or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › bookshelf speakers vs studio monitors?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

bookshelf speakers vs studio monitors? - Page 12

post #166 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by romeozdistress View Post
 

hmm what should i said the LF and HF db on? any ideas? dont know much about this.

They're for room adjustment

post #167 of 286
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraken2109 View Post
 

They're for room adjustment

can you explain?

post #168 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by romeozdistress View Post

can you explain?

Your room affects the frequency response of the speakers.

Unfortunately, unless you have measuring equipment to find out the frequency response of your speakers at the listening position, you can't really correct for that. So best thing to do is to use those adjustments to suit your personal listening tastes.
post #169 of 286

Some interesting reading here http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul00/articles/faqacoustic.htm but this is mainly for sudio/recording environment.  This http://homerecording.com/bbs/general-discussions/studio-building-acoustic-treatment/small-room-acoustics-365127/ may also be worth reading.

 

 

Unless you have a dedicated listening room/studio it may not be possible to deal with all acoustic issues, but a little understanding of the basic principles of sound reflection can help you make basic room adjustments to help your personal situation.  I really haven't got time to list a bunch of links, but there is loads of information out there.  A quick google on acoustic treatment is a good start, then look at sites such as homerecording.com and gearslutz and dig into recording/studio based forums.  There are simple and expensive solutions, and its well worth researching before spending $2k on upgrading your speakers.

 

If I get a chance I will try to post a few more links in the near future.


Edited by Tablix - 2/7/14 at 2:33pm
post #170 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post


Your room affects the frequency response of the speakers.

Unfortunately, unless you have measuring equipment to find out the frequency response of your speakers at the listening position, you can't really correct for that. So best thing to do is to use those adjustments to suit your personal listening tastes.

You can often guess from the room shape and where the speakers are. e.g. if the speakers are close to a wall bass is boosted so you want to cut it a bit.

post #171 of 286
I have the cerwin vega ls-5's. Only 100 dollars on eBay used. I am very happy with them, check them out
post #172 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonaldDumsfeld View Post
 

I'd like to explain the definition between active and passive systems in some detail because it is clear that not everyone posting in this thread understands the difference.

 

It has nothing to do with the location of the amplifiers. It is dependent on the type of crossover used. The part that divides up the input signal so that the high notes go to the little speakers and the low notes go to the big speakers.

 

In an active system the crossover comes before the amplifiers. Each size speaker has a separate amplifier. In a passive system there is an amplifier and the crossover then divides up the frequencies. A powered system is exactly the same as a passive system except the amplifier is stuffed into one of the boxes.

 

It should be clear that an active system presents many potential advantages, except maybe cost! In fact both pro and domestic manufacturers have always understood this. High end expensive (and powerful) systems have almost always been active for over 3 decades. Genelec didn't invent actives. They were just the first to realise that if they miniaturised everything they could fit it all into one box. (digital switching amps made this practical)  Hence the quality of actives with added convenience  and some cost saving. Really big and powerful high end systems are almost always active. It's just that the amplifiers and crossover units are not necessarily co-located in the same enclosure.

 

Apologies for the pedantry but it's important we all understand the terms we are using. Carry on...

 

There's a variety of good sounding scenarios for manufactured 'active' speakers, bi and tri-amped 'passive' speakers, and single amped passive speakers.  

 

For example, I've had the 'same' speakers in 3 different configurations:

 

  • Bi-amped with the 'Big' speakers fed by one solid state amp, and the 'Little' speakers (midrange and tweeter) fed by another solid state amp.  
  • Bi-amped again except adding a passive subwoofer (no built-in amp) with an electronic crossover and feeding it with one of the amps (bridged to mono) while letting the other amp feed the entire main speakers (woofer, midrange and tweeter).  
  • Tri-amped with the mids/highs fed by a tube amp, the woofers fed by a solid state, stereo amp, and the subwoofer fed by the monoblock SS amp.  

 

This last setup for these speakers yielded the best sound to me.  In the end you need to judge what suits your taste -- with your ears.  

 

It's been my experience that the listening room has a lot to do with how speakers sound.  In fact, I've had excellent high end speakers with very nice amps & preamps sound mediocre only to have the listening experience improve greatly when we changed the placement, added some 'sound treatments', or even changed rooms in our house.

 

We all hear things a little differently than the next guy.  Given that, I'd prefer the ability to change my amp(s) any day of the week for my speakers and my headphones.  I currently have tube and solid state amps; they each pair better with some cans than others.  One need not go any farther than the whole tube vs solid state debate within Head-Fi to understand that.  

post #173 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post

The fact that he claims B&W is neutral is suspect in itself as B&W is the Poster Child for "British Sound" and tipped up bass and treble, in fact a cursory glance through Stereophile and Soundstage measurements shows this to be empirically true.

Also the reason why individuals might find one speaker fatiguing vary due to individual differences in hearing, and age. Younger people are more likely to cite higher frequency cone breakup modes as hearing fatigue due a wider hearing spectrum, older people are more likely to cite a tipped up midrange.

A speaker can actually sound bright without being fatiguing. Fatiguing sound can actually be the result of poor amplification or source material.

1.Not fully representing the harmonics of the instrument. This is most noticeable on instruments with very high harmonic content such as piano & cymbals

2.being able to hear something is there In The background but sound murky or clouded. I hear this type thing a lot on even some upper level equipment & recordings. Yes some re cording are poorly done using cheap components & techniques.

3. Excess bass can also cause fatigue.
post #174 of 286

Hey guys, quick question....

I have the emotiva mini-x for my he-500, but now i want a pair of bookshelf speakers. Anyone know any good passive speakers for near-field listening but some occasional nice room-filling sound? I want something around $200-$300 but if you guys really think that it's not worth buying at this price point and that I should save up and wait (would be a long time...) then so be it. Any opinons, or suggestions? Thanks guys.

