what are some good PC speakers for a small 10x10 ft foot room?

Just crank some open back headphones

Adam AX

I got Monoprice 5" studio monitors on sale for $160 about a year ago.

Literally go to good will and buy some bookshelf speakers and an amp. I got a great computer sound setup for like $15

>>62324054
how is the bass on those?

>>62324134
Good, they have a 10" sub they sell as well you can pair with them. It's a bit steep at ~$170 on sale or $200-220 regularly.

File: eve_audio_sc203_pair_sc203_master_slave_system_1194256[1].jpg (370KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 2000x2000px

Eve Audio SC203

Technically monitors and not speakers, but lower the bass slightly and highs a bit more and you got a excellent pair of PC speakers

File: bafle-subwoofer-infinity-overture-1.jpg (174KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1200x900px

>>62324018
Money no issue? Buy any decent 100 watt per channel receiver, and a pair of Infinity Overture 1 bookshelf speakers. They fill my 16x32 room very well.

>>62324018
Vanatoo T0 are probably the best.

>>62324026
no sound stage and artificial sounding

>>62324018
Do these type of speakers sound good without a sub? I always feel I need to invest in a sub if I go this route and ends up over my budget.

>>62327040
Studio monitors sound fine without a sub. They'll sound more full and have a far better bass impact with a sub though.

>>62327062
Is there a good price rule regarding subs? If I get $150 5" am I expected to at least invest another $150 for the sub?

JBL LSR305

>>62327137
In 2.1 setups generally that's the case. $150 monitors with $150 sub.

With some higher end studio monitors($1500-2000 range) you'd pair them with a $500-800 sub.

But at the lower end for studio monitor level sub, you need to spend about the same as you are on your speakers.

>>62327196
And by that time I will also need a DAC or AMP since it will be hooked up to the PC?
I also have a ATH headphones that I might want to hook up to those late at night.

>>62327270
Just make sure you get powered monitors and and a powered sub and you wont need a speaker amp. Just a DAC to connect to your PC.

If you also want a headphone amp you can add one of those.

I use a Schiit SYS passive preamp hooked up to a Schiit Modi DAC connected to my Schiit Magni headphone amp and my Monoprice 5" powered studio monitors.


This setup lets me use a single DAC to play audio from both my headphones and speakers without having to mess with windows settings. Just a simple button press on the passive preamp to switch between output devices.

>>62327294
>Schiit SYS
Sounds perfect, thanks.

>>62327294
t. Schiit employee

File: 1713_1429015078_thumb.jpg (48KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 600x337px

Genelec 8010 and 7040 sub
Small speakers for any room

>>62324018
Logitech Z906 - got 'em and love 'em
http://www.logitech.com/en-us/product/speaker-system-z906

Yamaha HS5

Money not an issue? KH 120 with KH 805

>>62324304
No, technically monitors are speakers

marantz nr1607 and some dali zensors - bout 7 fiddy total

>>62324054
>>62324304
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/difference-between-a-speaker-a-studio-monitor

File: 0048f3de.jpg (68KB, 443x600px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 443x600px

>>62329173

>>62329583
What? Either way, it figures that audiophiles would have money to waste and buy something unnecessary. If you still don't get it - studio monitors and speakers serve different purposes.

>>62329173
so unless you're a recording engineer making music you should go with regular speakers?

>>62330066
Exactly. Different purposes.

I always tell people to go for regular speakers. There's a reason we find digitally enhanced pictures more pleasant to look at. Speakers do the same thing for your ears.

Monitors sound flat and boring.

>>62332291
Unless you don't listen to modern music.

I listen to a lot of classical music, and to really get a nice sounding orchestral piece you need to have more accurate speakers than just your normal cheap shitty PC speakers. It might sound flat for modern music which is heavily tuned for earbuds and shitty low end systems where as long as there is bass thumping it's "good". But for music that has extreme complexity and depth (Wagner commonly had 100+ member orchestras for some of his works) you need speakers that can give greater separation and higher detail in the highs and mids, while still delivering accurate but not overpowering bass. In classical music too much bass simply drowns out much of the mids.

This obviously isn't going to matter for most normies, but there are good reasons besides editing or studio use for studio monitors.


