/agt/ Audio General Thread

>>56336220
>Creative t12
>Edifier R1280T
>Edifier 1700BT
>M-Audio BX5 D2
>JBL LSR305 (/g/ favorite)/BX5 carbon

>>56336232
Hisssss

>>56336232
>Edifier 1700BT
r1600TIII are the same speakers except wired and cheaper. Why would you even want BT 2.0 speakers? I can understand 5.1 which are difficult to setup but for 2.0 speakers I don't see a point.
Other than that I can second Edifiers, amazing bang for buck, but only worth it in certain EU countries due to accessibility.

File: Swans-F10-F2.2A-2.8A-1040x698.jpg (116KB, 1040x698px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1040x698px

For the lower end of the money spectrum, I suggest people try powered Swan/HiVi speakers. They were my first foray into 'proper' audio, and for the price, they really can't be beat. I don't know about other markets but at least in Australia, they found a nice gap between Logitech-level stuff and say, AudioEngine speakers, and they filled that gap very nicely. Their offerings in this gap give AudioEngine a real run for their money, which isn't too hard to believe given that they were primarily makers of proper hifi, that decided to enter the desktop audio scene.

I had a pair of Swan D1080MKII 08, and while they've now been superseded by the D1080-IV, they blew my Logitech X530's out of the bloody water. They showed me what 'clarity' meant, in a way that Logitechs never will. And while the clarity that was to be found in those D1080MKII 08's can be considered fairly unremarkable as you climb up the hifi ladder (and there's a ways to go), it was really night and day. An excellent segue into what you're missing out on.

Picture of higher tier Swan/HiVi speakers

>>56336220
I'm planning to purchase that subwoofer to complement my Magnat Vector 207.

Currently using the subwoofer of my previous Teufel system, works sufficiently for now. I'm basically wanting to upgrade it because the sb1000 is black and the Teufel is grey.

>>56337124
Thanks dude

File: 20160830_122549_6.webm (2MB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 800x480px

VU meters.

Which one works better for you guys, needle or LEDs?

I'm looking for a relatively small amp that has rca out so I can connect it to a sub, price range of ~200, does such a thing exist?

Alternatively I can run the speakers through the subs high input, I know I would have to manually adjust the sub this way but would I see any degrade in quality from the speakers in this instance?

Alternatively if there exists a good dac and amp combo that also has a decent headphone amp and sub connection I could spring for that in the $300 range

File: DSC_3474.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>56338823
LEDs are more accurate but needles look classier

File: tumblr_o4a7sq1esU1u8vfxyo1_500.jpg (36KB, 500x289px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x289px

recommend me studio monitor €500 max a pair, can be second hand as well

was thinking of one of the following

adam f7
yamaha hs7
focal alpha 65
or tannoy reveal 8

How much can an entry level vinyl setup go for?

>>56338823
>>56338990
As someone who understand nothing about music or digital sound, why do VU meters start at negative decibels and why does it start clipping at 0? Why not start at 0?

>>56338974
>but would I see any degrade in quality from the speakers in this instance?
Yes, you could. For every link in your audio chain that the signal passes it gets dirtied up. You'd need a real good subwoofer to make sure it doesn't add noise and shit like that.

But personally I always use the high level connections as that's the only way I can hook up a sub to my amp

But yeah there are amps with RCA out. Yamaha A-S500 is the one that comes to mind but it's costly. One other thing you can do is if you have an amp that has separable pre-amp and power amp sections, then just run the rca to the sub and back to the amp.

File: 13111154649l.jpg (138KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x768px

>>56337124
>D1080MKII 08
>D1080-IV

Can't find these anywhere. Anyway, I was planning on getting these mostly because they are front ported so I don't have to worry about walls. (don't have a lot of space)

Good choice?

>>56339136
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0063NU3AA/ref=aw_wl_ov_dp_1_4?colid=1ZS4RH4AGZF7U&coliid=I3RV1SQT5OFKG9

Looking at this sub, the sub will make a bigger difference in the speaker quality than the amp will? I'm assuming a more powerful amp won't make a difference then.

I WAS looking at an smsl amp but I was told smsl quality is a little spotty, they are also cheaper however and I could always upgrade down the line.

I assume speaker and sub quality will make a more noticeable difference than the amp though

File: 20160830_170321_2.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>56338990
I wish I had those LEDs built in like you have.
Even if I prefer needles.

>>56339097
Because if you weren't limiting the gain then your amplifier would run at full power all the time, that's how decibels work.
My amp has just a scale from 0 to 10, though.

If that dude with the dragonfly red is here please let me know if it's worth the money over the black. Reviews are super positive but I'm still sceptical.

>>56339097
Because the meter shows you how many dB _beneath_ clip you are.

>>56339097
Bel is a logarithmic unit, i.e. 0 dB: 10^0 = 1, -10dB: 10^-1 = 0.1, -20dB: 10^-2 = 0.01.
the value denotes the power ratio to a base value, 1, or 0dB, being the maximum output in this case. when talking about amplifiers, you might see something like 5dB amplification, that would mean that the output power is 10^0.5 = 3.16 times the input power.

File: mytannoy.jpg (31KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 800x800px

>>56339172
I have these tannoy (bar the sub is black too not grey/white) The sound from them is just superb

How would one go about using 1 android as music source hooked up to my stereo and using android 2 as a remote? No spotify bullshit please.

>>56339870
Use some kind of UPnP software.
BubbleUPnP for android1 (music source) and other upnp remote control app as the android2. I use "AllConnect" app for that.

Does anyone know of any decent network audio players that don't cost an arm and a leg?

>>56340076
You can make one from any old laptop, raspberry pi or whatever. You can install some lightweight linux, then mpd and upmpdcli and just play stuff from your PC or phone.

>People actually use "computer speakers"
>people with Logitech speakers acting like high end audiophile memers
Fuck, I actually use music for a living, and half this thread looks worse than fucking /mu/

>>56340138
>I actually use music for a living
what do you mean by this anon?

Got 2 options
Fluance SX6 and a SMSL Q5 amp

or

JBL 305?

>>56340602
JBL 308

What is a good way to make a reliable power supply for a 12v car audio setup in my house? You get so much more power out of car amps than you do with home equipment.

>>56339048
Read here https://m.amazona.de/vergleichstest-studiomonitore-2/7/

>>56341553
errr... regular computer ATX power supply, by any chance? Why do you people not think of this?

What exactly makes a DAC good?

>>56341999
exact Digital-to-analog chip used in said DAC.
Also bit depth, sampling rate and overall quality of the whole unit.

What type of setup would be needed to be able to use speakers for both my PC and a TT?

>>56341999
Transparency

>>56340138
I've worked in music for over a decade and have been making music for more than double that time, everyone has to start somewhere, there's no need to be an obnoxious child.

>>56339294
Hi. I did a listening session with both of them. The red has far greater dynamics at lower volumes and more clarity in the low end. Definitely worth the upgrade in my opinion but the black isn't exactly a bad choice, it's amazing for the price.

>>56337124
No way in hell 9 tweeters and 3 woofers on each side will do any good for wave interference. It'll sound different with every inch you move.

>>56342286
Some sort of amplifier that can accept multiple inputs, or some sort of switcher.

>>56342923
If you're referring to the the tallest speakers, 8 soft dome and 8 planar magnetic tweeters (16 total), one midrange, and two woofers each.
Wave interference exists anyway with multiple drivers and path length differences, crossover filters or not. I presume the idea was a sort of line array or something like that, but most consumer oriented implementations are more crude than what you might see in PA.

File: bekindplis.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>56336220
College apartment tier.
Lsr308

ideal budget for a 5.1 setup? as cheap as possible without going ghetto or buying used.

just looking or a target is all.

>>56343497
Just curious, aren't they too close to the walls, especially the left one? They're back ported monitors.

>>56343510
>ideal budget for a 5.1 setup?
You forget about it and get a pair of decent monitors. Afterwards, when you've saved enough money again, you buy the same pair again and use them as a 4.0 system.

I have a pair of HD598's that I'm listening to through a Blue Yeti microphone. Is there any reason for me to use 320kbps instead of 96 with this setup?

>>56343519
Yeah you are 100% correct but there are not many other options for placement right now. Getting stands soon.

>>56343581
Your post tells me you should learn about codecs first as you question barely makes sense.

File: 51JGYWW4N4L._SX300_.jpg (14KB, 300x237px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x237px

Hey guys, so I have a polk audio psw10 subwoofer for my hometheater. It's pretty decent but not as powerful as I would like. What's a decent upgrade that won't cost me more than $300?

