Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best 2.1 computer speakers for music

Last response: in Components
Share
February 23, 2006 7:50:39 PM

Best 2.1 speakers, will be used in a bed room on a desk. Sound card will be X-Fi Xtreme Music. Almost exclusivly music, some gaming and video, but not enough to wave my decision of going 2.1. Under $150.

I was looking at the Logitech z-2300s or the Klipsch Promedia 2.1. But then I also found a deal for the Klipsch iFi speakers that can be riged for a computer. What should I pick, or is there something else that is better.

Another factor, is that i listen to about 100% mp3 files at a 128 bitrate. What effect does this have on what I should buy? Is there a better way to get better quality music from CDs and torrents?
February 23, 2006 8:26:04 PM

I have the X-fi sound card and with the Bose Companion 2 it sounds as good as a perfectly tuned guitar. But I heard about the Klipsch Promedia 2.1 and it performs great and some would say the best 2.1 speaker.

The bose componion 2 is now at $150 right at your budget. The Klipsch are around $130. I don't know much about the Logitech. But you can't go wrong with these two speakers when you want high quality sound. Get the Klipsch instead of the Bose for a think they have similar quality but for a lower price. :D 
February 23, 2006 9:06:41 PM

If your burning CDs burn them at a higher rate, I think 320 is the highest for mp3, which is what I burn at but I have a lot of storage. I think 192 would be enough if storage is an issue. I have of Creatives 3300, probably a different designation now because these are several years old, and good they're for music. I wouldn't buy any speakers I haven't listened to. People can help you narrow your choices but ultimately it's what sounds best to you.
Related resources
February 23, 2006 9:23:32 PM

Both the Z-2300s and the Promedia 2.1s are respectable speakers.

But against the iFi (if you are talking about the $200 Costco deal, or the $179 Klipsch refurb deal), then it's no competition. The iFi is composed of Klipsch reference home theater speakers whose individual parts are worth over $500.

If the iFi is too costly for you, the consensus 2.1 speaker set under $150 is the Altec Lansing MX5021. 6.25" sub, and very large power satellites, with dual 3" midranges and a 1" tweeter. Might give the iFi a run for its money.
February 23, 2006 11:00:50 PM

Quote:
Both the Z-2300s and the Promedia 2.1s are respectable speakers.

But against the iFi (if you are talking about the $200 Costco deal, or the $179 Klipsch refurb deal), then it's no competition. The iFi is composed of Klipsch reference home theater speakers whose individual parts are worth over $500.

If the iFi is too costly for you, the consensus 2.1 speaker set under $150 is the Altec Lansing MX5021. 6.25" sub, and very large power satellites, with dual 3" midranges and a 1" tweeter. Might give the iFi a run for its money.


Right now I just want the quality, regardless of the price, in my budget of corse, I can get the iFi's for a very good price. 8) How does the iFi's sub compar to the pro media 2.1 sub and the logitech z-2300 sub?
February 24, 2006 4:38:13 AM

M-Audio makes some very nice speakers as well.
February 24, 2006 6:01:40 AM

The iFi's sub is in another league. It's based on the $300 RW-8 and is tuned to around 30hz. It's flat to 27hz (-3db). The iFi originally debuted at over $400 (and still is at most locations, including the Apple Store), basically Costco is selling it at a razor thin profit margin.

Logitech subs are poorly braced, and suffer from massive THD peaks (basically play a 40hz tone at 80db, and you get a 100db 60hz tone. This is not bass...it's just noise and distortion that overpowers the real musical information).

The Promedia 2.1 sub is several generations behind the iFi sub and is a smaller 6.5" compared to the larger 8" iFi sub (which is also the most linear sub Klipsch has made in its non-reference line). The whole system is such an incredible deal, it's amazing its a Klipsch product (Klipsch is generally considered very low end hifi, along with types like Cerwin Vega; sort of pay for the looks but not performance sort of thing. The iFi totally knocks that preconception over in terms of value and performance).
February 24, 2006 7:46:51 AM

Quote:
Best 2.1 speakers, will be used in a bed room on a desk. Sound card will be X-Fi Xtreme Music. Almost exclusivly music, some gaming and video, but not enough to wave my decision of going 2.1. Under $150.

I was looking at the Logitech z-2300s or the Klipsch Promedia 2.1. But then I also found a deal for the Klipsch iFi speakers that can be riged for a computer. What should I pick, or is there something else that is better.

