Swan M50W vs KRK RP5 vs Audioengine A5s

Prodipe pro 5 , pretty much the same as the krk's just sound a bit better for the same price.

Swan m200mkii around $300 would be a good choice but audioengine a5s are probably just as good. I went to guitar center today and they have a buy one get one half off on the krk rokits. So rp6g2 are around $300 for a pair and less for the rp5g2. I would go with the rp6g2 if you go to guitar center.

Did OP end up w/ anything listed here?

I just picked up the KRK RP6's from Guitar Center, but they're HUGE, lol. I think I might order the M50W's when TAI gets them back in stock for a comparison.

get the Swans MKII instead with that budget. If not, add another 100$ and step it up to Swans MKIII. You won't need to upgrade in the next several years for sure.

Anyone compare the Swan M200 mkii/iii w/ the KRK Rokit RP2 5/6?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jodiuh 

I did. Returned the 6's for lacking front panel controls, taking up too much space, and having 2 power switches.
M50Ws take up FAR less space, have a much wider sweet spot, sound fantastic, come with a slick volume/mute control pod, and cost less. IMO, unless you absolutely need the high level of accuracy in the Rokits, you're better off with the Swans. They hiss less when muted as well.

I got the swam M50 2.1s for my PC.   For the size they sound really good.  That sub does a nice job of filling in the lower mids.   

For a PC or smaller area and clean setup they are hard to beat.   Monitors have the issue of lack of volume control or having to power them on separately or needing a usb DAC etc.  They are messy cable wise.   The swans are so easy to set up and just one button on the volume puck.   Best PC speakers out right now.

Rokits isn't known to have high level of accuracy (though compared to PC speakers like the Swan and Audioengine they probably are), you would have to step up to the VXT series for that.

That however is probably a good thing for someone after booming bass and not accurate sound.

Swan is like the Audio Engine, one active speaker and one passive, personally i don't like the design. But if had to choose i would certainly be the Swan and not the overhyped Audioengine. (imo)

One thing to keep in mind is that both the Swan and the Audioengine has their bassport on the back, so unless you have some space behind them you could get some problems.

As for monitors don't have volume control on the front, that's usually not a problem if you have DAC or preamp.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paullindqvist 

Swan is like the Audio Engine, one active speaker and one passive, personally i don't like the design. But if had to choose i would certainly be the Swan and not the overhyped Audioengine. (imo)

 

 

As for monitors don't have volume control on the front, that's usually not a problem if you have DAC or preamp.

The swans are both passive.  The amps are on the back of the sub and powers both speakers.    No external dac needed.   So for 300.00 they are hard to beat.   External DACs and preamps just add to the cost and push it over 300.00 

They better than the A5s.  

I was referring to the MK II as another poster mentioned them above... (yes i realize he first option was the M50w and not the MK II)

A external dac is never needed when hooking up a speakers to you computer, the reason people get them is to improve the SQ. 

Comparing a 2.1 system like M50w to bookshelf speakers like the one mentioned here is quite different in terms of soundstage. 

The KRK will have the most narrow sweet spot, but will also have the best stereo imaging.

As for the Swan M50w being the best pc speakers out there, well there are plenty of 2.1 system in that price range and the swans are in no way unique.

I tried many PC 2.1s

Klipsh

Corsair

Logitech

Altec

sound sticks

some others.

The swans sound like real speakers while the others are boomy toys in comparison.

On the external DAC need.   One of my buddies got some larger monitors with biamp separate power for like 400.00 pair.   But they did not have very deep bass.  So he gets a 200.00 sub woofer.

Then he gets tired of having to turn the volume on the speakers and then the sub.  He had no good way to control the volume of all three.

Then he buys a 150.00 external USB DAC to make it easier to control the volume.    He ran a splitter out of the dac, one to the sub one to the monitors.   Now he can finally do what my swans can do out of the box.

I pay 300.00

He pays - 400.00 + 200.00 + 150.00 = 750.00.

They sound good but they don't sound 450.00 better.    And he had to put alot more time into getting them the way he wanted.

So for simplicitry, hassel free set up I recommend the swam M50s. 

Im sure you have, and I'm sure you realize your not alone in have done so....

You would have to define "real speakers", without a definition of how you use the term it's as useless as it sounds.

The fact you claim the M50w to be head and shoulders above the competition tells me more about your references then anything else.

Just as the other 2.1 system the M50w struggles to reproduce the full range, in some areas they are slightly better then the competition and in some areas they are worse.

As i said the stereo imaging is not good on any of these 2.1 systems, try to get a defined center channel for vocals, it's not gonna happen.

Just like audioengine swan got some blind followers that claim they are the hottest thing since sliced bread, a easy way to spot them is people who makes claims they are the **** and the rest are just crap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAJOD 

On the external DAC need.   One of my buddies got some larger monitors with biamp separate power for like 400.00 pair.   But they did not have very deep bass.  So he gets a 200.00 sub woofer.

Then he gets tired of having to turn the volume on the speakers and then the sub.  He had no good way to control the volume of all three.

 

Then he buys a 150.00 external USB DAC to make it easier to control the volume.    He ran a splitter out of the dac, one to the sub one to the monitors.   Now he can finally do what my swans can do out of the box.

 

I pay 300.00

 

He pays - 400.00 + 200.00 + 150.00 = 750.00.

 

They sound good but they don't sound 450.00 better.    And he had to put alot more time into getting them the way he wanted.

 

So for simplicitry, hassel free set up I recommend the swam M50s. 

You "buddy" seems to have more money then brains.

Why on earth would he run a splitter from the DAC !?!? That alone tells us he doesn't know much...

What "larger monitors" did he get ? Just about any high quality 6,5"+ monitor will give you enough accurate bass reproduction for music, sure if your into boomy bass a sub will certainly help.

And if you trying to convince us the Swan M50w sub is class leading, don't as that would be a futile mission. 

There is no doubt there is cheaper/simpler setups for those who don't want to spend as much, im just not agreeing with you that the Swan M50w is the obvious choice simple as that.

Oh I know larger monitors have better stereo imaging than the M50s.   Once of the draw backs of having the sub fill in the mids.

I just did not have space for larger ones and the bass is better then 2.0s like MkII.  

He ran the spitter from the dac so when he used the DACs volume control both the speakers and the sub would increase in volume.   

For 300.00 I could not find anything better that had decent bass.   

The trouble with the other 2.1s I tested is they had no midrange, big hole in the music.   The swans fill that gap better but do sacrifice some imaging due to the sub producing some of the directional sounds.

Also I like having 1 on/off volume control vs reaching to the speakers to change the volume.   Did not want to get an external DAC for that as I already have a decent enough internal one, and I borrowed a usb external and the sound was about the same, so that saved me 150.00.

Speakers are all subjective anyway.   Some people love boomy bass, compressed sound etc.

The swans just sound full with much better midrange than the other 2.1s.   Most of them did not have enough midrange and the subs were sort of a 1 note boomy sub.

They not going to be as good as larger monitors but again for the size/space/price   not much out there better.  if there is one name it.