Studio monitors should also be used if you're trying to learn piano or an electrified classical instrument.

>>62332375
I listen to the piano guys and I can literally pinpoint two separate pianos playing on a 50$ 10 year old speaker. Your ears are shit, and studio monitors are your crutches.

>>62325673
Have u listened to a decent set of amped cans? Even my shit digital Sony amp and 558s sound great and are good for gaming/music

Just get a good software eq and pump the bass cunt.

Failing that floorstanders are your best bet even older 4ways

>>62332424
Wow TWO whole pianos?

Fuck off kid, that's nothing, how about Rachmaninoff Piano concerto No2? That's a full concert grand piano with accompanying orchestra. Good luck without having the orchestra sound like one wall of sound on shitty speakers.

>>62332476
I got rid of my pair of monitor speakers in record time after I fell for the hype, the courier service hasn't even registered the delivery in their system, I already e-mailed my withdrawal (purchase revocation) form to the store, then continued to use the Logitech Z-230s, that I bought for one seventh of the price of those monitors more than a decade ago. Flat bass, lackluster highs, detail in the mid range I never had before but without any character to them; no thanks!

If you hate music you buy a USB DAC, and connect a pair of active studio monitors to it. If you want to actually enjoy listening to music, you avoid music production equipment for listening, because no amount of software DSP fuckery can modify the sound signature of monitor speakers to make them sound lively. Sorry, but I prefer soft, silky highs, and dynamic, lively bass. You are robbing music of its soul by playing it through an analytic, linear, nondescript pair of speakers.

>>62332512
Pretending your listening habits are in anyway similar to mine is your first mistake, fucking philistine.

>>62332429
When I said crank open cans I didn't mean wear them. Just leave them on the table. I Was fucking around

>>62332529
70% of my playlist is orchestral you fucking moron.

>>62332550
I bet it's 16/44khz MP3 as well.

Disgusting

File: 2017 - Game of Thrones Season 7 (2.0 16-44).flac.Spectrogram.gif (2MB, 1920x1125px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1125px

>>62332563
Right.

>>62332550
I had Logitech Z-623 2.1 system for 4-5 years. Haven't been used since I got studio monitors except a few times in A/B comparisons when I first got the monitors.

I have Denon AH-D2000 for "fun" listening. AKG K712 for analytical headphone listening. And my studio monitors are general use and classical listening when not using my AKGs.


I would never go back to the Logitech's. The inaccurate overwhelming bass and shitty peaky highs were not my thing, they do the job if you've never heard good speakers or headphones you probably would never care. But if you actually have decent gear, you'll hate that garbage unless you primarily listen to modern top 40 garbage or other bass heavy trash.

>>62332599
>game of thrones

wow, lovely orchestral playlist you've got there.

>>62332602
I've bought 300 dollar speakers much worse than my Logitech. Most recently I spent 275 on a JBL sub I returned because it invaded and overwhelmed ranges it had no business being in. Every single piece of speaker I bought so far with the intent to replace my Logitech turned out to be shit for some reason. One pair has shitty vertical dispersion i.e. shitty sound stage, the other one has sound that is not colored but straight up DEFINED by the fucking boxes the tweeters are housed in etc. Shit sound from all of them. I have yet to find a 2.1 system in any configuration that would be an improvement in every single aspect of music listening.

>>62332610
>ohshit, that's flac
Nice damage control, faggot!

>>62332726
>Nice damage control, faggot!

Kek, i've got almost 600GB of classical FLAC, fuck off

File: screenshot_247.png (18KB, 616x686px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 616x686px

>>62332842
That's so cute, please tell me more.

>>62332879
Why's your date all fucked up? Also, why bother with 2TB of FLAC when 160kbps sounds exactly the same through the very headphones /g/ recommends for audiophiles?

>>62327138
How is the bass with these? compared to, let's say, Logitech x230 2.1

Edifier R1700BT, while they sound great with melodic and lo-fi house music, are somewhat insufficient with hard techno.

Either need a sub for these (dunno) or something better altogether. Last night someone put up a pair of 305s on Ebay for under 200€...

File: ff582-dateformatcomparison.png (17KB, 538x245px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 538x245px

>>62332929
>Why's your date all fucked up
It's called hungarian. And logic. Pic related.