Another factor, is that i listen to about 100% mp3 files at a 128 bitrate. What effect does this have on what I should buy? Is there a better way to get better quality music from CDs and torrents?


Speakers are quite individual issues.
As a brand I do not need anything better (price category) than Klipsch, but would not even consider other brands.

I settled for Klipsch Pro Media 5.1 Ultra, on realtek 850 on board.

They are more than sufficient for my "theater" needs and have supreme volume control.
Very pleased.

I wouldn't even consider Logitech!

If you are buying "X-Fi Xtreme Music than you should consider better than 2.1 and not less than 5.1
February 24, 2006 8:31:46 AM

I Say Try VKer , go to VKer Web Site , if want power it makes you feel good , ( i have one ) and i ALWAYS listen to Iron Maiden , and i must say that VKer is outstanding in music !!
but i respect logitech , it your choice and ofcourse logitech in nomber 1
February 24, 2006 1:16:44 PM

I have some Altec Lansing 2.1's and they sound great. Nice bass response and the satellites are clear and crisp. I bought them from Wal-Mart a few years ago for about $80. I want to upgrade to 5.1 or 7.1 but don't have the money for a speaker set and a new card.
February 24, 2006 1:50:10 PM

The last time I was at MicroCenter and Compusa I gave a good listen to both the Logitech and Klipsch 2.1 setups. I do agree with whoever said it, the Logitch bass is overpowering. Sure you can adjust the gain but it did seem to change more with different frequencies; the Klipsch was far mor consistent.

I did prefer the overall design of the Logitech but the sound of the Klipsch.
February 24, 2006 2:41:45 PM

Quote:

If you are buying "X-Fi Xtreme Music than you should consider better than 2.1 and not less than 5.1


What exactly are you trying to say? I have seen some people say that for 2.1 m-audio cards can be much better for the money, is this true? What is a good card they make for good music 2.1?
February 24, 2006 3:51:54 PM

Quote:
What exactly are you trying to say? I have seen some people say that for 2.1 m-audio cards can be much better for the money, is this true? What is a good card they make for good music 2.1?


He's just saying that 5.1 is better because you get more speakers! If you're listening to something in stereo more speakers are going to do crap! Sure you may get some 'surround sound' from the signal processing but it's not going to sound any better.

The x-fi is a good choice for music in 2.1. If you're an avid gamer or watch movies then 5.1 would be a wise choice.
February 25, 2006 12:23:39 AM

It's possible the X-Fi comment is supposed to mean that there are cheap 2.1 solutions that cost little more than $20 that would work just as well, if not better for music with very high quality DACs (no resampling to 48KHz).
March 28, 2006 12:30:15 PM

Personally I like Klipsch better.
I actually listened to quiet a few speakers before I get the Klipsch.
March 28, 2006 11:25:32 PM

I got a set of altec lansing cs21's a little while ago. awesome speakers for a respectable price ~£80.

No noticeable distortion playing DVDs/music or playing games even at high volumes
March 29, 2006 5:09:33 AM

Look at the Swans, I've heard they are of unheard of quality for computer speakers. Other than that, I would go with Klipsch. Thier super efficient speakers make the most out of the small amplifiers used in computer speakers. Of course, I could build you a pair, (Speaker building is my newest hobby) but hey :lol: 
March 29, 2006 12:29:30 PM

The Swan M200s are basically low grade studio monitors "marketed" for PC use. Really, there are sever other studio monitors (self powered bookshelves) also in that price range which are comparable, but not particularly "marketed" as PC speakers and thus don't get as many kudos. Of course I'm not trying to put down the Swans, as very people in PC gaming are even remotely aware of what accurate sound reproduction is like (or rather, the joys of), and the Swans do some audio justice here, but rather, my point is marketing can sometimes put blinders on peoples' perceptions and their decision making becomes solely based on recommendations or owners parroting their love, rather than objective qualifications.

For the range of frequencies the satellite covers, the iFi with its cerametallic drivers will do better than the Swans' very "standard" polypropelene drivers. The bass extension will also be superior with the iFi too (because of the subwoofer), but of course at the cost of time-coherency (satellites + subwoofer aren't time alligned, vs a point source).
March 29, 2006 1:08:36 PM

I've got the Klipsch Promedia 2.1 speakers and I am very satisfied.
March 29, 2006 1:55:02 PM

have you ever heard of edifier? i dont know how prices are, but they are made to be cheap, although using some nice features, like mdf body for subwoofer and satellites, 2-way satellites and stuff... check this out:

http://www.edifier.ca/products/xx00/xx00.html

look for the x600

i have a r451 5.1 from edifier and it kicks ass
March 30, 2006 4:58:44 PM

I have the Klipsch Promedia 2.1s and I absolutely love them.