>>56343616
Is it really the power you are after?

>>56339849
Model?

>>56343616
Power and quality. I like nice and tight lows when at low volumes, but when I crank it up I would prefer home-shaking bass which this subwoofer doesn't really provide for me. It's too muddy at low volumes than I would like.

File: FB_IMG_1472505309592.jpg (42KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x374px

>>56340138
OP here.
This thread is also for beginners. The purpose of making suggestions for the low end range is to make people enter this world and not buying the first shit they find on amazon, so instead of being a bitch, if you make this for a living, i'm sure you can give people precious suggestions.
>Pic related

>>56343616
Buy a second one. Same model.

>>56343678
meant for >>56343630
sorry

>>56343532
>>56343510
Quadraphonic is icky. Better to order the single monitor first after the pair so you get a real center.

>>56343678
That's a little ambiguous. Either you want more SPL, flatter response, or deeper bass. Probably all of the above. Larger subwoofer unit(s) would be the way to start.
EQ works well for bass equalization/flattening, less so for equalizing higher frequency effect from the room.

>>56343712
it would be useful to know what exactly is the issue and search a proper way to fix it before jumping into new purchase blind. I'm almost certain the issue you have has to do with frequency response and room acoustics. This is eased with an array of subwoofers as well as with EQ. A new sub in the same room might not do anything good.

Now if you truly need more power, better LF extension or features, maybe it is time for a new sub.

File: tannoy-reveal-802.jpg (371KB, 1920x1920px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1920x1920px

>>56343590
That's exactly why I want to buy a pair of Reveal 802 instead. They're front ported so the walls become less of an issue

>>56343698
>Use your internet powers only for good
Then go to fucking Reddit and get yourself upboated

Is there a thing such as a good soundbar?

>>56343887
End your life frustrated faggot

File: updated setup.jpg (166KB, 1400x932px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1400x932px

being an audiophile is great my powerboard cost more then most setups in this thread

>>56345582
im not a photographer thou

>>56345582
>dat sub

Now I'm jelly

>>56345582
You'd think with that much money you'd at least have space for all this shit

Got a 150 usd for a pair of bookshelf speakers and 100 usd for the amp, need optical out and usb

>>56337124
>implying Audioengine is on a tier above Swans
It's the exact same crap, but good for you for not wasting money on Audioengine

>>56345582
nice placebo

>>56345582
Hey what happened to my thread from this morning where you posted that? Fucking jannies didn't even give me a warning or explain what rule I had broken, it just disappeared.
>>56343616
Something used, or a build-it-yourself if you have power tools and space. If you really want power make a tapped horn with a large driver. Most of the designs out there are for little stuff (6-8") but some people have made big ones with 18" drivers, you'll bring the house down with that.

>>56345582
>that speaker placement
>audiophile

>>56345878
You REALLY wonder why that garbage thread got deleted? You should've been banned as well, preferably perma-range banned.

File: monoprice.jpg (23KB, 500x408px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x408px

>>56345939
Wow, you're mad

Thoughts on the Fluance SX6?

>>56346282
Disgusting. Get a pair of used speakers from a real brand, my local craigs had a pair of B&Ws for $100 last week, you can find stuff like that if you aren't afraid of interacting with people.

Plug them into one of those chinkshit class D amps, or a used receiver, and you'll have a setup that shits all over that garbage.

>>56345669
focal sw 1000 got it for 1200 my old sub broke and they had that one on the floor because it was repared by warrenty it usally goes for 4000 in aus where i live
>>56345779
the sub placement annoys me and it takes up to much desk space but there is no ware else in my house it would fit and there it fills the room nicely

>>56345900
its the best placment i can do given my situtation best listening position is on the couch that is on the rear wall which isnt pictured

>>56346324
Thanks m8, I´m in Mootxico so no craiglist here, only amazon , any speakers u recommend? I have 150 usd

File: vincent_inside.jpg (58KB, 640x618px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 640x618px

>>56345878
not sure what happend but /g/ isnt the place for audiophile discussion because everyone who is poor is to jellious of rich people and will just claim whithout testing that anything audiophile is placebo
eg >>56345876

>>56346440
I haven't got the slightest idea what they sell in Mexico or what the bargains are. These things are highly country-specific. My suggestion would work if you live in a decently populated part of North America, but I imagine Mexico is different. Although I am sure there are lots of placebophiles selling used gear in the DF, that gay hit man from Traffic said he was into B&W so maybe look for used B&Ws?
>>56346454
Yeah, it's funny. $500 headphones are totally not placebo, but the equivalent tier in speakers causes instant NEET outrage.

Will using a dac make a noticeable difference on a pc? My mobo is a cheap one to begin with so I assume the onboard sound sucks. Would it be noticeable? Also is it better to run the dac from USB or an optical cable?

>>56346431
Wait how far away are you from the speakers? It looks like a good nearfield position but if you're far away then it's not very good.
>>56346454
By ''testing'' you mean sighted listening, not blind tests, right? Your speakers and subwoofer are both really nice, but in my opinion the amplification and cd player or whatever that is are over kill.

But if it sounds good to you then all the power to you.

so I just bought a $150 amp/preamp to avoid having to switch cables around when I want to use my desktop speakers instead of my headphones
how /g/ am I

>>56346505
You'll hear a lot of people say unconditionally no

In my opinion, if you hear noise or the analog out is really really poorly designed, a cheap outboard DAC like the uca202 might make sense

USB and optical makes no difference in normal use (i.e. you are not in a studio or some shit). Just use whatever's available, convenient, and cheap

>>56346496
Didnt find any used or new from B&W
So far I have found these on Amazon
Paradigm Shift A2
ELAC Uni-fi UB5
Klipsch R-14M

Any of these are any good?

Is this good advice for getting a cheap speaker set-up? I have lots of thrift shop around me. What brands do I look out for?
https://youtu.be/76w-Efjwagg

>>56346599
Which one?

>>56346627
The only reason I'm considering picking one up is that my computer speakers now, when I turn them up to a decent listening volume there's a very slight hum I can hear when things are quiet. I'm wondering if the dac will get rid of that

>>56346673
Magni 2 Uber
the best part is I'll still have to switch cables, but it'll just involve plugging/unplugging headphones instead of RCA cables

File: IMG_8018b.jpg (285KB, 1297x855px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1297x855px

ive got one of those cheap polk psw10 subs. it works fine considering i have neighbors but i miss my old 500w jbl

>>56346638
None of those are terrible, but they're wildly different. Some are active some are not. Some are for studio, some are for personal listening. Those all have their pros and cons.

They're all better than what you suggested before. A lot better. But monitors are more aimed at flat response and less at being pleasant to listen to. Active has some theoretical benefits and can be more convenient, but also more limiting than passive (and at this price level the theoretical benefits are probably nil). A super flat response may be better in some environments than a "pleasing" response. In other environments it will be lifeless and unpleasant.

But, overall, yeah. Better. I'm a bit biased against Klipsch but it's still a big improvement over Fluance.

>>56346693
Does it do that when the amp isn't plugged into the computer? If so the DAC isn't going to do shit. If not, get a cheap DAC.

Anyone have experience with topping amp and dac combos? Any good?

>>56346735
Thanks m8, mirin the Klipsch

>>56346735
>biased against Klipsch
Horns too much for you?

>>56346782
Well, they have a really annoying fanbase, and they're kind of coasting on their reputation from 40 years ago when they were really high end. They're basically on the same tier as Polk but with an attitude.

Klipsch are like that average looking dumpy girl in school where you tried to be nice to her and she was like I'M NOT INTERESTING IN DATING YOU. Like, get over yourself bitch, I was just being nice.

>>56340304

Means he lives in his mom's basement or a ghetto apartment working minimum wage while his recording career takes off.

Little does anon know that 2 year audio degree was more worthless than a general arts degree

>>56346840
Chances are that's true, but I know quite a few people who make money in the music business, as composers, professors, or evil record company executives.

And he's right about dogshit computer speakers although, funnily enough, it seems like the people who actually produce the most have the worst gear.

Then again I only know about people doing respectable music stuff not that stuff kids listen to where you can't even understand the words, or "DJ" shit.

Why don't people audition stuff instead of blindly buying shit based on anon advice? Literally no reason not to go to a music store and compare monitors, or go to a hi-fi place (even best buy) to demo stuff.