>>62332929
>why bother with 2TB of FLAC when 160kbps sounds exactly the same through the very headphones /g/ recommends for audiophiles?
Because /g/ is always talking shit when they talk about audio? Take you for example.

>>62332954
The JBL's each have a 5" woofer, the x230 sub is 5" though probably tuned to sound boomier. I have the KRK 5" monitors and ended up getting their sub after a few weeks for more satisfying bass.

>>62333096
>the x230 sub is 5" though probably tuned to sound boomier
They have boom, but those booms fully know where they belong. Not in the low mids, that's for sure. Like the JBL I sent back.

>>62333025
Audiophiles always argue that their FLACs sound better until they get BTFO for not doing ABX tests etc. After that it's just damage control about HDD prices being low so "it doesn't matter anyway".

Do an ABX test with 148kbps Opus and your 24bit 192khz lossless placebo

>>62333226
I don't give a shit about your exotic file formats, this is how I torrent them, they are either mp3, or flac. Besides, I can hear half a decibel difference in volume levels so compressed formats always sound shady as fuck for me.

http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=1

File: Capture.jpg (55KB, 572x646px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 572x646px

Poor entry level fags. 4,76TB of FLAC and DSD.
btw. best audio format for music is a DSD64 (1bit, 2,8224MHz)

>>62333781
>DSD
So you basically have less music, you just waste more space on it than the guy who has two terabytes.

you people are fucking autistic as fuck

>>62333839
Nope. The guys shilling their studio equipment are autistic as fuck. I'm still the opinion they've got shit hearing and they use their autistic monitors as crutches, so the analytic sound compensates for their lack of a good hearing.

Can anyone recommend me a good cheap soundbar? I don't need studio quality sound but not overly bad either.

>>62333876
You lost me at bar. That's the worst thing you can buy after single bluetooth speakers.

>>62332726
I kind of agree with you on some points, but holy shit, seriously you are defending logikek shitspeakers?
Chances are, you just didn't give your ears enough time to get accustomed to different sound signature of much better speakers.
Did you put any work into your room acoustics? Was your speaker placement actually good or did you just randomly slap those speakers anywhere like your old logikeks and expected them not to sound like shit?
I have used popular logikek 5.1 speakers set for a good portion of my life, from age 13 to early-mid twenties, and those were fucking awful. Boomy, farting and unnatural bass from subwoofer, satellites with no depth and no extension on all frequencies. Anything is better than this crap. This thing was good for blasting loud music for all my neighbors when I was a teen and thought that it's cool thing to do, but that's it.

File: IMG_1754.png (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>62333827
this is 3898 albums
I can listen this a whole life and never get bored

Is Adam better than Genelec? Is Genelec just a meme?

I read that Genelec's metal cones can be taxing on the ears after a long period.

>>62334082
genelecs are rather dull compared to adam's incredibly sharp x-art tweeters, probably the worst amt tweeters out there at the moment
look at hedd or eve if you want that kind of tweeter

>>62334057
1: Speakers have to sound better from second 1 or they aren't better, period. If they sound too wooden, or have no fucking soundstage, I won't continue listening to them, I return them and move on.

2: Speakers are to left and right of my monitors, they go there, they belong there, I won't put them anywhere else, they have no business being anywhere else.

3: I haven't gotten far enough with ANY speaker to consider room acoustics. For that they have to sound at least okay first. Blatantly obvious faults in sound imaging won't improve by me slapping sound dampening foam on some walls.

4: I don't know what you've listened to, probably plugged them into some shitty motherboard audio. With a sub $100 DAC the Logitech speakers I have have sound accuracy on par with the 274$ Sennheiser headphones I have. Funny thing is, I prefer listening to the Logitech speakers, because the Sennheiser cans sound a tad bit hollow and distant compared to them. Soundstage is accurate too.

>>62324018
A ten foot room is gonna have some really noticeable resonance modes

>>62334082
>Is Adam better than Genelec?
No.
>Is Genelec just a meme?
No. There are other options to choose from depending on your criteria.
Genelec is fairly competent as far as manufacturers go, but they don't have much of an entry level selection.
The most similar line I can think of is Neumann/Klein+Hummel, minus the product segmentation.
>I read that Genelec's metal cones can be taxing on the ears after a long period.
You know how audiophiles can sometimes associate copper and and cooler colors with warmer sound, and silver with brighter and harsher sound? That's like that.
Actually, the treble peaks are a common problem with the ADAMs.

