Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Swan M50W vs KRK RP5 vs Audioengine A5s
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Swan M50W vs KRK RP5 vs Audioengine A5s - Page 2

Poll Results: Swan M50W vs KRK RP5 vs Audioengine A5s

 
  • 51% (18)
    Swan M50w
  • 20% (7)
    KRK RP5
  • 28% (10)
    Audioengine A5
35 Total Votes  
post #16 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by RAJOD View Post

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.

So why not connect the DAC->SUB->Monitors ?! 

 

What kind of 200$ Subwoofer did he get ? 

 

The trouble is the same with the Swan M50w, you claim in another thread that the MX5021 has better midrange..

 

About a month ago my 6-year old MX5021's died so i know quite well how they perform.

 

The MX5021 being heavily colored, with overpowering sub that chokes way to fast and highs that are processed to the point they sounds harsh and fake, i agree what the MX5021 does best is in the midrange. 

 

The Corsair easily rivals the Swan M50w, i think the difference between will be due to personal preferences. The sub easily surpass the M50w, while the Swan's Satellites has slightly better midrange, and the Corsair has cleaner highs and overall more reference like then the Swan. 

 

Having had the Sp2500 for two weeks before returning them, i can say they outperform the MX5021 in just about every aspect except slighty less defined midrange. (due to the MX5021 dual 3" elements)


Edited by paullindqvist - 9/3/12 at 12:24pm
post #17 of 30

As for DAC the M50w is the bottleneck as is just about any of the other 2.1 systems we mentioned. To take advantage of good 200$ DAC you simply need speakers that can reveal the difference.

post #18 of 30

The 5021s are more colored and fatiguing.  After doing side by sides on FLACs  they do not sound better than the M50s.    But they do have decent midrange but are less accurate than the M50s.

 

The sub is not as accurate either.  But they were not 300.00 either.     They don't have the quality of the swans speakers or amp.

 

Going from a internal DAC to speakers/sub leaves the only way to control sound via windows software which is not quit the same as external knob.   

 

Sorry the corsairs bass is just a boom box, not in same class in terms of accuracy.  It is louder, so for that its better.
 

post #19 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by RAJOD View Post

The 5021s are more colored and fatiguing.  After doing side by sides on FLACs  they do not sound better than the M50s.    But they do have decent midrange but are less accurate than the M50s.

 

The sub is not as accurate either.  But they were not 300.00 either.     They don't have the quality of the swans speakers or amp.

 

Going from a internal DAC to speakers/sub leaves the only way to control sound via windows software which is not quit the same as external knob.   

 

 

Sorry the corsairs bass is just a boom box, not in same class in terms of accuracy.  It is louder, so for that its better.
 

 

It's quite amusing reading your older post about the MX5021 compared to this.. your not very consistent in your arguments thats for sure!

 

Not sure why you felt the need to make the statement of using a internal sound card, i think it's quite clear to everyone.

 

You and your friend however seems to have a hard time connecting a SUB and monitors to an external DAC....

 

As for YOUR opinion the SUB, no need to be sorry. Not that im surprised from a guy who claim the Swans M50w to be "accurate".

 

In the end you opening statement that the competition is toys in comparison to the Swan M50w is just not true, not for anyone with two ears and a objective mind at least.

post #20 of 30

I think my older post on M5021s was the first day I had the swans and they do have louder midrange.    Louder is not better.   Since then I have had more time to compare.   For the money the m5021s are one of the better 2.1s which is not longer made.   The amp for them is not very good.  

 

Toy speakers - Logitechs, newer altecs etc.   I'm talking 2.1s not 2.0 monitors.  The cabinets on the swans are wood, and are very solid.  Not all plastic like most.  

 

I don't use a external dac no need.   

 

Without an exteranal DAC how would you control the volume of a sub that was purchased to work with 2.0 speakers?  

Can run a splitter out the internal dac but then would have to control it via windows. 

 

More accurate than the m5021s and other 2.1s.   All the better speakers are much larger and take up too much desktop space.  

 

Don't know why you are a m50 hater.   Even the votes show them ahead of the poll here.

 

The reason I mentioned interal DAC because that is a hidden cost when purchasing PC speakers.    Some internal sound cards are quite expensive and are not able to control the volume on a 2.1 setup except via windows volume,  these people then have to spend money on USB Dac.   User might end up getting external USB DAC to make controlling volume of sub + Speakers easier.  

 

If I did not get the swans I probably would have purchased larger monitors with an External USB DAC + splitter + Sub.    Little monitors might be accurate but they are missing that low bass that I like for watching movies and also some types of music.    

 

The swans bass is not super deep but it does blend well with the small speakers, does not have a huge hole in the music like Klipsh 2.1s for example.


Edited by RAJOD - 9/5/12 at 12:27pm
post #21 of 30

Hate to semi necro a thread here but I am in a similar boat. I just purchased the Mackie MR5 MK2s for home entertainment (gaming, movies and music) in that order. I love them and they sound great but wish there was a tad more bass for immersion. On the other hand I love the bass because it is accurate as opposed to overly present but that is the same reason I am debating another system--the Swan M50Ws. 

 

I am going to purchase a sound card but what do you think? Should I return these and get the Swan M50Ws given what I want them for?

 

I am exactly like the post above me is talking about. I was about to make sure I purchased an external sound card so I can control the volume of the speakers. I love that the Swans have that control unit attached. However, the external inputs are nice on a seperate DAC. 


Edited by Crooked - 3/16/13 at 6:08pm
post #22 of 30
I much prefer the m50ws over the irk rp6s. though the krks were more accurate and detailed, they were beyond inconvenient. the smaller size of the swans, the sub that doubles as an Ottoman, the RAD control knob that doubles as a mute switch...just a great package overall.
post #23 of 30

I don't know why people are arguing about comparing the M50w, a 2.1 "multimedia" speakers to actual monitors?

 

They're for different usage.

The M50w is a better all rounder, it does well in gaming, it does equally as well in movies. It isn't going to be better than the KRK or the A5s in music, period. Why even argue about the M50w being as good in music? It just isn't.

 

With that being said, I'm in no way saying the actual monitors are bad for gaming or movies either. But are they as well versed as the M50w in this regard? No.

post #24 of 30
Because they're the same pricepoint. Because a lot of us have a love for good sound, but may be limited in space. Because some of us can't decide between quality or convenience.

Personally, I have 3 LCD monitors and plan in adding another soon. The KRKs would severely impact desk space in my situation. So even though I prefer their sound in music, games, and videos...their size simply shelves them.
post #25 of 30

Where can you find Swan speakers nowadays? They seem out of stock on every website.

post #26 of 30

PC Case Gear has some in stock. 

post #27 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crooked View Post

PC Case Gear has some in stock. 


Also in Australia! (I'm not in Australia frown.gif )

post #28 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by area5x1 View Post


Also in Australia! (I'm not in Australia frown.gif )

I've emailed The Audio Insider about this earlier today and will let you know when I get a reply.

post #29 of 30
Even though swans are a bit hard to find, they are still top notch products with great fit and finish. I love my m200mkiii's but if your looking for more bass, get the m50w. Just a note, the audio insider has expensive shipping. The original price of 430 on the m200mkiii's was up to 495 with shipping.
post #30 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byrnie View Post

I've emailed The Audio Insider about this earlier today and will let you know when I get a reply.

He said:

 

"Thank you for your interest.  In 2012 Swan had a variety of issues with distribution, North American pricing, and in some models, product reliability.  Out of stock Swan models are still pending Swan's resolution of these and other issues."

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Swan M50W vs KRK RP5 vs Audioengine A5s