control of the computer.

 

I've been reading a bit more and I'm narrowing down between the KRK Rockit 5 and Behringer B1030a, both seem to be great but the Rockit is quite a bit more popular, particularly in the US and on Amazon, the Behringer is a bit cheaper here in Australia thought. 

 

It would be great if someone who actually had both could shine in since I don't think I would be able to audition them here in my home town.

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