>>62332424
Rude
Compare a pair of HD 800S to even audio technica ath m50s. Even if you can discern the different instruments on the m50s, the separation will be even cleaner on the 800s. So you having the ability to distinguish two pianos is cool, but try some higher end stuff and you'll be impressed

>>62330493
>>62332291
What bullshit. Most of the time normies aren't gonna listen to poorly mastered music so most monitors sound great for just listening. The main difference is monitors are cheaper for what you get, and you don't have to pick an amp.

File: Klipsch-R15PM-Powered-Monitor-Speakers-01.jpg (236KB, 1300x1000px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1300x1000px

Are these overrated?
I want to get them to connect them on a PC and they'll be about a meter or more apart and a bit more than a hand's length from me (I have a big desk). Also is there a difference in quality between these and the non-powered version? I don't want the extra hassle or cost with getting an amplifier.
Will be used for music and games mostly.
I can get decently reviewed and more powerful ones for less than half the price but since I consider this a long term investment I'd rather get something that's as well built and that sounds as natural as possible.
Also would they do their job without a sub? I'm not a "basehead" but I do listen to a lot of rock and electronic.

>>62334295
>HD 800S
>compare $1700 product with $150 product, results will be better
No shit. I'm not willing to spend more than $300 on any single piece of audio equipment. And even then, I find it a complete and utter joke, that nothing in this price range can beat something I bought more than a decade ago for $50. I'm literally listening to my flac album on $130 worth of audio equipment chained up, and when I close my eyes I can imagine the guy playing the chello sitting 3 feet away from the piano slightly closer to me. Nothing I bought so far has come close to achieve this, and in a fit of frustration I bought $443 speakers last time. Almost kept them that time, but they had no bass.

>>62334416
Klipsch speakers are pretty so-so at best. Less than impressive radiation pattern and could stand to be flatter on axis. The latter is easy enough for the end user to fix, but the former is not.

At that price the usual go to option are the LSR305 and the Behringer 2031.

>>62334480
>Behringer 2031
I wouldn't buy Behringer. Ever since they outsourced their manufacturing to China there are increasing complaints.

Have yet to try the LSR305 meme.

>>62334480

That's not the first time I hear those being recommended. The JBLs look absolutely horrible IMO, I know we're talking about audio here but still...
I'll look more into the other ones you mentioned.

File: flelacdebutb6.jpg (41KB, 770x433px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 770x433px

I bought a couple of elac b6 speakers a year ago, first ever speakers but I can't get it to sound right. The reviews were all good but idk, the bass feels weak, the hihats and symbols are super distinct to the point of annoyance, and it definitely needs some kind of eq to make anything listenable, whether it's music or dialogue in a movie.

Do you guys think it's the speakers themselves or is that just a fact of life with owning speakers?

>>62334615
Could be room reverberations or low end DAC

>>62334514
I've only ever known Behringer as a cheap company that makes cheap products for years and years. I'm not sure how they go lower than that.
The Truth is passable but an obvious ripoff from one of Genelec's older models. A bit of treble dip.
>LSR305
Cheap construction. Very slightly tipped up. So, it may be a worthwhile idea to listen very slightly off axis, 5-10 degrees.

>>62334615
I meant the 2030, whichever one was smaller.
2031 is the larger one, a bit too large for a desk.

>>62334615
I don't know what your expectations are, but you may want to trying moving the speaker around to get the bass level right.
Is the grill on or off?

>>62334652
DACs don't affect that in particular.

>>62334652
>>62334701
>implying dac:s affect anything
It's the most simple thing in audio to get right. In a blind test you can't tell the difference between a cheap and expensive one.

File: 1484281296575.jpg (49KB, 748x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 748x600px

>>62334701
Grill? They're as they came in the box, I haven't made any modifications to them. When I say the bass is weak, I mean it's not as full as say my car's bass. If I were to blast it and crank the bass on my receiver, it would rattle and shit, but the bass would be in distinct groups of frequencies, if that makes sense. Like I could pick out the different bass ranges, I preferred my car stereo where it sounds like less distinct and more whole.

