[Xeo]

I'm looking for the best sounding 2.1 or 2.0 setup I can buy for $150 or less. I want to create music in cubase and I'm looking for the best quality I can get for my tiny budget. back-and-forth, yay and nay. I went looking through these boards for hours last night looking for info on what kind/brand of speakers should get. When I first started search for information, I sure I was going to buy a set of computer speakers, but then I come to this forum and find a whole lot of hate towards them. Many members said "buy a pair monitors" or bookshelf speakers or something like that. My questions are are the following...

1. If you have a 2.0 setup, and there's no subwoofer (right?), how do you get the big deep bass?

2. I'm having a hard time believing that most of the "high end" computer speaker setups sound like "crap", even compared to a home theater setup 10,000 dollar setup. How much of a difference in quality am I going to have between the best set of 2.1 computer speakers, and the lowest quality ($150 or under) set of studio monitors, and which would be a better choice?

 

[ooheadsoo]

1. You won't

If you've got your mind stuck on "big deep bass," that's not what cheap 2.0 setups are good at. What you will get is better imaging, soundstage, and midrange. At the expense of "big deep bass." You'll have to decide what's more important to you.

2. You'll get bigger bass, but I've never heard computer speakers that could image worth beans. Maybe the monsoon ribbon panels could, but then you wouldn't get that big deep bass you want. Midrange is also a tossup on computer speakers. Keep in mind that not all monitors/bookshelves do good imaging/midrange/stuff like that either, especially for the price you're naming, but I've never heard a computer speaker be anything more than below average in those areas.

 

[Xeo]

dangit, it's all equally important to me

. The deepest bass (being pronounced, not LOUD and overbearing) is just as vital to the music I make as the mids and the highest highs.

What do you suggest I do? If good sound is really impossible for my price range, would you plrease recommend the cheapest "good" option possible, even if it's above my budget.

All this time, I've been using a 4.1 set of Altec Lansing ATP5's. I've had them for years now and I all this time I've thought they sound absolutely fantastic. I must really be missing out on great sound if these old computer speakers are as poor as everyone says they are.

 

[JeffL]

Quote:

1. You won't If you've got your mind stuck on "big deep bass," that's not what cheap 2.0 setups are good at. What you will get is better imaging, soundstage, and midrange. At the expense of "big deep bass." You'll have to decide what's more important to you.

I *completely* disagree with that statement, almost with a passion.

The subwoofer is absolutely not necessary with proper full range speakers. Mind you, you still have a woofer driver, and the cabinet is larger to provide the deep/tight bass that you'll want, but you do not have to have a subwoofer. You will be more than satisfied with a good set of 2.0 speakers, provided you look for speakers that are designed to extend the frequency response. This means a large cabinet, and relatively large drivers, but I am not talking huge here, either.

Quote:

How much of a difference in quality am I going to have between the best set of 2.1 computer speakers, and the lowest quality ($150 or under) set of studio monitors, and which would be a better choice?

Alot. And this goes right back to the above issue that I was just describing!!

Put simply, most 2.1 systems, especially cheap ones, should NOT have subwoofers in the first place. Reason being, in order to cut costs, and appeal to consumer image, the drivers used in the satellites are much smaller than they should be, the enclosure is cheap plastic (highly resonant!), and the amplification and crossover circuitry is absolutely horrible.

What happens then, is that the larger subwoofer driver is forced to reproduce the frequencies that the satellites are uncapable of. Even the Monsoon Planarmedia 14 speakers, which aren't bad speakers, have one fatal flaw: The crossover is set EXTREMELY high: 200hz.

In order to achieve decent imaging, the frequency response needs to be relatively smooth, without severe coloration. Placement of the speakers is also an issue. Stereo localization is highly dependent upon midrange, to include bass, down to roughly 80hz and below. What happens is called bass localization, where you are able to "hear" where the subwoofer sits. The high crossover also forces all frequencies sent to the subwoofer to be condensed into mono, thus causing loss of stereo information further, and again, to keep size down, most 2.1 systems don't use very large subwoofer drivers. Some even use drivers as small as 4". COmbined with inadequate enclosure size, and you'll never get deep bass from these so called "subwoofers" to begin with.