From what I'm hearing about these iFi speakers though, they sound like a better deal if you're willing to fork out the dough.

For under 150 I would say go with the Promedias, but like everyone else is saying, it's a matter of personal preference.
April 2, 2006 6:10:42 AM

Another vote for the Klipsch Promedias!!

I havn't seen these new iFi spoeakers, and even though the Klipsch Promedia may have an outdated sub woofer, they still rock!

As stated above, I am very satisfied with these speakers!

krfan1
April 2, 2006 12:02:49 PM

welp I'm a creative guy! Their speakers are good too. My xtreme music sounds great with my 2.1 creatives.
April 3, 2006 4:48:19 PM

For music I would forget about computer speakers all together as they are meant for gaming and movies not sounding good on music. Most sound pretty horrible on music. Do yourself a favor and get a nice pair of active studio monitors. The M-audio Studiopro 4 is in your price range and sounds pretty nice for $150, definitly better than the Logitech and Klipsch computer speakers. Only thing is they dont have a sub so they wont have the pounding bass, but the bass is fine for music imo. And you can always add a sub at a later date if you really feel its needed.
I used them for a little while while I was saving to get my Genelecs, and they did the job very well
April 3, 2006 4:58:38 PM

Quote:
t (Klipsch is generally considered very low end hifi, along with types like Cerwin Vega; sort of pay for the looks but not performance sort of thing. The iFi totally knocks that preconception over in terms of value and performance).

Are you kidding?? Klipsch is very low end?? I dont think you can put Klipsch in the same group as crap like Bose or Cerwin Vega. Klipsch have been around for a wile and have produced probably some of the best high-end speakers ever built(Khorn, Heresy, Cornwall...). Yes thier lower end stuff isnt that great but the Heritage line is simply amazing and one of the best bang for the buck in the hi-end market. They just came out with the new Cornwall 3 and its truly an awesome speaker especially when you consider you can get the for $3k, not many speakers can compare at that price, especially if your rock fan!!
April 3, 2006 5:26:09 PM

I will have to agree with the consensus here and say that the Klipsch Pro Media would be a superior choice. The iFi.... if you have the money.... would be like kicking the Pro Media up a couple of notches. I personally own the Logitech Z680s and they thump. I must say however that it is not in tune with some music. I have the bass all the way down on the controls and it still sounds too "boomy". For bass heavy rap or drum and bass I am loving it..... cant say the same for my neighbors. But for other music I wish the Z680s had a little bit more... finesse. Klipsch... Pro Media or iFi.... will give you the finesse along with the power.
April 4, 2006 12:26:52 AM

Man I dunno, I have heard some amazing speakers and a decent pair of creative i-trigues I think that they are a great bang for the buck. They sound really good? Every used them with xfi card or are you just saying sound quality sucks?
April 4, 2006 1:00:03 AM

I bought a set of i-Trigues for my sister and I must say they sound great. I was a little disappointed that the bass started to lose itself and the midrange became to pronounced as you turned the volume up. For light listening in a small room... say college dorm.... its perfect. I like it loud.... thats why I got the Z680s. I still will say that the Klipsch are the most well rounded set you can find in 2.1 audio if you got the loot. For the budget minded the Creative i-Trigues are good alternatives. To tell you the truth the only way you will know what you like with audio is to go to a store like Best Buy or Circuit City and listen to the bastards. Forget the specs.... its all about the sound.
April 4, 2006 1:23:41 AM

Quote:
not many speakers can compare at that price, especially if your rock fan!!


