Help me make a choice....

I'd just put up with it till I upgrade.

Well you didn't include the 1-2 years part. I change my decision then. Upgrade then.

My Two Cents

1) All computer amplified speakers suck. You're better off to buy mid range Stereo Receiver and a mid range set of surround sound speakers.

A forty year old two channel stereo amplifier and three way reflex speakers will beat any of today's amplifed computer speakers.

Why? It's Root, Mean, Square Output Power verses Total Harmonic Distortion verses Signal to Noise Ratio.

Audiophile speaking any amplifier with an output power of 20W RMS per channel should have a S/N Ratio greater than 90dB with a THD less than 0.5%

Computer sound cards have poor preamplified output signal because the THD is usually higher than 1%. They all have S/N Ratios greater than 90dB so that is not an issue. And they all use software to manipulate tone.
Even high quality sound cards have poor preamplified output signals. They may have great sound processing capabilities (ex. Dolby Digital Surround Decoding) except the sound quality is pure crap.

I'm disgusted with computer sound hardware. It doesn't matter if it's an AC97 compatable ASIC chip using the cpu to process the sound processing control or an independent sound processor on an expansion card. The quality of output signal is crap.

Anyway there is no reason to spend more than $50 on a 2.1 speaker system. Plus I'll never waste money on a sound expansion card because on board sound chips are perfectly capable for listening to music and DVD sound. Gamers would require higher end sound processors for multichannel surround sound.

2) If you have a newer ASIC sound chip on your motherboard and you're not a heavy gamer I wouldn't recommend getting a highend soundcard.

3) Spend the majority of your money on a quality 19" LCD monitor.

Thanks for letting me rant about crappy amplifed computer speakers. They really suck.

Samsung SyncMaster 960BF, kick ass LCD and runs around a 4ms refresh so there will be no ghosting during games. I should know because I'm running one right now . Also has excellent picture quality and has an anti glare coating on the screen. I bought it for 450 bucks at Bestbuy, likely less now. It was guaranteed to have no dead pixles, and it still doesn't. Great little 19", unless you want something bigger.

Edited for spelling.

Let me see if i got this right....i am supposed to pay almost $100 more for a non-widescreen LCD thats SMALLER ($200+ total once i get the 2nd one) because it has a 4ms refresh rate? UM...no

Low res: only 1280x1024 is a HUGE limiting factor for me....as well as the drop in size, increase in price, and non-widescreen.

Does your samsung have 8bit color?

I bought for image quality, and because I wanted it, had a sleek look that goes good with my system.

I like widescreen because i get more out of all my movies and HDtv shows.....widescreen 20" is better then 3:4 24" for what i do.

And i REALLY multimonitor setup....and it would bug me to have 2 types of screens.

I would actually get a Fw900, if the people on ebay lived closer. Hlaf only do local pickup, and the other half will do $125 shipping with no innsurance offered.

shit i forgot to answer your original question.

i would go ahead and upgrade your monitor for now, lcd's are pretty cheap right now.

Yep. And stop saying my monitor sucks, I wanted so I bought it, end of story.

I'm not an audiophile. Nor am I offended by your post.
I'm just disgusted that sound for home computers seems to be a forgotten issue with hardware designers and developers.
The TV we have right now has dial tuning and a mono speaker! And our stereo is a ten year old ghetto blaster.
I have a main stream Pioneer deck and decent speakers in my car but it's not high quality. THD is 5% at Peak RMS output.
I just think if a person is going to spend over $200 dollars on computer speaker system it should at least have an amplifer that can provide a low THD at peak RMS output. Something at 1.5% THD or less is good.

Tom's Hardware Review of 2.0 Speakers

Thats awesome....a ghetto blaster!!
But as far as computer speakers....unless i have $500-$600 to spend i am stuck with "computer speakers" because buying everything seperate is a little more money, and its more of a hassle to setup. I like the knob on my desk to adjust sound levels and it has a headphone jack.....simple things a Home Theater system can't do....but yes, you're right, audio sucks on them.

I'd recommend researching and buying a hi-fi system, even if the price is going to be a couple hundred dollars higher.

Now, I'm not talking about audiophile-like solutions where a couple grand is the "budget solution", and $300 is spent just on wires.