Then you can pick what you like, see how the speakers out of your price range sound compared to the ones you can afford. Maybe you will save more money. Or maybe you will realize you prefer the cheaper ones?

>>56346916
My speakers were bought auditioned

My electronics weren't because it doesn't make a difference

Why do people on 4chan love to do this "everyone is stupid except me" thing?

>>56346454
It doesn't whether it cost 5 dollars or 5000 dollars.
That's just shitposting.

>>56346735
>and less at being pleasant to listen to
Since when did this ever mean anything.
Even if the on-axis response is flat, they can sound quite different. There are tons of ways the speaker can be colored that may or may not be subjectively acceptable or even pleasing.
If there's anything they do different, consumer speakers are more likely to dabble and experiment with exotica and emphasize the design aesthetic.

>>56346551
blind testing and also have the component in the system for 2 weeks then take it out and see what the difference

the couch is about 3m away the sound fills the room nicley having the speakers closer together shortins the sound stage but it mitigates reverb from the walls my mate has room treatment which im getting soon ish

>>56346870

I only do it for fun, I have a real job - but I started on shitty - like really shitty come with the computer speakers, then a $80 2.1 system , then a 70s amp with matanz speakers (shit bookshelf ones cost $5 at the garage sale) and then finally when I had a okay job a pair of krk rp8s

You learn alot when you don't have the best gear. Learn how to work the gear you have and have it sound okay on other systems. It was amazing how easy it was to fix my tracks once I got the proper monitors.

>>56346925

How does electronics not make a difference ? Amps sound different... It's the second most important part after speakers

File: jackma_with_trudeau.jpg (88KB, 620x410px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 620x410px

Is a pre-amp really that important? I have a chink amp like >>56346670 but I see they also sell chink pre-amps like the Little Bear on AliExpress. Does it add much to the sound at all?

>>56346983
Not really. After speakers is room response and placement. Actually that's far, far more important than the amp.

I'm not saying amps all sound the same, but outside of underpowered amps or amps with weird distortion, they sound so damm close that it's the last thing anyone should be thinking about.

And to your point about 4chan recommendations, the kind of stuff that asked in these threads is pretty germane to anonymous advice. We're talking like, "should I get these dogshit $100 powered bookshelves with real wood veneer, or a pair of Paradigms and an amp"

We're not talking like, oh does he like the Sonus Faber sound or the Focal sound. We're talking about objectively garbage gear, vs. stuff that's sort of redeemable.

Ive got a set of LSR305's on the way, Is my e10k an alright source or should i get a dedicated usb interface?

>>56347050
The e10k is already a dedicated usb interface

>>56347104
I´m not >>56347104
but
Just curious, how could you connect them?

>>56346983
Well, speaking performance wise, past a certain point the amplifiers do literally sound the same. And by ''sound the same'' I mean they are acoustically transparent - which is what high-fidelity stands for.

That doesn't mean every shitty amplifier out there is acoustically transparent. You have to do some real research for that and unfortunately not every amp has measurements available on the net

File: con526_rca_to_jack_adaptor-340x340-800x580.jpg (29KB, 800x580px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 800x580px

>>56347120
With adaptors. You'd need an adaptor that goes from 3.5 to 2 RCAs and then adapt them to 6.5s. Either that or I got myself confused. I don't have the monitors nor do I use adaptors but it's possible

>>56346943
>Since when did this ever mean anything.
Well, for instance a lot of music is mastered to sound "shouty" so that it is easier to hear on shitty speakers. That gets fatiguing with flat response. But it depends on what you listen to. Big deal if you listen to screamo music. Then again flat or even a bit of HF boost can be nice if you listen to classical music.

Also, "flat" means flat within the design parameters of the speaker. A pair of flat monitors is going to be flat down to the lower 100s, then a slow rolloff, then jump right off a cliff when you reach the 70hz range plus or minus a little.

Contrast that with a "home listening" speaker that may give a boost in the midbass range to give it more "punch".

There are many ways in which "not flat" can mean "less good for the end-user"

Most people are not mastering music, they just want to enjoy their recordings. It would be best to avoid presenting speakers as a science instrument and more as a mechanism for producing listening pleasure.

Especially with lower end gear, the right kind of uneven response can sometimes be better than aiming for a ruler flat response.

Gonna buy a pair of ELAC Uni-fi UB5 and a SMSL SA-98 any feedback?

>>56347183
>>56347120
Actually never mind what I said. I was being stupid.

You just need this https://www.amazon.com/Hosa-CMP159-Stereo-Breakout-10-Feet/dp/B005HGM1D6/

>>56346670
Don't look at just brands, because some brands that are known for having awesome speakers have some real shitty sounding ones, and some brands that have a shitty reputation have some really awesome speakers.

What is best to do is look up the speakers on google if you can, and the best source of info on older/vintage speakers tends to be audiokarma, but there are other great sites as well.

The video also leaves out the fact that you should check the foam surrounds on the speakers. They can be easily replaced rather easily and inexpensively, but it sucks if you buy speakers and the surrounds just fall apart on you after you play some music on them (this will cause them to sound shitty and even blow out).

>>56347231
Should be good
For that price the SMSL is a real deal

File: B1800X-PRO_P0288_PFI2-I_P.jpg (76KB, 960x899px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 960x899px

>>56336220
>50
thrift store cabinets/receiver
>100
thrift store cabinets/receiver
>150
Klipsch ProMedia 2.1
>200
Klipsch ProMedia 2.1
>250
Mackie MR5 monitors

>pic related for OP - my sexy subwoofer - I have two actually.

>>56338823
Needles are by far sexier, but IMO they both work pretty satisfactorily.

>>56338974
>such a thing exist
Yeah that should be easy to find. Pretty much any entry-level receiver.

>degrade in quality
Meh, I seriously doubt it would be noticeable unless you do a shit wiring job.

>>56339048
Personally I think it's hard to go wrong with the Yamaha. They definitely don't have the best specs in their price range on paper, but they're a standard with high resale value and I like their sound. On the off chance you hate them, you can probably resell with minimal loss.

>>56339097
"In professional audio, equipment may be calibrated to indicate a "0" on the VU meters some finite time after a signal has been applied at an amplitude of +4 dBu. Consumer equipment typically uses a lower "nominal" signal level of -10 dBV.[39] Therefore, many devices offer dual voltage operation (with different gain or "trim" settings) for interoperability reasons. A switch or adjustment that covers at least the range between +4 dBu and -10 dBV is common in professional equipment."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel#Voltage

>>56347288
The foam thing is mentioned in the description, running your finger along the foam to see if it flakes? I'll keep an eye out and do my research, no thrift place minds if you read some reviews on your phone as you browse.

File: Audigy2_ZS.jpg (408KB, 1786x1316px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1786x1316px

>>56341553
>you get so much more power
ehh okay? I have a 4U rackmount Crest V1100 under my desk that begs to differ.

>good way to make a reliable power supply
The other anon is kind of right about ATX power supply. It works, but it's not exactly cheap and it's ugly. Also, car audio is designed to run at somewhere around 13.8-14.4V, so 12V won't give you the full power.

>>56346505
IMO makes a huge difference, depending on your motherboard and your DAC though. I know there are some decently onboard sound implementations out there, but I've never seen a cheap board with one. The biggest drawback of onboard is you will get hiss and interference when the music is quiet, or even when no music is playing. A cheap DAC, or even a sound card can make a huge difference. Personally I recommend getting a used Audigy2 ZS from eBay if you have a legacy PCI slot to put it in. Best price/performance value easily.

File: FB_IMG_1472459186843.jpg (32KB, 483x550px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 483x550px

What are good 5.1 av receiver but for active soeakers and with balanced outputs?
If such device exists

>>56347421
no such device exists. Art CleanBOX Pro along with a normal receiver should do what you need.

>>56347433
actually, i take that back. the receiver probably won't have 6 rca outputs to plug into the level converter.

You'd need something more like this + 3 Art Cleanbox Pros.
http://www.miniinthebox.com/hd1080p-hdmi-input-to-hdmi-audio-decoder-with-audio-edid-setting-converter-box-adapter-5-1digital-decorder-spdif-3-5_p1765452.html

File: 1421034164170.jpg (21KB, 360x240px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 360x240px

>>56347037

> I have no fuckin clue what I'm talking about

>>56347512
lol you have a better idea or you just here to shitpost?