 

I've looked at the Celestion 5 (vintage, recommended by Modulor), Klipsch RB series

and I've also looked at active speakers (but i feel like its a waste since i already have the mini-x) like the JBL earlier posted and the Airmotiv 4 and 5


Edited by Nimzerz - 2/7/14 at 10:00pm
post #175 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post

Hey guys, quick question....
I have the emotiva mini-x for my he-500, but now i want a pair of bookshelf speakers.

ARX and Ascend Acoustics are as well known in home audio for their speakers as Emotiva is for their electronics. Check out the Arx A1b and Ascend CBM-170 SE. Either will work quite well for nearfield usage.

It would be best to experience the Klipsch RB series before going with them. Many people find them fatiguing for HT usage, much less in a nearfield situation.
post #176 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post


ARX and Ascend Acoustics are as well known in home audio for their speakers as Emotiva is for their electronics. Check out the Arx A1b and Ascend CBM-170 SE. Either will work quite well for nearfield usage.

It would be best to experience the Klipsch RB series before going with them. Many people find them fatiguing for HT usage, much less in a nearfield situation.


I've seen the CBM recommended so often, are they that good? Also the Arx planar tweeter...that's caught my attention! How well are the JBL compared to these kinds of speakers, they've gotten some crazy reviews...

 

Also, of those two you recommended, what's the main pros/cons between their differences?

 

Which one of these require distance behind the speaker? I currently have about 2-3ft but depending on if I move my gear to my room or not it might be against the wall. Then again, if the SQ is worth the need to adjust speaker placement then I'd take SQ over convenience tbh..

 

Edit: I did find this review: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1512562/arx-a1b-vs-ascend-acoustics-cbm-170-se-vs-wharfedale-diamond-10-1-update-1-30-14

From this review it seems the Arx A1b is better


Edited by Nimzerz - 2/7/14 at 11:09pm
post #177 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post

I've seen the CBM recommended so often, are they that good? Also the Arx planar tweeter...that's caught my attention! How well are the JBL compared to these kinds of speakers, they've gotten some crazy reviews...Also, of those two you recommended, what's the main pros/cons between their differences?

You can look through these two threads over at AVS:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/629769/ascend-se-owners-thread
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1429229/the-official-arx-owners-thread-a1-a1b-a2-a2b-a3-a5-etc

They are both fairly neutral speakers that are repeatedly found to be more similar than different. I think the differences between them will come down to personal listening tastes and your room acoustics/placement more than anything you could determine by reading on the Internet. It would be like trying to decide between two different apples that come equally recommended when you've never tasted an apple before. The primary differences that do seem to stand out are that the A1bs tend to extend just a little deeper, but the Ascends have a little better sensitivity. As for the tweeters, know that the Ascend tweeter is a better model of Seas tweeter than is used in the NHT Classic Threes (Seas tweeters are well recognized in home audio circles). So don't get too caught up in the planar magnetic tweeter hype; both have equal quality tweeters and implementation.

I haven't demoed the JBL's yet. But I haven't heard any other powered monitors in the <$600 range that stand out as definitively better than those two.
post #178 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post


You can look through these two threads over at AVS:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/629769/ascend-se-owners-thread
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1429229/the-official-arx-owners-thread-a1-a1b-a2-a2b-a3-a5-etc

They are both fairly neutral speakers that are repeatedly found to be more similar than different. I think the differences between them will come down to personal listening tastes and your room acoustics/placement more than anything you could determine by reading on the Internet. It would be like trying to decide between two different apples that come equally recommended when you've never tasted an apple before. The primary differences that do seem to stand out are that the A1bs tend to extend just a little deeper, but the Ascends have a little better sensitivity. As for the tweeters, know that the Ascend tweeter is a better model of Seas tweeter than is used in the NHT Classic Threes (Seas tweeters are well recognized in home audio circles). So don't get too caught up in the planar magnetic tweeter hype; both have equal quality tweeters and implementation.

I haven't demoed the JBL's yet. But I haven't heard any other powered monitors in the <$600 range that stand out as definitively better than those two.


Sensitivity is unimportant to me as long as they can get decently loud with the Mini-x, and I'm pretty sure the A1b would be able to, right? I'd probably choose the A1b as it sounds a lot like the he-500 vs he-6 debate, warmer more intimate sound vs more detailed and analytical sound. I'm more toward enjoying relaxed music without too much treble and the A1b seems to have GREAT reviews as well. Thank you so much for the recommendations. It'll probably be a long time till I decide and actually buy a pair of speakers, but these will probably remain at the top of my list.

post #179 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimzerz View Post
 


Sensitivity is unimportant to me as long as they can get decently loud with the Mini-x, and I'm pretty sure the A1b would be able to, right? I'd probably choose the A1b as it sounds a lot like the he-500 vs he-6 debate, warmer more intimate sound vs more detailed and analytical sound. I'm more toward enjoying relaxed music without too much treble and the A1b seems to have GREAT reviews as well. Thank you so much for the recommendations. It'll probably be a long time till I decide and actually buy a pair of speakers, but these will probably remain at the top of my list.

Uuummmmm........Sensitivity is extremely important to you. It will determine the dB output of the speaker when combined with the amp.

post #180 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by adupree View Post
 

Uuummmmm........Sensitivity is extremely important to you. It will determine the dB output of the speaker when combined with the amp.


Hence why I said "as long as it can reach decent SPL with the Emotiva"

Plus, I just read someone was using the Emotiva with the arx a1b speakers so I'm sure it'll work out well


Edited by Nimzerz - 2/8/14 at 12:04am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › bookshelf speakers vs studio monitors?