However, a HT AV amp/receiver + speaker pack, even a relatively cheap one, sounds, at least to my untrained ears, much, much better.

You also get, all the connectivity, radio, functions and whatnot that these things offer and the chance watch real 5/6/7.1 home movies if you ever buy a projector or very large screen later.

Maybe it's just me, but I hate buying half-assed solutions, even though I'm very, very frugal - I always go for bang/buck and computer speakers offer very little bang. Yes, an amp for $150 is nowhere close to a true audiophile's wet dream, but they still have much better THD ratings and good sound, much better than $150 2.1 computer speakers. For $300, I can't tell the difference between it and super expensive solutions. (My father's 3-year old Yamaha has a THD of 0.05% at rated RMS power)

The problem is now, of course, the speakers. The satellites + woofer you buy in AV receiver packs offer good sound, much better than most computer solutions, IMO...but I'd go for a pair of mid-range bookshelves or even floor speakers. Something like a pair of Celestion F15s can be had for around $200 and offer sound above anything I've heard out of computer speakers, even without a woofer. You really have to research though, as price alone is a very bad indicator - listen to stuff in stores...

Just for info, I have an old, Soviet, stereo Hi-fi amp with a reworked pair of these. Build quality wasn't ideal, originaly, but reworked (little things in the filters, isolation etc.) the things sound way, way, way above the crap I can afford as a student - and I got it all for almost free.

Upgrade your CPU, definately...

Problem solved...

Do you have a big blank wall nearby? I'd suggest getting a projector.

Being an old "Geetar" player when ever I see the word Valve coupled with pre-amp I think vacuum tubes... surely this can't be your meaning...

What a goof... Dat' bitch is gonna' run hot ...I've got a small old peavy amp head that has 3 ax7's in it...You cant hold your hand near them for more then 30 sec's...

Odd Idea for a computer....

Now THIS is an original idea worht looking into....

You are, as always, most very welcome

Seriously, I've read what you said... but I can't agree with your reasons. It's a true, honest recommendation: spending $300 on computer speakers is money wasted, IMO. Searching around for a quality setup (pawnshops are a great idea, actually) for $500 isn't.

My setup cost me no money beyond a few electrical components and one mid-range driver, (and time - can't forget time) but sounds much, much better than any PC-speaker system I heard. (Though I don't think I've listened to the specific model you want to buy.)

I could be wrong.

I'm biased against PC speakers: when I was searching around 3-4 years ago the Z-5500s didn't exist and the stuff that was available wasn't very good... but like I said, I could be wrong, probably am. (The Z-680s didn't impress me all that much, though)

And I made my own crossovers to suit my music tastes, it's not that hard.

It's all very subjective, anyway.

I live in an apartment...my neighbors aren't too happy sometimes when I have people over.

But, yeah, it's a big problem. I had to buy a good pair of phones just so I could listen to things at night or at the volume I prefer. And 90% of my music listening is now headphone listening.

Those are the ugliest speakers i have ever seen.

While TOm's gives them props.....i need some user reviews to know exactly what i am dealing with.

Thanx for the option, but for $69 more i am getting something I KNOW is good.

I looked for the ones you are talking about and can't find them....until you provide proof.....they are still the ugliest

LMAO!

I couldnt get past that line without slurping my beer back hardways. Yes, they are terribe speakers, but the ones i had before were a 2.0 system that was even worse.

I moved alot when i was younger....and so large 5.1 systems made no sense...the 2.0 set i had had a headphone jack and i had a nice comfy $135 set of headphones. Amazing ones...but now that i have my own place, i am looking to get rid of these HORRIBLE things.

No offense, but are you really a guy? Most of your responses are...um...chickish.


Speakers=sound. Looks= Speakers make sound....but women do come to my apt....and i would prefer not to have insanely ugly ass speakers. If they sounded HELLA tight....i would be all over them. Who has them that i can listen to?? Circuit City or some place?

i personally would say upgrade the speakers first, not now though (you only use your monitor when your on the computer, speakers can be used otherwise (greater useage)), but all i can say is, it would be better to get a reciever/speaker combo, although i know their quite expensive, i would wait until you had some more spare cash to spend on something that will last you and something you will be happy with for a long time to come.

Ara