>>56347512
>I'm severely deluded so the other guy is wrong
It's ok, I'm sure you'll find another forum on which to agonize over if your cables are the right match for your pre-amp

You are what people mean when they say "audiophile" as if it is a bad word, I hope you enjoy your role as a provocateur. I don't have the stomach for it

File: vincent_sa-31mk_sp-331mk_pre-power_amplifier.jpg (32KB, 600x509px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x509px

>>56347037
>>56346983

no way amps make all the difference passive speakers just express the signal the amp sends them so it better be top notch the diffrent classes of amplification sound different i like class A the best and i hate class D amps

>>56347573
Triggered

>>56347590
>amps make all the difference
amp typical THD: 0.1%
speaker typical THD: 1-10%

If your amp is underpowered for the speakers, sure that will be the bottleneck. Otherwise speakers are far more important.

>>56347022
Preamp is important if you have a true Poweramp. It's also just nice since you get a bunch of inputs.

It's also useful if you have a weak source, but that's uncommon these days.

It's obviously needed for phono.

>>56347668
What's a good amount of power for an amp, to power speakers for a small room (about 10x10). I'm looking at an amp that current only does around 25w, is that too low?

>>56347745
Not the same anon, but maybe this? http://pt.aliexpress.com/item/Breeze-Audio-TPA3116-HiFi-2-0-Audio-Stereo-Digital-Power-Amplifier-Advanced-50W-50W-Sound-good/32664243769.html

>>56347668
so you are fine with buying the laipai amps for 100$ and using those the diffrence between my old sr10 and the power and pre amp was night and day its just flat out better your saying it dosent matter

>>56347745
25W is plenty, that kind of rating used to be associated with quality, but lately the chinks have picked up on the meme so they are putting low wattage ratings on their amps to make them sound like fancy British amps

File: Screenshot_20160830-212311.png (620KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

620KB, 1440x2560px

Did I fuck up buying this? Seemed very good for the price.
Could have gotten something from a refurb that was much better for about $10 more but I rather buy new.

>>56347745
100w

>>56347745
Depends on your speakers. Speakers and cabinet designs vary a LOT in efficiency. Standard home amps are usually 100W/channel at 8 ohms. That's usually enough for almost any reasonable speaker.

25W could be completely fine if you never like to go beyond, say, 85dB peaks and your speakers are reasonably efficient.

>>56347761
OP asked for speaker + amp systems in the $50-$250 range. Even a $100 amp is a stretch in that range.

Sure if you've already spent $500 on the speakers and you have a shitty chinese amp, you will probably notice the difference an amp upgrade makes. Especially if your speakers have low efficiency, like a lot of modern speakers do.

>>56347775
It's shitty, but what did you expect for $30. It will probably sound okay at low volume.

>>56347775
you get what you pay for cheap trash

>>56347775
Doesn't belong in this thread

>>56347817
Thinking about getting these
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01DPRZ2ZW/ref=aw_wl_ov_dp_1_2?colid=1ZS4RH4AGZF7U&coliid=I19AHY1M1TDD84&vs=1
Or just searching around for something good second hand. Budget is about 200 but I'm being a bitch about it and for aesthetic reasons I'm trying to find a pair that don't look like wood

>>56347573

> Thinks the thing that amplifies the signal is not important.

I mean you do realize you're retarded. No one mentioned cables.

Yeah you get diminishing returns as you spend more money, same deal with speakers.

Saying it's not important is just wrong. It's extremely important.

https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Powered-Computer-Speakers-A150/dp/B00GHY5JAO/
are these decent for the price?
all I'm really going to use them for is putting music on in the background while I work and maybe putting audio from my Wii U through them
I have a decent headphone setup for "serious" listening

>>56347668

Speakers are the most important, but after that is the amp.

I want to upgrade my speakers, but I'm honestly overwhelmed.

I have a FiiO E17K/K5 with a pair of AKG 7XXs for headphone gaming/music, but a 10 year old Logitech Z5500 setup for speakers.

I think I want to upgrade to a 2.1 setup with passive bookshelves, amp, dac, powered sub...but I feel so lost. Few stereo amps have sub outs. I'm not familiar enough with wiring to know how to overcome that. I want to spend around $600. Can anyone enlighten me?

>>56347900
You said "why don't people audition amps"
I said "because it doesn't make a difference"
Obviously it fucking matters in the sense that if you buy a lepai to power your $4000 speakers, they're going to sound like shit
But that's why I said:
>but outside of underpowered amps or amps with weird distortion, they sound so damm close that it's the last thing anyone should be thinking about
In other words, the lepai would fall under "underpowered or amps with weird distortion" (protip: those usually are more or less the same thing for the same reason)

You're really dumb, btw.

>>56347900
shut up you retarded audiophile you make us all look bad the only thing that matters is my top tier speakers so i can look cool in battlestation threads. No one is mirin your older than grandpa Pioneer amp.

After months of dillydallying I shelled out ~900 dollarydoos for the svs sub in the OP.

I didn't get to listen to any cheaper subs. Is it actually that much better than anything else around the price range?

I also assume these things have good resale value? Anyone buy/sell one second hand?

File: 8-inch-floppy.jpg (14KB, 430x319px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 430x319px

>>56347898
>https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Powered-Computer-Speakers-A150/dp/B00GHY5JAO/

87dB sensitivity. Pretty low anon. Again if you don't care about playing loud, you're probably good with the 25W. Is that 25W per channel?

>>56347920
Those are shit. But for the purpose, maybe?

>>56347975
Good subs (SVS is a good sub) usually have a little better aftermarket value than speakers

>>56347962

> Being this autistic

Makes me laugh man.

>>56347997
oops didn't mean to paste the shitty speakers link in there.

>>56347963

Lol old amps are shit. Makes me laugh people actually meme this shit

>>56347997
well would I really find better for $15?
powered is a must in that price range, I guess

>>56348013
Is that autistic in the sense that you were pretending to be dumb but I just didn't pick up on it, or in the usual 4chan way which means "you posted an informed opinion and that kind of thing seems out of place around here"

>>56348027

> Being this mad

Autistic because you argue about stuff you're clueless about.

>>56348046
>mad
You keep meming and it's detracting from your argument.

But I can see you have none, which is why you're resorting to memes.

>>56347997
It is 25 per channel, I'd prefer passive speakers and an amp though over powered. I haven't really started looking into speakers yet, been trying to decide on the amp.
This is what I was looking at
https://www.amazon.com/Teac-HR-S101-BB-High-Resolution-Micro-System/dp/B00UVTO5V0/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&dpID=41268zk-mQL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160,160_&refRID=VW7AV0YKGCSW89A32C6X&linkCode=sl1&tag=zeos-20&linkId=620e69bf2ebd08536fa6f2503e6d6cf6
I like that it has everything in one including headphone amp and sub output but I'm still worried about the power. Alternatively I'd be fine with a separate dac and amp but I'm finding it difficult to track down an amp with sub outputs at the price I'm looking for.

Once I settle on that I might go to a local audio store and just start sampling speakers

File: HeresDoggy.jpg (84KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 720x960px

Hey guys a friend of mine was having some amp problems. He's got a primaluna prologue 1 and whenever he starts it up it makes some weird crackling noises for the first ~5 minutes, and has to do some weird ass thing to make it not crackle.
What can I do to help him?

>>56348025
they're all shit in the $15 range unless you go used.

I seem to recall that Altec Lansing had a $15-$20 set that I used to consider to be the 'okayest of the bad' back when I sold PCs. Here I just found a set on eBay for you.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Altec-Lansing-Series-100-Amplified-Speaker-System-/182255553140

>>56348142
ah
thanks, but those are way too tall for my desk
unfortunately I don't have a ton a real estate, they'd get in front of my monitors
what would you say is the cut off price for a decent pair of powered speakers?
I need something small, the amazon ones fit the bill nicely in terms of form factor
if it's higher than $40 or so I'll probably just go with these

>>56347948
>I think I want to upgrade to a 2.1 setup with passive bookshelves, amp, dac, powered sub...but I feel so lost
Why not make life easier and just get a pair of 8 inch monitors that have plenty of bass that you don't even need a sub (unless you really really want you)

Some examples would be the Reveal 802 and LSR 308

>>56347948
>Few stereo amps have sub outs
But most of then will have line out, and you can find plenty of subs with line in.

File: BST82716.jpg (2MB, 3125x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3125x1440px

My system:
NHT Classic 3 Bookshelves (Front)
NHT SB2 Bookshelves (Rear - on stands)
Dual NHT SW10 Subs
Pioneer Elite VSX-59TXi Receiver

I connect Digital audio out from my desktop to my receiver.