Yeah well, that was kind of my point. From an objective point of view, hifi is about "accuracy." Klipschs are anything but accurate on their high-end, it's an acquired taste. If you listen only to rock and like how they exaggerate the midrange, all the best to you, sound is subjective. But if you listen to a wider range of music, those exaggerations will create listening fatigue in music with wider dynamic range. Accuracy or flavor, versatile or genre specific. These are all things you need to look at when purchasing loudspeakers.
April 4, 2006 1:36:29 AM

personally id say crap on computer speakers and get a real sound system
i run a 500 watt suround sound reciever with a home suround speaker package sounds better than any computer specific speakers ive ever heard
April 4, 2006 2:36:59 AM

Quote:
personally id say crap on computer speakers and get a real sound system
i run a 500 watt suround sound reciever with a home suround speaker package sounds better than any computer specific speakers ive ever heard


Yeah but no one knows what you are talking about when you shake the "wattage" e-peen because that just walks right with the multimedia speaker lingo--wow 500W! And RMS too, that's the important thing!

More like, things what satellite speakers can't provide, such as
1) wide dispersion (vertical or horizontal...sounds like its coming from a point source rather than from a real "sound stage")

2) large sweetspot (small midrange drivers beam forward like lasers)

3) low distortion (you don't seriously think its playing 110db cleanly do you?)

4) Linearity (your neighbors are annoyed when you turn up your computer speakers...whereas someone else can turn up more accurate home theater speakers (that reaches higher, and digs deeper) to much higher sound pressure levels without annoying the neighbors...because it doesn't have those random +20db upper bass peaks that sound like one note bass knocking through the wall)
Anonymous
April 4, 2006 4:42:22 PM

I gotta agree with that. Dumping megawatts of power means nothing if it is in the form of heat for example since what we care about is acoustic energy. What really matters here is not the total power output but the power that is actually turned into audio and that will depend on the total power out AND the efficiency of the electromechanical transducers, ie the loudspeakers, and whatever is lost in passive filters, interconnects etc.

I think Astrallites point here is valid especially considering the current PC speaker and car audio speaker markets since it is here that marketting depts act nearly criminal in specmanship. The power ratings without some form of qualification regarding the efficiency of the conversion is rather meaningless. In fact when I see power ratings with no further qualifications about the performance my imediate assumption is that the manufacturer has something to hide.

Of course the other part of the story is the accuracy....but that is another matter.
April 4, 2006 7:52:37 PM

Quote:
Best 2.1 speakers, will be used in a bed room on a desk. Sound card will be X-Fi Xtreme Music. Almost exclusivly music, some gaming and video, but not enough to wave my decision of going 2.1. Under $150.

I was looking at the Logitech z-2300s or the Klipsch Promedia 2.1. But then I also found a deal for the Klipsch iFi speakers that can be riged for a computer. What should I pick, or is there something else that is better.

Another factor, is that i listen to about 100% mp3 files at a 128 bitrate. What effect does this have on what I should buy? Is there a better way to get better quality music from CDs and torrents?


First, speaker choice is highly individualistic; what may sound good to one person may not to another. There are some general rules though that will help you decide. First, no self respecting professional will recommend Bose. Any company that refuses to publish specs (performance) on their equipment should always be suspect. Next, there is a reason they call their ‘sub’ woofer an Acoustimass – it’s because legally they cannot because it cannot attain the frequencies required of true subwoofers.

Anyway, look for speakers with a dB higher than 89 and typically they start at $300 Pr. and those are not very good. To attain anything really close to what that card is capable of you’ll need to spend at least $500, seriously. That’s why I don’t really understand why people spend 200+ on sound cards when they put cheap 100 speakers on their systems. Buying a set of 100+ headphones is really the way to go if you want anything close to the quality capable by that sound card.
April 4, 2006 8:35:21 PM

well then lets be more specific pioneer model vsx-d412 reciever and that would be 500 watts rms (laymen terms 500 watts continuous output not peak) and bose surround speakers http://www.crutchfield.com/S-GrIIdHDwe5m/cgi-bin/ProdVi...

i do realize this persons budget is lower than what i listed here but a simple 2 speaker setup with a stereo reciever would still be better and higher quality than just about any speaker system that is computer specific although if i were to buy computer specific speakers get klipsch
April 4, 2006 9:12:19 PM

Pharoah, I must say that is a nice setup you got there. Excellent receiver and great speaker package. Though I am not a diehard fan of Bose I cant deny that they make great sounding products.... sometimes. As for the your receiver being 500 watt of continuous power, I couldnt help but notice the specs and the way the wattage was tested. According to the specs on the Crutchfield website:
--Stereo Mode Power 100 Watt @ 8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, THD: 0.2% --Surround Mode Power 100 Watt @ 8 ohm, 1 kHz, THD: 1%

Unfortunately the 100 watts produced in stereo mode is not equal to the same 100 watts in surrond mode. In actuality if the surrond mode was to be tested the same way the stereo mode was test, you will find that the wattage output would be smaller than the listed 500 watts. Though this is a minor thing I will still say that your system is still better than most PC speaker configurations.... more versatile too.
April 4, 2006 9:27:18 PM

Quote:
Another factor, is that i listen to about 100% mp3 files at a 128 bitrate. What effect does this have on what I should buy? Is there a better way to get better quality music from CDs and torrents?