That aside, one thing to look out for when buying a speaker is design, cabinet build, and cabinet size. Good solid cabinets will help produce low, deep, tight bass. The goal of a subwoofer is to augment a good, full-range speaker from 20-60hz or so, because that is a very difficult range of sound to reproduce cleanly, and without distortion. A subwoofer alone can easily be just as, or more complex in design than their speaker counterparts (the cabinet that is), and cost just as much.

Also, searching for "studio monitors" might be a bit vague, and may also be redundant. Some speakers are referred to as studio monitors just as an advertising gimmick, and doesn't necessarily mean they will be of decent quality, either.

I would recommend you get a decent set of Floorstanding speakers, if you can, and possibly increase your budget. I would look for at least dual 6" drivers at the least, a single 8", or dual 8" drivers.

BTW, if your curious, here is what I have for speakers (excuse the price

): http://store.yahoo.com/discountsonline/adas22sp.html - These are the best speakers for the price I have ever found. Deep solid bass to 35 hz, no joke. Excellent dynamics and imaging. They aren't terribly forward, and are a bit bright though, but sound great out of my Marantz 2230B.

 

[ooheadsoo]

I think the area where they are probably most clearly lacking is imaging. I've never heard a computer speaker with a solid center image. When you listen to crap like diana krall or norah jones, do their voices come in distinctly from between the speakers? There's also some issues of detail and clarity, stuff like that. The difference between these speakers and really good stuff is really only dramatic if you care about it. For most people, since they've never been exposed to good sound, they simply don't know and don't care.

In my opinion, the bass has got to go. First of all, I have no doubt your room is not treated for bass, which means you're not hearing anything close to flat bass in the first place. Second, I think bass is the easiest thing to judge without hearing. Granted I have like no experience in mixing and creating stuff, but you can hear the upper harmonics and guess what the bass sounds like. You can always add a sub later but you can't upgrade your speakers without throwing something out (potential waste of money.) I can see you listening to cds you know well to get a sense of what well recorded/mixed bass sounds like on your speakers and aim to recreate that sound on your speakers, but midrange? I think it's a lot harder to judge. Too much critical musical information in that area. Bass is pretty simple, IMO.

Now that I've written all this crap, please take it with a grain of salt. I probably know nothing about what I'm talking about

As for actual speaker choice, that's really tough. Even $200 is a real stretch for decent gear. Options keep popping into my head that are more expensive than your budget by a couple hundred dollars, so I'll leave the real suggestions to the other head-fiers

 

[ooheadsoo]

1. *Ahem* His budget is $130. If he had $500 and wanted to do it all in 1 shot, I'd probably recommend some vintage JBL 12" 3 way monitor floorstanders. He still needs an amp/preamp with this $130.


2. "What happens then, is that the larger subwoofer driver is forced to reproduce the frequencies that the satellites are uncapable of. Even the Monsoon Planarmedia 14 speakers, which aren't bad speakers, have one fatal flaw: The crossover is set EXTREMELY high: 200hz.

In order to achieve decent imaging, the frequency response needs to be relatively smooth, without severe coloration. Placement of the speakers is also an issue. Stereo localization is highly dependent upon midrange, to include bass, down to roughly 80hz and below. What happens is called bass localization, where you are able to "hear" where the subwoofer sits. The high crossover also forces all frequencies sent to the subwoofer to be condensed into mono, thus causing loss of stereo information further."

In my experience, the sub playing up to 200hz isn't as big an issue as most people would like to make it out. In real music, I find myself hard pressed to tell the difference between my speakers crossed at 200hz vs 80hz. It's there, but only on material that highlight that range. 80hz was what thx decided to make their standard. It's actually different for different people. IMO, the lower the better, but you better have some serious money if you want a sub that crosses at 40hz or under and actually plays below that. Anyway, I'm not out to prove anything here.

 

[Xeo]

Well, so far it looks like I'm going to except my fate and buy what I can afford. I'll probably buy the "best" computer speakers I can (the most balanced) and look into buying new stuff in the future. Although, buying a $5oo set of speakers wont really break my bank....because I've got no bank to break,