I also have a B&K 307 AVR and Rotel RX-1050, which I might switch in for the pioneer

>>56347386
I didn't realize that the foam thing was in the description. Yeah, that's the way that I do it.

I look up the speakers in the store too. I learned that the hard way, since I missed out on some great deals. It's a good idea to do it in store since there are some smaller companies that you will most likely never run across in normal research that make killer speakers.

>>56348307
I meant to comment on your post from the Battle Station thread. I really enjoy your setup.

>>56348270
>I need a good set of speakers that is less than 5" high and less than 4" wide.
Good luck. Even if you increase your budget I don't know what to recommend.

>>56348304

I've had trouble with this as well. I want a nice stereo amplifier with a dedicated sub out and bass management. If you use high-level, your speakers are still trying to output bass at the same time as the sub. If you use a line out, you have to adjust the volume of the sub and the speakers simultaneously.

This is why I use a (high end) receiver instead of a stereo amp.

Best pair of passive speakers at 450 usd?

>>56348341
width isn't as much of a problem
5" high is though
I could probably make due with something 7"-8" wide as long as it was under 5" tall

>>56348404
do, not due
muscle memory is a pain sometimes

File: isotekevo3genesis.jpg (32KB, 600x446px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x446px

anyone here own advanced power treatment sometimes i get a 50hz feedback humm that goes through the equipment wondering if it would help

>>56348361
So hold up using a sub out line on an amp means the volume control on the amp won't Co tool the sub?

I thought there was a way to change using high level so that you could adjust it to avoid overlapping?

>>56348361
I use headphone out for my sub desu. My speakers are rated +/- 3 dB down to 42 Hz so they cover half the sub's range, and I've set my sub to how it sounds best at the most typical volume I'd have everything on. If I'm going higher or lower the sub is adjusted too and I can tweak bass eq with my amp remote to balance things out.

Having a receiver with a dedicated sub channel would be a much better way to do it, but it isn't the only way and that previous anon did not have the budget for one.

>>56348275
How is the bass in these compared to a sub? I really like the shaking from the sub, will I get that same boom from those types of monitors?

>>56348330

Thanks. Not really sure where to go from here. I'm pretty happy with everything, but always need to find ways to improve.

>>56348483

No, with sub out it will, but stereo amps generally dont have a sub out.

>>56348485
I can spend more if it makes sense. About what budget do you think 5.1 receiver, sub, stereo speakers make sense? On a related note, do home theater receivers tend to act as dacs too, or only amps (do I need a dac with a receiver)?

>>56336220
I'll just call my friends who have legit stacks, stfu with your consumer garbage.

>>56348556
Modern receivers pretty much all have DACs.

>>56348556
Receivers will have DACs built in, amps generally will not.

For a decent 5.1/sub/receiver setup you'd have to spend well over $1k I'd say (depending on where you live. Also you could look 2nd hand for good deals).

If you're not watching many movies, you're better off going for 2 passive speakers, an amp and a cheap DAC.

>>56348640
Let me clarify - a 5.1 receiver, but only using 2.1 speakers. I have little need (or space) for rears on my PC. Still >1k?

>>56348685
Why not get a 2 channel receiver if you're not doing surround?

>>56348691
Wouldn't that reintroduce the problem of no sub out? Unless we're talking stereo receivers with sub outs rather than (what seem to be more common) stereo amps?

I like how I've only seen a handful of these audio generals and we've already started cancerous "insert words to make everyone cringe" editions, this one isn't a terrible culprit of that though

>>56348685
You could do a decent 2.1 setup with a stereo receiver for under 1k. Only get a better receiver if you think you'll want to do home theatre stuff in the near future. You can get 2 channel receivers with sub out.

>>56348772

Yes, but the problem is that most have no bass management

My cousin wants to get a pair of 2.1 'PC speakers' but he's buying something like this https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003VAHYTG
What should i tell him to get instead for about $100

>>56349000
>Z623
Not the worst thing in the world, but I'd go Klipsch Promedia 2.1 myself, even though they're a bit more.

>2 channel receivers
Are these even a thing? As in, 2 channel receivers capable of digital input via S/PDIF and HDMI? I don't think I've ever see one of these.

File: muh sys.png (1MB, 1448x1124px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1448x1124px

>muh poorfag setup
Comfy af. Will maybe change the sub.

>>56338823
those meters are installed upside down... i do not approve

>>56349562
frys special

>>56349257
kids these days.

YES it is and always has been a thing. S/PDIF was intended for 2 channels. and HDMI, sure why not? Many TV's and computer monitors can accept HDMI signals and have 2 speakers usually.

>>56347866
>>56347873
>>56347886
Yall can't hate so much. The reviews all point out that it's good. It might not be better than more expensive ones but for $30 it's totally fucking worth it. All I am gonna listen to with them, are YouTube videos.

>>56349657
I'm 26. I don't think I've ever seen anybody actually use one. Plenty of stereo amps, sure, but not receivers.

>>56347311
I have a pro media 2.1 from Klipsch, can I add a second sub? I love me dat bass

>>56349695
I don't really see why not. Two subs can be tricky to tune though. Easy to get partial phase cancellation and whatnot.

>>56347775
>tfw also looking for cheap speakers [spoiler]as a birthday gift[/spoiler]

>>56336232

congratulations on the shittiest most plebe-tier recommendations ive seen here in a month

>>56342923

>he fell for the jbl meme

sad

>>56347131
Aside the perceptual part, you can achieve quite the cancellation null using different amplifiers, which would indicate that they behave the same.

>>56349772
Some of that can be intentional: reduction of effect from room modes.

>>56346454

/g is oddly full of imbeciles when it comes to audio -- its almost as if the autistic adherence to frequency response charts and a fear of socialization, and oh yeah the lack of income, prevents most of the responders from actually trying out anything other than "hurr check out these recommended products on this list"

its just jbl 305 and the room treatment meme -- doesn't matter anyway since all these retards listen to is game video music dubs

its the same basement neckbeards who have an impression of audio but are too sperg to actually comprehend what to listen for -- not that it matters anyway, once again, since they can't read nuance the way they can't read faces

>>56346983
you'll be getting a response from, 1. the "aging room treatment cheapfag" soon

>>56347037
nevermind, there you go

>>56347590
get a load of this imbecile

>>56347668
and finally, 2. the "THD sperg" -- because one parameter is all that matters in an output system

--

i agree with you, it's speakers first, amplification afterwards

>>56347761

>laipai for 100$

dumbass

>25W is plenty

you must enjoy music at the sound dynamic of a washing machine

>>56350133
go test it yourself ask to try out different amps at any hifi store and you will tell the difference

>>56350171

>>go test it yourself

what do you mean? test what

>>56348304
Line out is not affected by the pot so that really isn't a good setup for sub. You'll either have to adjust the volume separately from a sub and amplifier or from your source.

Microlab 2.1 FC530U or Edifier R1600TIII?

File: 1419305901025.jpg (36KB, 405x431px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 405x431px

>people advocating listening to amplifiers in a Hi-Fi store to prove their point

File: IMG-20151209-WA0001.jpg (70KB, 370x370px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 370x370px

Memes aside, I need a little help because the more I read the more confused I get, probably because I grossly underestimated the scope of audio shit.

I'm actually moving into a new house in a while, and I want to put speakers in my bedroom+study. Based on what I got inind and what is already confirmed, this room will include a bed, wardrobe, shelf, and desk that's facing the wall. It's not a very big room, being as big, if not smaller than most college dorm rooms.

Is this room ideal for speakers, and if not is there any way to make it so? Furthermore, I've been looking at active speakers like the jbl 305s and 308s, because I've already got an custom o2 that's got outputs to connect to these speakers and don't want to spend any more on an amp. But can I do better at this price point, the size of my room considering? I have and love my hd600, if that's at all relevant. I know that some sound comes out from the back of these speakers so I can't exactly put them facing the wall and I dont know if I have the space for stands.

I've got more questions because I'm gay and retarded, but I think this should go first. Thanks in advance.

>>56346967
Krk rp8

Hahhha

my setup is amplifier voltage gain of 23x, no volume pot, no preamp,

PC with windows volume on 10 for normal volume into 8 ohm speakers

anyone wanna fight me?

>>56347509
Seems good, i think i won't find anything with trs output. Why use also three aetbox though?

>>56347775
You couldn't get anything better for 30€. But really, it's like posting a broken Pc from 2004 in /guts/, this is not even audio equipment, those speaker barely exists

>>56350133
You're such a fucking faggot, anon. You didn't present a single argument to these posts and you think you're the saint here.

