Need speakers - not klipsch they arent available in my area

Try Creative Progamer or the Gigaworks. The sub isn't as punchy but the satellites are comparable to better (with the latter). I've never heard of Boss before.

I don't think very many people have even heard of Boss speakers, and I know alot. As far as I can tell they primarily sell car audio stereos and subs, which have a completely different aim than home speakers because of the acoustical differences in cars--aka not optimal. Given the noise levels in cars, its no wonder car stereos are built with very forward sound, rather than accurate. In a completely quiet and serene environment, accuracy should come first.

logitech z-5500 ftw

i realize they might be inferior but it all comes down to how much he wants to spend. and the 5500's are a badass set of speakers.

snob IMO though mine rock. show me some audiophile quality speakers that for the same price beat mine in games.

i 2nd that!!!

I have a better suggestion. Logitech X-530s. They are a *lot* cheaper than the Z-5500s, and probably measure within 90% of what the Z-5500s do, and I suspect with lower midrange distortion with a 1.5-way crossover. That's pretty good bang for the buck in the audio world, especially since $200 bookshelves would measure about 500% better than the Z-5500s.

S750? $420 retail?

At the very lowest, 7x Infinity Primus 140s ($280). Or, quite a step above, 7xInfinity Primus 150s ($350) or Athena AS-B1s ($320). Dayton Sub-100 ($100) or Dayton Sub-120 ($120). Both systems fall within +/- 2db 40-20KHz.

Between $400 and $470 you can get a system thats alot more linear than the S750s. Since the Dayton's only amplify two channels, you'll need a receiver. $90 for a Onkyo SRTX501. $490 to $560 for a set that's significantly more linear, greater SPLs, lowered distortion, much greater connectivity as it can actively switch between multiple sources, set your own crossover, adjust the levels to be linear for your sitting position, radio playback, all sorts of algoritmns like A weighted response curves for night listening. Oh yeah, better vertical and horizontal dispersion, linearity at volume, level-matching with the sub, less driver beaming and a slew of other things I'm forgetting.

PC audio is generally faces a lower returns as the price goes up. Here, with all the added perks, I would say the returns have increased rather than diminished per dollar spent.

The great part is you can go to your local Best Buy's Magnolia (as badly set up as they are; you could always find a local hifi dealer), pop in a CD and actually hear the difference, rather than just shout at each other over a forum.

PS: You aren't the type that needs convincing anyway, since you aren't the type who owns "cheese" PC speakers anyway.

What about the Athena 4000 compared to the Dayton sub-120?

Some people say that the Athena is better and the Dayton is a "1 note wonder"..

As we all know good bass is incredibly expensive. You can buy a speaker that's incredibly accurate from 50hz up (aka Ascend Acoustics 170SEs) for $350 -- +/- 1db 55-27KHz...(yes, I did say ONE decible).

However for a system that's that linear for the last 45hz...say 15-50hz +/-2db, you'd be looking at, at *least* a $750-$1000 subwoofer. It takes so much physical excursion to belt out those lows, it's just hard to do it on the cheap.

The Dayton is a good subwoofer for a first time (non-multimedia) buyer. It has very little output below 40hz--by this, not in the multimedia subwoofer sense (you can't hear it), but a more stringent measurement--it dives beyond this point, it's -10db at 35hz. The older Athen ASP-400s, while lacking power and SPL, were more linear than the Dayton's--Tom Nuissance (sp?) who measures many commercial subs, found the Athenas to measure within the +/- 3db spec down to 31hz. Much more impressive "musically" I suppose.

I wouldn't say the Dayton's aren't musical or "one note wonders tho. Since they can't reproduce much below 40hz, there's not much room for THD peaks (like you would see in say a multimedia PC subwoofer, which are poorly EQed). More like it plays the notes it can, but since it doesn't *try* to reach deeper, the upper bass isn't exaggerated by THD peaks (as all overEQed drivers will have THD peaks when trying to extend beyond it's natural bandwidth--in the case of the old Z-680 Logitech subwoofer I had, I measured a +45!! db peak at 90hz when playing a 30hz test tone.), so it is free of being a "one-note wonder" like many PC subwoofers.

The Athena ASP-4000 on the other hand looks like a totally different (possibly inferior?) design, and looks like it was built more for mass market consumption in mind. I don't think it would be as linear as the older 400s, but it looks like it's been armed with a better amp for more SPL/output.

As for the X-530s vs the Z-5300s....when I demo them in stores, I can't even hear the differences between them anymore. They just all sound the same. It's hard to differentiate "ehh" and "a little less ehh" after you are in high-fi. This is not audiophile snobbery. This is turning on LOTR when the King of Rohan is knocking his sword against his cavalry's spears and hearing all these intricate rings...when your roommate who thinks spending any money on audio is foolish goes "holy sh1t dude..."