I second the recommendation on tha Altec Lansing 2.1's. I got a set a few years ago and you wouldn't believe all the people that comment about how excellent they sound.

WRT ripping CD's, there is a ton of literature out there about the sound vs. bitrate, etc. I know that without VBR, I can hear the difference between 128 and 256 on my Altec Lansings and even more on my big stereo system. With VBR encoding, 128 sounds much better to my ears. I am currently ripping at 192kHz with VBR on. Sounds good to me! If I remember right, you can only buy at 128 through services like itunes, right?
April 4, 2006 10:12:37 PM

Well purchased iTunes tracks are encoded in 128kbs but its AAC format which is more efficient and sounds better at 128kbs than MP3. AAC, though a more superior format to rip CDs to, is not widely supported.... except if you have an iPod. I am starting to see some after market car stereo systems with AAC support however.
April 5, 2006 12:33:27 AM

Quote:
Well purchased iTunes tracks are encoded in 128kbs but its AAC format which is more efficient and sounds better at 128kbs than MP3. AAC, though a more superior format to rip CDs to, is not widely supported.... except if you have an iPod.


Sure, but even though 128AAC is a bit more efficient, to my ears it can't compete with 192VBR. With disc space being cheap and MP3 players having huge memory, the additional space required is meaningless to me because if the music sounds noisy, I won't listen as much.

I hear people gripe about AAC and needing itunes but to me it's really no big deal. I've heard of better music software but haven't messed with it much in the last couple of years. Since iTunes allows VBR, it's fine for me!
April 5, 2006 1:05:13 AM

Interesting Bose info:

http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html

http://liquidtheater.com/editorial_56.html

Disclaimer:

Bose is obviously in a very interesting position in the audio market. They've never followed major audio trends (but the one constant always been accuracy, and they aren't into that either).

However, they are a very good business. They market their speakers against home theater in a boxes against import giants like Sony, Yamaha, Onkyo, etc.

These companies used to actually lead the world in audio design, but partly thanks to the collapse of the world monetary system in the 70s, where the US demanded currency depreciation against the rest of the world so it could be more competitive in the world market (or it would impose massive trade barriers), every other country had to appreciate its currency (hurting US importers). This is part of the reason why the Japanese import giants mostly sell cheap stuff here nowadays, but you'd never see these products in Japan.

On to the more important point, which is these companies dominate the low end, and with the long standing market penetration, everyone (under the age of 50 anyway, who had a clue at some point) thinks these are "normal" for speakers, rather than bookshelves and floorstanders which dominated loudspeakers until the 1980s. Bose today simply sells a slightly better product, and at a marked up price. Comparing the two makes it easy to see Bose is better. Bose is in this position because they achieved market penetration back in the 70s, when they actually had an audio mantra (stereo everwhere) rather than just selling a priced-up "me too" product.

Have I heard Bose? Yeah. Have I owned Bose? Yeah, but only the low end 2.1 Mediamate speakers, and those (as I look back to my foolish days) were horribly overpriced, but had the Bose name.

Do they "suck?" That's a value judgement. Some people buy it for decor (I believe it's called Wife Acceptance Factor). Some buy it because they heard its good, from a friend, on Time magazine, or the Shopping Network. If you are happy with it, your say is the last. If you are trying to achieve audio nirvana, well, I *IMO* think you could do better for the same money or even a lot less.
April 5, 2006 5:55:20 AM

Quote:
Sure, but even though 128AAC is a bit more efficient, to my ears it can't compete with 192VBR.


Agreed. But what if we did 128VBR with AAC........ would you still be able to hear the difference. I dont think so but I sure would like it if the iTunes music downloads were at least 192kbs AAC.... sounds like over kill but I want to download the best quality (hell I am paying for it) and sync it to my player at a lower bit rate (like transcode it on the fly like it does with the iPod Shuffles).
April 6, 2006 6:38:18 AM

Quote:
Sure, but even though 128AAC is a bit more efficient, to my ears it can't compete with 192VBR.