Sorry if that's confusing, I'm not well-versed in music lingo so idk how else to describe

>>62334743
That heavily depends on what price range we talk about. 300-1000 is just marketing and placebo. Below 300 they continually sound better as you spend more on them. Above 1k there's some more resolution and next to no grain.

>>62334823
Maybe 10 years ago there was a difference. Now even a cheap PC motherboard has a decent DAC. They are not rocket science and the components are dirt cheap.

Sure you can measure a difference but not hear it.

>>62334743
In AB testing I've found cheaper DACs to have a slightly harsher and fatiguing sound but diminishing returns set in quickly.

>>62334615
>bass feels weak
according to their specs they go down to 44hz, so you can't really expect deep bass from those speakers.
also, did you own some cheap 2.1 speakers before you bought the elacs? because cheap subwoofers highly distort bass, giving you the wrong impression about what strong bass sounds like.

>>62334917
Funny you should say that. My SupremeFX (ALC1150) is outclassed by a cheap shit $65 chinese DAC that has Cirrus Logic and Texas Instruments chips that were used last time 9 years ago by Marantz in their CD decks.

Dumb question but would you get any issues if you swapped left and right powered monitor speakers and swipe them in Windows audio panel as well? I want the DAC and inputs speaker to be on the left instead of the right where it normally is for my speakers.

>>62335025

I've suspected for years that Realtek onboard audio cards are just junk. I even attributed stutters in CS GO to their shitty drivers.

>>62334917
there is nothing changed in this 10y anon. cheap dac is still sound cheap. Teac UD-503 sound very poor compared to Berkeley Alpha Dac.

File: 1489536649245.png (29KB, 354x286px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 354x286px

>>62335017
Yes, i did own some powered $50 Logitech speakers, so you're hypothesis explains it. Never had what I considered real speakers before though. Is it bad if I liked the sound color of the logitech ones with distorted bass? Does that mean I'm a pleb that should stick to active lofi equipment or is there better speakers with a similar sound profile?

>>62335066
ASUS is fucking up more audio drivers than they get right. Can't speak of the others, but if ASUS is any indication, the codec WOULD be alright with the right driver. Anyway, I will be using my DAC instead, they can shove their faulty drivers up their ass.

>>62335146
Haha, fellow Logitech user who finds "real" speakers dogshit. Was it by any chance the X-230?

>>62334743
>implying dac:s affect anything
Sure they can. Look at some of the weird audio esoterica that tries to build DAC against every single engineering practice. No reconstruction filter, strong rolloff at both high and low end, unfiltered resampling. These are generally not very low priced.
But if you follow the manual, it takes only a few dollars to get right.

>>62334917
>10 years ago
Modern converter design has crystallized since the late 90-early 2000's. The standards for vendors looking to shave every dollar off possible has not. You still have many real world devices that sounds poor from interference leaking in.
>rocket science
These are very difficult to design from scratch, starting from the converter.
But no one actually does that.

>>62335189
Nah, z313. They were like $35 at Target, so when I ordered $250 speakers I thought I was gonna be blown away, only to find that I was happier with the "junk" speakers.

>>62335329
Yea, those are worse than the X-230, had them. Got rid of them for $20.

>>62335346
Might have to pick that up then

>>62335466
Doubtful you can. They were discontinued loooong ago, and there is no guarantee you'll get a used one that's good. Good luck anyway.

>>62333839
this omg quality is worthwhile but don't go fucking nuts, it's supposed to be about the music and enjoying it properly not about autisting about so much shit

>>62334190
Yeah I know that problem with other speakers just having some flaw that ruins the experience compared to the Logitechs. The best one I've heard that's superior in quality and its sound stage and off axis is way better than the LSR305 is the Vanatoo T0. I don't use a sub though so I don't know it compares but it has a port and settings to crossover for a sub. It's the first speaker that made me realize how bad colored logitech and how bright it is.

>>62334615
>bass feels week
Fuck it, put them in corners, or closer to the back wall

>>62335329
Lock up your old Logitechs and listen to your new speakers only for a week or two then pull out the old ones and give them a listen before deciding. The Logitechs are probably really colored and your brain thinks colored is normal.