The only thing that the dayton would do is reinforce what is already there?
I honestly would think that if you drop $350 into the 170's, you would gladly drop $500 into somthing that will hit 16hz with some SPL behind it to get that "That dinosaur just broke my vase" sweetness!

Everytime I see a review on those 170's compared to anything else I just want to skip a car payment and scoop em up!

Movies. Most commercial subs are tuned for 40hz for this reason. This is as far as it extends...and it costs $100. I mean, sure, you could get the Athenas ASP-4000s for about $100 now. If you have a larger living room and need 110+db SPLS (without multimedia subwoofer type "I am here" THD peaks), then this is a great bang for the buck, a hold over until you get better subs.

I personally think Ascend should've listed their speakers at +/-1db for the sake of e-peen, mainly because AV123 has their $200 X-LS flaunted at +/- 1.8db, rather than just use the regular convention (+/- 3db) because honestly, if you look at the graph, +/-3db (F3 point) falls closer to the mid 40hz...

hey, i think there great for music. what makes the logitech better. sorry to get defensive but you'll hurt there feelings

for clarity my speakers are great, how can you not like them in that respect, yes sound is subjective and yes the bass can be a bit much. i usually have it at its lowest or near lowest setting.

nothing can beat a good set of hifi speakers and a nice amp. Dont use any of this computer speaker crap

The Z-5500 logitech are loud. Best Speakers available for the price.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=647862&page=1

Review on Atoms vs Ascend vs SVS shelf speakers... Have you seen this yet Astrallite?

He seems to have similar views that I do as to taste....

problem i have is most my time is spent playing games or playing music. i actually made my self a switch box, so i could switch from my gigaworks to the hifi and back.





p.s pic quickly took with mobile right now lol.

i was talking about your's. that much huh. like i said spec can be decieving. my dads actually cost a little less than that, i did a quick check and seen you can get yours for about a 120 now. as long as they suit you. one thing i know though is that i do find other speakers sound bad and i know that if i did get some good qaulity hi-fi speakers i might not be able to go back to anything else.

Yeah I have. It's amazing the ear that DIYer has (or mind, perhaps is more accurate). He even pinpointed where the high decay areas were on the Ascends. The Ascends were very close to his $250 DIY speakers, the difference being his speakers I believe had much lower time domain distortion. This is usually the hardest thing to hold down in any linear loudspeaker design, and you'd have to get something in the $2k+ range (think Revel) for +/-1db linearity and almost inaudible time domain distortion.

The fact that they rose to the top of the listening test, despite comparisons to much more expensive, and brands with considerable weight to them--Paradigm Studio, Dynaudio Audience, (anandtech has a guy who compared them to B&W DM602 S3s, it was no contest in the favor of the Ascends). There's another AVS thread with Ascend vs Paradigm Studio, Dynaudio Audience, and Boston Acoustics VR3s--which cost $1300 retail and are ALOT more expensive than the Ascends, which won out by a hair's margin at the end because the listener preferred a "jazzier high end."

When the SVSs first came out they were the new "bargain" $200 speakers, but it seems AV123 and their X-LS is just as linear (+/- 1.8db 60-20Khz) and has more bass output (even more than the Ascends; these babies are down -10db at 20hz in-room). So people who would get the SVSs would be people who have space limitations and are trying to fit them into cabinents for HT usage, as the SVSs are of sealed acoustic suspension design. For $200 as a HTPC guy, I would definitely lean toward the X-LS over the SVS SBS-01.

THD is the distortion that occurs immediately at the time of playback (0ms).

Time Domain Distortion, also known as spectral decay, is shown in waterfall plots. Like the following:

B&W DM302 (a $250/pair bookshelf)




Revel Ultima Studio (a $10,000/pair floorstander)



It's measured in milliseconds, and is how long the loudspeaker keeps playing a frequency after the signal has already subsided. Softer materials tend to resonant/ring less, harder/stiffer materials, although produce less total THD, will resonant/ring more (like a bell).

Anytime a loudspeaker driver resonants in the midrange, it's most audible (although some claim to be able to hear high frequency ringing for aluminum tweeters at 23KHz--those people really have superhuman hearing; I personally don't doubt they hear that, as medical tests have shown people with hearing badwidth that far DO exist). Generally metal cones should not be employed in midrange work as our hearing curve is most sensitive from 800-8KHz. The DIY guy mentioned a general resonance he might have heared at the lower midrange, around 1.2KHz while using his DIY speakers as reference (given both his and the Ascends were designed for extreme linearity). However, it's a minor issue considering how linear the loudspeaker is.

Some internet direct loudspeakers use aluminum cones for midranges, in fact its almost a niche market because many people perceive more midrange output as being more detailed. Axiom audio and AV123 fall under this category, although AV123 has recently outdone themselves and released the $200 X-LS, which is totally different, uses drivers from the $800 GR AV-1 kit, and more less decimates AV123s' older Rocket line because its well, cheaper and more accurate.