I don't know how you think room acoustic isn't important and is cheap. Proper room treatment is fucking expensive.

As for the rest of your garbage, here's the four parameters that matter when it comes to amplification


>gear passing all these criteria will not contribute any audible sound of its own and in fact sound the same as any other gear passing the same criteria:

>Frequency Response: 20 hz to 20 Khz +/- 0.1 dB
>Distortion: At least 100 dB (0.001%) below the music while others consider 80 dB (0.01%) to be sufficient and Ethan’s own tests confirm that (see below)
>Noise: At least 100 dB below the music
>Time Based Errors – In the digital world this is jitter and the 100 dB rule applies for jitter components.

>>56352300
Get a load of this >>56350133 faggot

File: IMG_3572-1.jpg (474KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 667x1000px

>sexy subwoofer edition
yay

>>56352502
Woah

>>56346916
Literally no reason not to go to a music store

>where do you think we are?
this is /g/, half of these neets would sperg out so hard when going into a shop and being confronted with human beans, spaghetti all over the floor ya know? Its better if they just order stuff from the internet.
Much safer.

Reminder

http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm

>>56352502
it'd go well with my a7x's. incredibly expensive tho.

>>56352719
I got it for like 650 eur when I intern'd at adam. the s2 I got it for are long gone though since I don't really like the adam tweeters anymore

>https://www.amazon.com/Audioengine-A2-Powered-Speaker-System/dp/B00FE9XGVM
>250$

what's the lowest price you've seen these go? yes i'm adamant on white meme speakers

File: 3468610640_3058b87ae4.jpg (43KB, 300x400px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 300x400px

>>56353061
the 4" drivers are so ridiculously tiny though

>>56353091
that's a huge appeal to me

>>56353061
>$250 for fashion speakers worth $50 at most
Don't forget to grab a pair of Beats™ by Dr. Dre while you are at it.

>>56349691
I'm 38 and you're not paying attention
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-0x62P9qLHwr/p_745D3020/NAD-D-3020.html
>>56349657
When Comrade Sanders takes power through a silent coup late next year, he will compile a list of all people who have been hoodwinked by the "more than 2 channels" meme, and they will be sent to regional re-education camps which will be set up in swamps in the deep south

They will not be allowed back into society but their children might, provided they denounce their multi-channel parents and accept the eternal superiority of pure 2-channel sound

>>56353206
they are good desktop speakers tho

>>56352300
Thank you for saving me all that typing.

Either that guy is just engaged in some unbelievable post-purchase rationalization, or he is getting confused over the argument.

Good, properly designed powerful amps are not exactly cheap, but between two properly designed good amps, almost all of the difference people erroneously perceive is illusory.

I bought a Cambridge 640A because I liked the way the front face looked compared to the NAD, and the remote felt nicer too.

People get fooled by stuff like "the volume rises faster as I turn the knob", and come up with all kinds of funny explanations about "liveliness" or "PRAT" or whatever.

There's some difference as the amp is pushed past its limits and starts to fail (some have anti-clipping mechanisms, for instance)

But that's about it, if your system is properly set up you'll hear a bigger difference by literally taking off the speaker grilles.

>>56353286
Oops that was a lot of typing, kek

> https://www.massdrop.com/buy/kanto-yaro-2-massdrop-exclusive-launch

is this good deal?

>>56346714

I could hardly imagine that you get very coherent stereo imaging with that placement anon. I would suggest moving the speakers further down along the wall towards the TV

>>56353215
That's an integrated amp. Anon said a 2 channel receiver that can take HDMI, that NAD does not receive any kind of video input. For the record, I haven't seen one either.

>>56353493
No
>then what is
Please read thread

>>56351541

They are solid.

>>56353591
>That's an integrated amp
No, it's a receiver

Receivers existed pre-HDMI, and they continue to exist post-HDMI

There is nothing in the definition of "receiver" that says it has to have HDMI

>>56353061
15W
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>15W
JESUS for that price you can buy BX5 Carbon which are superior in everyway, just to name one

>>56353745

integrated really just mean it has a preamp and input selectors, optionally tone and bass controls.

Receiver usually means it has a am/fm tuner as well.

It's all pretty loose terms. You can be autistic about it, but that's the jist of it.

>>56353818
As soon as it has a DAC or a tuner it becomes a receiver

File: MENTOR SUB-white.png (121KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 800x800px

>>56352502
One of the criteria for picking this one up was looks.

>>56353745
>No, it's a receiver

No, that's definitely an integrated amp.

>Receivers existed pre-HDMI, and they continue to exist post-HDMI

>There is nothing in the definition of "receiver" that says it has to have HDMI

Ahuh. No one's saying a receiver has to have HDMI. Anon was asking about receivers with HDMI. Is this too much for you to comprehend?

I want and audio interface/dac/preamp with balanced outputs under 200, for my active speakers.

What can you suggest me /g/?
I was looking for focusrite 2i2, or Roland UA22
As dac the only i found with balanced outs is the Asus xonar but really to expensive

As preamp i hav no clue

Halp me /g/

>>56354114
No, see >>56353850

File: dali.jpg (1MB, 2200x3300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2200x3300px

>>56353980
Pic of the sub and a loudspeaker here.

>>56351658
convert the level from -10dBV to +4 and give you balanced output.

>>56349976
What would you buy for 100 bucks?

>>56354244
Oh shit, I didn't even click the link and assumed it was linking to NAD 3020. I concede.

Second point still stands though.

>>56354116
Steinberg UR22 Mk II is one option.

>>56353061
http://noaudiophile.com/AudioEngine_A2_Plus/

Apply some DSP correction to smooth out the response if you get those.

File: kenwood kc 6060a.jpg (107KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1920x1080px

>>56338823
I picked up a Kenwood KC 6060a for a lot more than I'd like to admit a few months ago. Not mine in the picture but in just as good of condition.
It's so mesmerizing. I always loved the scope visualizer on windows media player but this thing is just incredible to watch.

I love this flashy shit. I have three different graphic equalizes outside the signal path just because I love the different spectrum analyzers.

>>56354485
Whoa that is seriously cool. I hope I can find something similar in the future

>>56343497
Nigger spotted

>>56343497
You do realise you have a car bass box there? and that these run at a different ohms

>>56343645
Apparently discountinued now but available on ebay and other internet places

TANNOY EFX 5.1

>>56354386
Not him, but I'd use it to increase the budget for my stereo speakers and get full size towers instead of dinky little bookshelves

>>56355550
And why do you care about the form factor here? Literally says nothing at all about loudspeakers.

>>56355487
>you have a car bass box there
And?
>that these run at a different ohms
It's usually not very far off from typical home audio voice coils.

>>56355574
Matters for efficiency, output, bass extension. The internal cabinet volume that is, there are quite a few small floor standers and massive "bookshelves" out there.

>>56355597
Its 4 to 8. So yes its a mile off. If you dont even understand the basics theres no point explaining any more.
Its shit basically.

>>56355632
It's not like we're setting out to short our amplifier outputs..
Most home audio speakers vary from 4 to 8 ohms nominal, dips to 3 ohms are common, with the occasional challenging 2 ohm load out there.

File: pc1.png (28KB, 702x796px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 702x796px

Thinking of dropping a wall and combining two rooms for a home theater system. PC desk behind couch seems like a good solution to be able to utilize the audio system for both computer and TV usage.

Plan to scale. 1 pixel equals 1 centimeter.

File: altec-lansing-251-computer-speakers-5-1-amplified-computer-surround-sound-12cf196b54fd38cb03b90b467ec4c9cb.jpg (17KB, 500x291px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x291px

My decade old Altec Lansing 251 is dying, and has been for at least 5 years. I want to replace it with 150-200€ max, for a 2.1 system because i'm not using the rear speakers unless they'd be wireless or connectable through rj45 especially for that tiny price range.

Do you know of something in that price range with cool leds, cool knobs for volume n shit, maybe a remote controller all while being high quality?

I bought some 150€ logitech set last year and send it back because the sound quality was not even 10% of what my setup puts out right now, it was ridiculously bad, couldn't get any bass, felt flat and horrible.

Cheapest good-sounding amp for 6 ohm speakers? Doesn't need a built-in DAC.