>>62336040
They are already about 4 inches away from the wall, my desk isn't big enough to have them any further away ;_;

>>62336076
then it's amp

>>62336151
My receiver has good reviews too (onkyo a9010). Maybe I'm doing something wrong though. With all the different ways to adjust volume idk what the right way is. I currently have the volume knob on my receiver turned up to about half, my system volume at 25%, and I adjust the volume of whatever I'm playing in foobar/mpv. Is there a proper way to have volume set so I don't accidentally blow my head off if I open a yt video at full blast?

>>62336212
those surround receivers are never being good solution. they often sound weak compared to decent stereo amp. maybe it filter out low bass on front monitors and sand it to sub

>>62336212
Keep foobar/mpv/whatever program at 100%. Keep system volume also at 100%. Adjust the volume of your amp only.

Also look up speaker placements guides and get some stands to decouple the speakers from your desk.

>>62336076
Then don't put them on the desk. Put them in your room. On stands. I couldn't hear any subbass from my HS7s on a desk, whereas in the room I could definitely hear it (with them pushed in real close to the corners)

>>62324018
I own these
http://emotiva.com/product/airmotiv-4s/
Really happy with them, even in a room bigger than what you have. I got them on sale for $299, they're probably worth it at $399 but not as amazing value.

File: 1410826043235[1].jpg (11KB, 251x242px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 251x242px

>>62327294
>preamp

Don't forget the postamp and postdac/preamp.

>>62337230
You dunning-krugered yourself. He's not talking about a phono preamp, he's talking about basically a volume control and audio switcher in a box. If your self-powered speakers don't have a built-in volume control, you need a preamp.

Wharfedale Diamond 10.1/10.2 any good? I saw them recommended on /g/ a few years ago but haven't heard them mentioned much lately.

>>62334818
Is the home set up louder only for a few specific frequencies?
That would be the room resonances, which you have to tackle by placement and EQ.

>>62337230
Yes, a passive pre-amp.

It has 3 sets of RCA input/outputs, a volume knob, and a 2 input/output selector.

Since it's fully passive it can be used in several ways, it's primary use would be to connect 2 DAC Inputs to a single output to a set of speakers to have multiple sources with a single volume control.

But it can also be used with two outputs like in my set up wit a single input.

So instead of switching between two sources on 1 output device, I have switching between two output devices on 1 source.


For $49 it's breddy gud stuff.

>>62340103
How does a passive "pre-amp" work.
Isn't it just an input-selector.
Amplifiers need some energy to do the amplification with making the whole statement paradoxical.

File: 2017-09-09 20_23_22.png (1MB, 1533x726px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1533x726px

>>62340251
I have a DAC plugged into the RCA out.
I have my powered studio monitors plugged into the RCA in 1. I have my headphone amp plugged into RCA in 2.

The studio monitors are powered and don't need to be amped. The headphone amp is obviously already an amp.

I press the button on the front to switch between headphones/speakers without having to touch windows settings or mess around with setting default audio devices, etc.

Volume control is also done with hardware instead of using windows, software sound is set to 100% and left there, I use the potentiometer on the pass pre-amp for everything.


Again, for $49 it's breddy gud.

File: 12634.jpg (128KB, 980x664px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 980x664px

>>62340314
But does it have any transistors in it? It is still just a potentiometer with a set of switches.
I can see it says "pre-amp" on your image, but all you can do is turn down volume, or equalize shit.

(pic) Is what I use as input-selector, so that I can listen to music from sources while still being able to hear the computer's audio. And this is pretty much not passive.

File: sys_board.jpg (292KB, 1000x693px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1000x693px

>>62340314
So 49 dollars for (pic)

>>62340387
Yes it's 100% passive, that's kinda the whole point at this price level.

Yours has far more customization ability since you can equalize, but this also can add distortion, depending on the quality of the gear you're using and the quality of the source audio.

>>62340429
>$250
>>62340429
>$50

Not to mention the foot print of the schiit is 10x more manageable for a home desk setup.

>>62340435
Other "passive-pre-amplifiers" I was able to look up looks like they does mixing with coils, while yours is just a switch and a volume knob.

Sorry for the autism but the term for the equipment is just counter-intuitive.

JBL LSR 305's