But some people like the sound of time domain distortion. Everyone perceives sound differently. Some companies (like Revel, or Ascend, and I might put NHT in that category too) believe in the utmost accuracy in their designs. Some companies like to feed a certain demographic, possibly because its what they made their name in and they don't want to risk alienating buyers by changing--Klipsch (high frequency horns), Definitive Technology (bipolar), Axiom/AV123 (metal cones with high time domain distortion), B&W (time domain distortion with their kevlar cones), Dynaudio (laid back, muddy sound, large soundstage), Paradigm (warm sound, makes it harder to blend with sub because the upper bass is peaked), etc, etc.

Okay in audio theory if two loudspeaker systems are totally linear, and all things equal (aka each order of harmonic distortion, spectral decay), they would sound exactly the same, regardless of what type of material was used. This is why we use the slew of measurements (frequency response, time-coherency, spectral decay, THD and also the individual makeup of the even and odd orders of distortion) to get an idea of what it would sound like, because each material has its own characteristics and you need to pinpoint why it sounds the way it does. Final output being frequency response minus the cumulative effects of distortion (less detail) and decay (*more* detail).

We have a slight problem here as no two systems sound exactly the same, so what we usually do is to the best of our knowledge, look at all of the cumulative measurements to theorize why it sounds the way it does.

I know the SVSs are soft-material based but actually the Ascends are based on a harder non-metallic materials. It's a mix of aerogel, kevlar, carbon-fibre and possibly some poly. If it has "less detail" and measures linear, than you have to assume some of it is being drowned out by certain orders of harmonic distortion. Harder materials will tend to exhibit less THD (and seem more detailed), but on the flip side it may be *too* detailed because it rings (spectral decay). So the middle of the road is a composite material, like the drivers used in the Ascends, stiff--so detail doesn't get drowned out by THD--and also flexible enough that it doesn't have trouble releasing the sonic energy efficiently and the final output builds on the signal (poor spectral decay).

Think of soft-material based cones as THD-ridden (as an analogy, the equivalent of minus gain on an EQ) and hard material based cones exhibiting poor spectral decay (the sonic equivalent of plus gain on an EQ).

This is obviously an over simplification as there are other things that regulate how a loudspeaker sounds, such as how it responds physically to more power (it may no longer remain structurally spherical and start producing irregularities in the shape)--as different materials have different stress thresholds and all systems begin to sound different as the power input increases.

There are also things like dispersion pattern to think about as this affects reflections and final room response. But I merely put forth my original argument on completely theoretical grounds, assuming you could control all basic variables, say you were comparing the loudspeakers outside (essentially an anechoic environment) or a large room, or near field analysis only.

A good set of Genelecs, they are going to be the last set of speakers you will ever buy. I'd go for a 2.1 Genelec over any Creative 5.1 or 7.1 system.

Also trust me, you only need the smallest speakers from Genelec, they will already blow your ear drums at less than 1m distance. The dynamic range is great even without sub woofer, but I'd definitively would get a sub woofer.

thats all fne and well for music but for anything else you would need more speakers. i know people will say get reciever and 7 speakers and a sub, but having everything in one package appeals at times.

That's true for music, although for games it's not so good, even remotely.

Gaming speakers are for gaming, HIFI speakers are for HIFI.

What would you reccommend as a 'good set of hifi speakers and a nice amp'?

I dont understand where some of you are coming from saying that these "cheese" speakers are good for gaming...

I have the Klipsch Ultra 5.1 setup and I game with it all the time... And honestly it sounds ok... Not great... Just Ok...

So why wouldn't some nice hifi speakers in a 5 channel config not be as good?

Now I understand 2.1 vs 5.1 or even 7.1 is an issue, but I dont see anything else...

Well, I don't know about you but I wouldn't want to subject my Hi-Fi speakers to a PC game. They're designed to play back music, and there's no escaping that - not frag grenades and rocket launchers.

I'm not saying a 5.1 set of, say Eltax (not really that fantastic but within the same price range) wouldn't sound great for gaming, but if you really appreciate audio I think you should keep the two seperate. My friend busted his tweeters on his B&W floorstanders with his PC - granted he should have biwired, but the fact remains - it was alright with his CD deck.

I'm going to have to call you on that - I'm not sure what BiWiring is in the states or whereever you are, but in the UK it's not just 'merely connecting two wires to the same amp'. You connect two sets of wires to each speaker output on the rear of your amp, and have each set go to a different section of the frequency crossover on your speakers.

I know some people have even gone so far as to try and install a sort of frequency crossover inside the amplifier, and bypassing the often lower quality crossover circuit in the speakers.

I don't think that it can affect the speakers in such an extreme way as the difference between blowing them or not blowing them, but it does make for a clearer bass and a clearer treble - although as is the case with most things audiophile it's a point of controversy.

Like I said, a 'Hi-Fi' 5.1 setup (although also like I said Eltax is not a good example, although they do do a cheap 5.1 setup) will sound better for music and also be good for gaming, but it's not what it's designed for.