>>56355597
>The internal cabinet volume that is, there are quite a few small floor standers and massive "bookshelves" out there.
Yeah that was mostly my point. I don't see a purpose in hunting for a loudspeaker of a specific type as in whether they are bookshelves or floorstanders. If you have the room to accommodate large speakers, why not, but those choices should be based on the listening conditions. Not budget or because one would inherently be a better choice, which it isn't. And large loudspeaker could really well be "bookshelves".

>>56356907
Sensitivity of the loudspeakers would be more useful here.

>>56356916
>Sensitivity of the loudspeakers would be more useful here.
Not sure since they're kinda ancient. It's a pair of Koss M80 speakers, and they're actually 4 ohm.

File: horizontal_speaker_position_th.jpg (37KB, 500x267px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x267px

>>56355704
do it right

File: 20160828_164855.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

Made some speaker stands today.

>>56356960
A quick Google tells them to be fairly standard sensitivity at 92 dB / 1 W / @ 1m to 4-6 Ohms. A bit on a higher side actually. Maybe hunt for used integrated amplifiers or receivers if you are on a budget. 3 dB increase in volume requires double the amplifier power so unless you are going to blast them over their specified limits, 30 W a channel to that 6 Ohm load should be enough as far as power requirements go.

>Because I havent posted it before


>>56357029
Good jaab but,are you gonna leave those sides unfinished?

File: 1470705945338[1].jpg (935KB, 1980x1539px) Image search: [Google]

935KB, 1980x1539px

>>56357466
fug

>>56357466
I suppose I should. particle board is pretty weak as is without some protection but I don't know what to cover it with?

Should I just get the LSR310S to match my LSR305s, or is there a better deal out there I can take advantage of?

>>56347229
Good thing Sean Olive has provided empirical evidence that consumers prefer speakers with flat frequency response.

>>56358819
don't bother, the sub is pretty shitty. save up to get somelthing accurate like a KH805 or just bigger speakers instead

I want to get into Vinyls and have absolutely no clue where to start. I have a few, but no player or anything. What do I need, and what should I get? Semi Budget oriented

>>56360095
You need a turntable

You need a preamp with phono stage(some turntables have it built in)

Then you need loudspeakers or a stereo amplifier + loudspeakers depending on whether you get passive or active loudspeakers.

Any budget? You get the best value for your money used.

>>56358793
I dunno,I just noticed that flaw since the rest looks so neat

>>56354424
Quite the same of Roland UA22
Also saw the zoom tac2 looks good but it requires thunderbolt and i'm on binbows

>>56357244
Any good new ones to look at while I search for used ones?

>>56354330
Fucking awesome man

File: livingroom.png (138KB, 1916x991px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1916x991px

>>56360489
Starting from the cheapest end...

Audio-Technica AT-LP60 turntable
SMSL SA50 two channel amplifier
A pair of Pioneer SP-BS22-LR bookshelves

>>56360496
Quite alright. I'm looking at DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core but ran into a bit of dilemma how to implement it. The room is fully untreated and I just have that one sub. I need some DSP to fix the room response. Pic related is mostly how it is now(don't play attention to the absolute dB). The EQ what I have currently is a bit more refined than that. Can't find a measurement at the moment. Might do some work on it over the weekend to adjust it further.

>>56360673
To explain the three graphs a bit further. These are the very initial measurements I did of the system. Red is the response from my listening position after simply plugging everything in and doing a sine sweep. Second one is after adjusting the subwoofer crossover frequency and level. Third one is after a quick EQ based on the second measurement.

Should I get an amp and a dac or an amp+dac combo of some sort?

>>56358880
>>56347229

(Olive actually showed people prefer a linear, sloped FR. "True flat" didn't rank especially high.)

But yeah, stuff like
>It would be best to avoid presenting speakers as a science instrument and more as a mechanism for producing listening pleasure.
...is a confused viewpoint.

This is characterizing science as "cold, unfeeling medical equipment", implying its the opposite of "pleasure". Audio science isn't a belief system or an attitude, it's just a process for weeding out the bullshit.

It's not coincidence the science-based FR is by far the most preferred in blind testing. That's on purpose. That's the idea. Give people a way to show what they actually perceive and enjoy, without egos or bias, then share it.

Ideas like tuning speakers for certain genres are nice, but they crumble when they run up against real life. There's just way too much variation in mastering within a genre (or even a single goddamned album) to apply a permanent speaker voicing. For every song you better, there's hundreds more you ruin.

File: 1467010833441.jpg (83KB, 600x448px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 600x448px

>>56360673
Fug

Pay* attention, not play attention.

That purchase advice was mean to >>56360095. Sorry >>56360489, don't really have many models in mind for you. That cheap SMSL might do the job already but I'd look for lowest end integrated amplifiers from brands like Yamaha or Marantz.

I need to sleep.

>>56361197
Your posts are enjoyable as ever anon. Rationale and knowledge is always welcome but distinctively lacking in most discussions I see about audio here.

>>56360673
Props on showing your data, something that almost never happens on /g/.

Make sure not to adjust anything above 200Hz using an in-room measurement. You can't tell the speaker output from the delayed room reflections, so it's easy to reduce peaks that aren't really there.

With a single sub, remember that below 200Hz (in the modal region), you can only EQ for a single listening position. You might as well make your sub nearfield (put it as close to your head as possible, within 2 feet) to maximize impact. If you want great bass over a wider area than a couch, you need to jump to 3 or more subs.

Subwoofers themselves act like active absorbers, so buy more of them before resorting to bass traps.

>>56361197
Flat on-axis response from the speaker is shown as preferred.

The situation in the room is more tricky than it appears. That target line holds best for a speaker with that given dispersion.
The brain can seperate reflected sounds after a short time window from the initial sound cue. A slow sine sweep measured at the mic does not and sums up everything up, loudspeaker response, early room reflections, and much more delayed power response mixing into the signal. The response you get in room with a steady sine is downward sloping because:

-The directivity for most speakers increases steadily with higher frequencies. This eventually results in the treble reponse from the tweeter to become very narrow and beam-like.
-Room materials usually have poor low frequency absorption. Absorption in air is disproportionately tilted to upper frequencies, which are reflected all sorts of surfaces.
The sound power that gets sent back to the listener reduced upper frequencies for both. In total, a down sloping response.

>>56361703
Subs don't quite act as absorbers so long as they are being made to work all at once. The room acoustic is still unfavorable.
They can be used to cancel out room modes and improve the LF reproduction.

Also, I'm inclined to believe that the usual room Schroeder frequency is a fair bit higher for most anons: small rooms.

Trying to settle on a receiver/amplifier to use in my main setup.

Options are:
Pioneer Elite VSX-59TXi
Pioneer Elite VSX-99
Rotel RX-1050
B&K 307

Which would you consider the best option?

>>56361197
>This is characterizing science as "cold, unfeeling medical equipment", implying its the opposite of "pleasure
No, it's not, dumbass. That's not what it's saying at all.

The reality is that we don't listen in anechoic chambers, which is the environment in which ANY legitimate speaker testing is done because it is the only possible way to present meaningful data

Data is interesting if you have a known speaker setup that you know you like, and you want to replace them with other speakers based on measured characteristics of both speakers

However that is NOT the question that is ever being asked in these threads. These are questions about NEW speakers to people who DO NOT KNOW what they're going to like. A flat response in an anechoic chamber may show wild peaks and troughs in unexpected places when dropped into some random bedroom, measured at the listening position. Oh, you still want flat? Well fuck, it looks like a "flawed" speaker from an anechoic chamber may actually be a better speaker in that neckbeard's bedroom. Oops! So much for "a confused viewpoint", looks like you don't understand how speaker testing is done!

You're doing that reddit scientist thing where everyone who has a different set of goals from you doesn't understand KEWL SCIENCE HOLDS UP SPORK and anyone who doesn't consider a data set meaningful in a completely unrelated scenario is a science hating soccer mom

This kind of talk gives real science a bad name, so please stop that

>>56362326
>>56362326
Screenshotted

>>56361197
>>56363636
Oh and before you MUH DSP garbage on me, your average home listener isn't going to use those because they require a crazy amount of investment, equipment, and expertise to set up correctly.

Your average consumer plugs in the speakers and goes "I like the way it sounds" or "I don't like the way it sounds". You can argue that this is bad, but this is the reality. People want something that they enjoy. What you're doing is confusing a method of gathering data on a piece of equipment, with the end goal of that piece of equipment as it's used in real life.

You are the one pushing superstition by pretending that an FR chart is more meaningful than it is. Because "science is kewl", right?