Agreed. But what if we did 128VBR with AAC........ would you still be able to hear the difference. I dont think so but (snip)

About a month ago, I picked the 128VBR AAC from 192VBR non-AAC on four out of five tunes using Sennheiser HD580s. The 192 sounded less edgy, grainy, whatever you wanna call it. I could not reliably tell the diff between 192VBR AAC and 192VBR non-AAC.
April 6, 2006 7:55:51 PM

I think it must be difficult, no, impossible to tell another person what speaker is better or `which one is the best for them. Seeing that the audio experience takes place inside of our head and since each person is different, with different ideas, values, perceptions, priorities and way of thinking it has to be an insult to tell another person that what one hears, through their audio experience, that takes place in side of their being is what others should hear from their audio experience that is taking place inside of their being.

Worse, is to say that something is wrong with one person’s value judgment if there audio experience with any given speaker is not the same as someone else’s.

When we collectively talk about speakers, we express our own audio experience, as it occurred/s inside of our own mind. That the other person expresses a different experience is natural, correct and just as valid as everyone else’s. The only person that buy the best speaker for him or her self is that person! No one can hear for them! Yes they can let someone else chose for them, but in that case they will end up with the other persons values, not their own!

Some people may be happy with that, but to me it is like letting someone else chose your
Spouse for you.
April 7, 2006 2:43:40 AM

Quote:
I think it must be difficult, no, impossible to tell another person what speaker is better or `which one is the best for them. Seeing that the audio experience takes place inside of our head and since each person is different, with different ideas, values, perceptions, priorities and way of thinking it has to be an insult to tell another person that what one hears, through their audio experience, that takes place in side of their being is what others should hear from their audio experience that is taking place inside of their being.


That's true. Mood is a key component too. Some components can sound different from a competitor without either being necessarily better.
April 7, 2006 4:34:38 AM

Quote:
About a month ago, I picked the 128VBR AAC from 192VBR non-AAC on four out of five tunes using Sennheiser HD580s.


Now did you test this with all the same tunes encoded in each format from the same source? If not then I dont think that was a fair test. The thing is to have a track encoded in 128VBR ACC and 192VBR non ACC. Non AAC..... I hope you mean MP3 because there are many other audio formats out that that support Variable Bit Rates. Besides thats what we were originally comparing.... right? :?
April 7, 2006 11:17:08 AM

Quote:
I think it must be difficult, no, impossible to tell another person what speaker is better or `which one is the best for them. Seeing that the audio experience takes place inside of our head and since each person is different, with different ideas, values, perceptions, priorities and way of thinking it has to be an insult to tell another person that what one hears, through their audio experience, that takes place in side of their being is what others should hear from their audio experience that is taking place inside of their being.

Worse, is to say that something is wrong with one person’s value judgment if there audio experience with any given speaker is not the same as someone else’s.

When we collectively talk about speakers, we express our own audio experience, as it occurred/s inside of our own mind. That the other person expresses a different experience is natural, correct and just as valid as everyone else’s. The only person that buy the best speaker for him or her self is that person! No one can hear for them! Yes they can let someone else chose for them, but in that case they will end up with the other persons values, not their own!

Some people may be happy with that, but to me it is like letting someone else chose your
Spouse for you.


I think you are confusing informed purchases with uninformed ones. Yes, it's anyone's right to buy and enjoy whatever he wants. That goes without saying.

IF they auditioned it against what they have or made side to side comparisons, they are free to believe whatever their mind tells them--that's individual subjectivity. Also, if you purchased it based on a specific need, such as WAF--wife acceptance factor--and it fits your needs, then you've done your homework.

Now the issue here is people who simply buy what they saw in Time Magazine or the Shopping Network "as the best" without any objective comparisons, or heard it from their cousin, pays the premium, and never looks back--now wait, that's your choice too! That's not the problem. The problem is coming onto forums like this parrot the product they bought for the above reasons, not for something that is comparative at all, and throwing down the objective arguments of others, deflecting them as either haters, not knowing what they are talking about, or working for the competition (of the company you bought), while having no objective arguments to support your own. Then, you are just completely delusional, and I (and I think anyone sane) should have a problem with that. Don't need to name any names, but there are a few forum regulars that fit this bill.
!