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 3

post #31 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by romeozdistress View Post

my only thing with the ants is the wattage seems kinda low. its like the same wattage im using now. i def would like to improve on sound volume if i can.

Amplifier power only tells you half the story and doesn't help a lot by itself. How loud speakers will get does depend on the amp, but it also depends on how sensitive the speakers are. For example, my Ascend CBM-170 SEs are rated 89db 1w/1 meter. That means with 1 watt of amplifier power, they will reach 89db when listening from 1m away. Compare those to the ARX A1b I mentioned, which are 86db 1w/1m. 3db difference.

Now that might not seem like much. But the thing is that it takes double the amplifier to produce 3db. So a 50 watt amp only produces 3db more than a 25 watt amp; the CBM-170 SEs will be as loud with a 25 watt amp as the ARX A1b will be with 50 watts of power.

M-Audio claims 101.5 dB @ 1 meter RMS for the AV40s; Adam F5 is rated ≥106 dB peak. Usually, RMS will have more power output at peak than what is specified. So you may not get much more volume out of the F5s than the AV40s, although most likely the F5s should have better drivers that would maintain their composure better at higher volumes. This all assuming the manufacturers have been honest, which is often not true. Specifications are often exaggerated by audio companies.
post #32 of 286

I always tell people its an AMPLIFIER not a WATTIFIER  :bigsmile_face:   

post #33 of 286
Thread Starter 

very tough decision, luckily i have like 3 weeks to decide which direction to go.  swan peeks my interest. ive heard they are very good. like the Swan m200mkIII. just another option to add i guess heh. i also like the idea of buying my first amp or reciever. seems like a fun idea. so many choices lol.

post #34 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by romeozdistress View Post
 

very tough decision, luckily i have like 3 weeks to decide which direction to go.  swan peeks my interest. ive heard they are very good. like the Swan m200mkIII. just another option to add i guess heh. i also like the idea of buying my first amp or reciever. seems like a fun idea. so many choices lol.

The Swann stuff I've heard was fantastic. But they get pricey

post #35 of 286

Some used Swans in a For Sale thread right now. Might be of interest here. 

post #36 of 286
Thread Starter 

These 8 inch monoprice studio monitors have peaked my interest at only $250 hmm... im gonna have to do some comparisons.

post #37 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by romeozdistress View Post
 

These 8 inch monoprice studio monitors have peaked my interest at only $250 hmm... im gonna have to do some comparisons.

 

Better to do go with a 5 or 6" in a 2-way design, although the ideal monitor IMO would be a 3-way with a 2" or 3" mid and a 5-7" midbass driver.

 

An 8" driver beams quite a bit (don't know what your seating distance is) and also has trouble resonating fast enough to meet up with a tweeter. There was a member on AVS with a Dynaudio Special 25 who spent over $3k on a DEQX active crossover with 300db/octave crossovers and still couldn't get the 8" woofer to perform in the mids as well as the 6" on a Dynaudio Confidence C1 (both speakers use the same tweeter).


Edited by astrallite - 1/22/14 at 8:26pm
post #38 of 286
post #39 of 286
Thread Starter 

thanks alot man. im all for saving money. very good read.

post #40 of 286

No problem! Was looking around for new monitors also. Currently have KRK RP5 G2 and want to get something better and the LSR305 seems to be that good!

 

Also, I accidentaly linked the 2nd page instead of the 1s of that impression thread.

post #41 of 286

Go with monitors partly for convinience and partly for there "revealing" nature. What kind of sound signature do you like? Also what type of music do you most listen to? That can swing your decision too. 

post #42 of 286
Thread Starter 

I listen to alot of different types all besides pop music. but id say metal is probably my all time favorite. i will be using these for listening to music. i dont need them to mix or anything.

post #43 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by kid vic View Post

Go with monitors partly for convinience and partly for there "revealing" nature. What kind of sound signature do you like? Also what type of music do you most listen to? That can swing your decision too. 

One speaker model being more revealing than the other is an indication of difference in speaker quality. Has nothing to do with passive vs active.
post #44 of 286

Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.

 

Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.

 

Active crossovers increase headroom because the bands are separated reducing the chance of distortion.

 

Active monitors have amps specially matched to the drivers. Better damping.

 

Active monitors can connect the bass driver mechanical motion in the amps feedback loop. Better high freq response, reduced ringing, reduces driver distortion. 

 

Passive crossovers waste energy as heat.

 

All else being equal active always beats passive. That's why it's almost impossible to buy high quality, new monitors that aren't active any more.

 

If you can afford it that's what you want. Active.

 

So yeah. kids right. Actives will be more 'revealing' because they are by nature more accurate, produce less distortion and play louder.

post #45 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonaldDumsfeld View Post
 

Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.

 

Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.

 

Active crossovers increase headroom because the bands are separated reducing the chance of distortion.

 

Active monitors have amps specially matched to the drivers. Better damping.

 

Active monitors can connect the bass driver mechanical motion in the amps feedback loop. Better high freq response, reduced ringing, reduces driver distortion. 

 

Passive crossovers waste energy as heat.

 

All else being equal active always beats passive. That's why it's almost impossible to buy high quality, new monitors that aren't active any more.

 

If you can afford it that's what you want. Active.

 

So yeah. kids right. Actives will be more 'revealing' because they are by nature more accurate, produce less distortion and play louder.

Not true.

 

Passive speakers can be bi-amped also. Passive speakers can have just as good of a crossover. Headroom is based on making sure the AMPS have enough power available. Passive speakers are typically used in a lot of mastering suites, where they need to most "revealing and accurate" speakers.

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?