>>56362901
Pioneer are masters at chip-amp design. There's even a chance the rotel or b&k are pioneer rebrands (or commissioned designs).

the 59TXi is definitely the daddy of that group, though, followed by the b&k. there's little place for stereo-only anymore.

>>56363731
Might as well just buy speakers based on looks, then. Because even if you audition the gear at a shop it's gonna sound different in your home.

>>56363845

Yeah, I really wish somebody would do a decent stereo amp/receiver with sub out and bass management. The few that do have a sub out dont have bass management, so it is pretty useless. I just use multi-channel receiver. Makes everything easier than separates.

>>56363871
Not sure if you are expecting me to disagree or what. I don't completely disagree with this. Looks are important, and the shop sound isn't the same as the home sound.

Don't get me wrong you can get an approximate sense of the style of a speaker from auditioning it in the store, and if you really hate a speaker in the store, there's a higher chance you're going to hate it at home too, but don't be tricked into thinking it's going to sound just like that at home.

FR charts are useful for some purposes, but there's a population of retards on /g/ who treat speaker buying like a video game in which the winner has the speaker that measures the flattest because of a crippling fear of uncertainty and a religious belief that the supernatural demon named "science" will fix everything.

>>56336220
>tfw I have exactly that sub
I'm in love with it, would recommend

>>56363636
hi, hello.

i'm a little hesitant to break down you down here, as i can tell you don't quite grasp that you're talking to multiple people.


>Oh, you still want flat? Well fuck, it looks like a "flawed" speaker from an anechoic chamber may actually be a better speaker

yeah, yeah. as
>>56362326
explained, dispersion is a huge part of this. you're stuck on trying to convey that goals aside from the "on-axis anechoic" measurement have import. we know. got it.

we're already talking about the specific ways this can be achieved. it's not about taste (not at this stage), it's about dealing with the problems that

>questions about NEW speakers to people who DO NOT KNOW what they're going to like

i mean, they're human, right? people have shown to be pretty damn statistically stable in their perception and preferences. the problem you're actually describing stems from uncontrolled directivity being plopped down into rooms or varying shapes/sizes without regard to perception.

>"I like the way it sounds" or "I don't like the way it sounds". You can argue that this is bad, but this is the reality
you seriously must be talking to someone else.

once again, that is the entire premise of audio science.

>>56363923
Well, you should be using multi-channel anyway; stereo's always been a hack rife with implementation problems.

a center-channel working off a stereo-matrix setup is one of the best things you can do for stereo imaging and intelligibility.

surround is still a contested area re: best practices, but a center (or three) is a no-brainer.

File: bullwinkle.png (29KB, 284x278px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 284x278px

>>56364675
>a center-channel working off a stereo-matrix setup is one of the best things you can do for stereo imaging and intelligibility.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

>>56360095
Look on Craigslist/Gumtree/other classifieds site for some used gear. Plenty of integrated amps from the 70s had built in phono stage (required for turntables) that were actually implemented well and sound decent, whereas the phono stage on modern amps are pretty much an after thought.

Also, passive speakers if you get an amp.

>>56347421

Emotiva?

>>56348831

Pretty much all powered subwoofers have an adjustable crossover. They'll work with a variable full range audio signal.

>>56363871

well, yes and no

speakers with top notch drivers will be accurate and convincing no matter the "room treatment" unless the user is really too lazy to turn a speaker slightly this way or that, or the amplifier is underpowered or undercapacitated in relation to the speaker

>>56363970
underrated

File: 508218566.jpg (76KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 640x480px

How much are they worth? bid is at $10 atm

>>56367783
>speakers with top notch drivers will be accurate and convincing no matter the "room treatment"

no, that really isn't how it works. if you placed said top-notch drivers outside, away from modal weirdness, that'd probably be true.

but indoors, once the sounds leaves the drivers and hits objects and walls, diffraction and reflection come into play. no matter how pure it was originally, the "ghost" images that hit your ear within 5ms after the direct sound are combined in your brain, smearing imaging and altering timbre.

unless you've got a speaker that actively tries to combat this, e.g. controlled directivity in at least the 700-7000Hz range, the "top notch" is wasted. even if you've got CD, it's an uphill battle, and correct room treatment like diffusers placed laterally and absorption placed vertically are crucial.

some top notch shit like shorting rings and pole caps reduce flux modulation distortion, which can be very audible regardless of directivity. but since most high end drivers chose to optimize their BL curves for best THD response instead of lowest audible distortion, it's not exactly something you can count on to be present in most designs.


FR charts are mostly useless, sure, unless detailed context is provided. Polar maps are the minimum, but even they can be manipulated. Real, meaningful data is hard as shit to produce.

>>56368013
Probably $30USD, max.

drivers are sized right for some fairly smooth--if wide--directivity. woofers are foam, though, so they won't last long before disintegrating.

This local store is selling Boston acoustics cs23 IIs for 59 bucks, should I get them? Just looking for a first pair of bookshelf speakers for my turntable.

File: 09 quad haha.jpg (445KB, 1504x1000px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 1504x1000px

>>56368357

Post your speakers, if you don't mind. I'm genuinely interested in what kind of equipment you use that is that sensitive to room placement.

These (this) (pic related) (quad 21L) are mine. They're not that susceptible to "room treatment" so long as I don't back the ports up to the wall. In fact, they sound really awesome in almost any placement, with some placements more awesome than others.

File: pioneer_qx-949_front_panel.jpg (74KB, 800x456px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x456px

Found one of these on CL today. Are quad receivers worth getting or should I just get an SX-880 for half the price?

>>56368553
>get quad receiver at like...age 13, needs a simple capacitor replacement
>was 13, didn't know shit, didn't bother to research or ask
>part it out
>see prices for quad receivers now, while sensible
>why

I just have an 18" stroker ported to 33Hz and called it a day.

Is there a sexy and quality record player for under a hundred burgers? I can't justify dropping $300 for one when I have two records at the moment

>>56368588
Define "sexy".

>>56368571

good circuitry design, i think

>sounds like some pajeet randomly stringing together jargon to make up for the lack of access to quality gear

>>56368357

>>56368448
>They're not that susceptible to "room treatment
From the quick outlook on that cabinet design they couldn't really be much worse. Diffraction from those edges and no waveguide at all for the tweeter. How did you even come to that conclusion? You gave them a sighted listening test in a room?

>>56368726
The one you quoted seems to know his shit. Gear is irrelevant here or what you or that anon owns.

I'm new to audio and I want to get an amp and some bookshelf speakers for my pc.

Is the Lepy amp still the way to go in terms of value? I'll probably be buying my speakers used on craigslist

File: 08 scratchy gone speakers u next.jpg (499KB, 1504x1000px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1504x1000px

>>56368772

>>From the quick outlook / edges / waveguide

That's all nice, what you wrote, and yet, they sound great. They beat out some low end Sonus Fabers and some medium tier Focals which I trialed for a month. How do you think that happened with a boxy design?

Could it be that the drivers are really awesome?

haha at these poorfag rules and all their made up bullshit in lieu of actual having something that works

>>56368772

>gear is irrelevant here

>>56368854
>theoretically the speakers you own don't match my imaginary standards based on parameters i gleaned from reading magazines

I think you just summed up /g audio

>>56368823
So a sighted listening in your room, got it. That's very convincing anon. Did you do any measurements with them or are you just content with the fact that they sound good to you? Why are they "not that susceptible to room treatment"? You must have your reasons. Also the more you post the more you keep throwing in meaningless brand names. Why?

>>56368854
Gear you or someone else purchased is indeed irrelevant at understanding loudspeaker design and room interaction.

>>56368896

Why would I put speakers in my house that "measure" according to someone else's standards, but which I don't like the sound of? If the speakers sound great, that's all I care about, and all that matters ultimately.

So, can you post your gear? Not that it matters, since this thread is off to the rail yard.

>>56368448
I never said my equipment is sensitive to room placement. :U
My speakers use compression drivers with custom designed 3D-printed phase plugs and waveguides. i designed for against-wall placement.

From the looks of yours, you've got those quads ~5-6 feet off the back wall, away from desks and furniture that might diffract. Definitely the way to go with omni dome tweeters, but very few people have the space to pull that off. obviously your setup isn't bad by any means, but other designs can take advantage of that special placement even more.

>some placements more awesome than others.
yup. that's how improvements feel after a certain point; no one change will blow you away, but stack enough together and you'll be amazed at what's possible.

>>56368822
The lepai? no, no no no.

It's a pile of shit.

it's definitely possible to get great class-D amps for around that price, though. look at "finished" Sure amps on ebay.