-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Audiophile quality PC speakers
- Thread starter nitewulf
- Start date
- Status
nitewulf said:
Yeah, it definitely would have been preferrable to audition several pairs, but unfortunatelyI live in a small town so there's not many hi-fi stores around. Also, the speakers were purchased new at a considerable discount from "retail" price and are new, so I should be able to sell them for nearly the same amount if I don't like them.
In terms of room acoustics, my room is nowhere near optimal, but it'll have to do for now. Sooner or later, I'll get the stands, place them in a nice listening room and work on room treatments/perfect placement. Research into room acoustics will be something I will engage in heavily pretty soon.
The Mentor 2's remind me of the main ship off of Gradius:
These Dali Helicons are unbelievably pretty:
beelulzebub
Banned
Hi everyone. I've been lurking in this thread for a little while and am looking for some guidance.
I'm looking for a pair of self-powered desktop speakers for my turntable/PC setup on a budget. I don't want to wrangle amps or receivers into it if I don't have to: it's extra expense, extra clutter for my already cramped desk, and the less power drawn, the better (electric bill and all that). The speakers that seem to best fit what I'm looking for would be the Swan M200 Mk.III, and at $400, is a little more than I'd like to spend. I considered the Mk.II since it's half the price, but the Mk.III seem to be a significant step up in sound quality...I can save up a little bit longer if it's worth it. If anyone has any suggestions that seem to fit here, fire away. It can be a bit overwhelming researching this sort of thing.
Not really sure where to start with DAC's...I'll be doing plenty more research on them tomorrow. My ideal here would be something a little cheaper than the V-DAC (which, I admit, is not really that expensive) with an analog input. The cheaper bit is negotiable, it'd just mean I might have to wait a little longer to save up for one...not really that big of a deal. Are there any that would allow you to play two inputs simultaneously? In this case, it'd be PC + turntable.
I'm looking for a pair of self-powered desktop speakers for my turntable/PC setup on a budget. I don't want to wrangle amps or receivers into it if I don't have to: it's extra expense, extra clutter for my already cramped desk, and the less power drawn, the better (electric bill and all that). The speakers that seem to best fit what I'm looking for would be the Swan M200 Mk.III, and at $400, is a little more than I'd like to spend. I considered the Mk.II since it's half the price, but the Mk.III seem to be a significant step up in sound quality...I can save up a little bit longer if it's worth it. If anyone has any suggestions that seem to fit here, fire away. It can be a bit overwhelming researching this sort of thing.
Not really sure where to start with DAC's...I'll be doing plenty more research on them tomorrow. My ideal here would be something a little cheaper than the V-DAC (which, I admit, is not really that expensive) with an analog input. The cheaper bit is negotiable, it'd just mean I might have to wait a little longer to save up for one...not really that big of a deal. Are there any that would allow you to play two inputs simultaneously? In this case, it'd be PC + turntable.
I haven't read many reviews of the new one mkIII, but $400 seems a bit steep? Audioengine 5 and M-Audio BX5a are both around $300 and are highly regarded for powered speakers for their pricepoint. (use coupon code COVERTEN on audioengine's site for 10% off)
On ebay, the BX5a are around ~250 new. B-stock (refurb, but full warranty) are even less.
Certainly not as nice looking as the Swans though.
On ebay, the BX5a are around ~250 new. B-stock (refurb, but full warranty) are even less.
Certainly not as nice looking as the Swans though.
I love making small adjustments and watching the sound improve. I pulled the speakers further off the wall. They have about 1 and 1/4 feet at minimum from the wall. Also, plugging the bass ports have given a solid improvement to clarity as well. I also switched from some cheap walmart coaxial to a blue jeans cable coaxial. Cleaned up the sound a bit as well.
These energy rc-10s sound really good for their price. Really makes me wonder what I'll experience when the Dalis get here.
These energy rc-10s sound really good for their price. Really makes me wonder what I'll experience when the Dalis get here.
rykomatsu said:
You must be kidding tube equipment sounds great with an oldschool analog source like reel to reel and lp from a good turntable but if your going to go with a pc output there is nothing wrong with attaching the l/r to a 70's era pioneer or a marantz not to mention that if your lucky enough you can score an amazing sounding system at a budget price from a second hand store or garage sell. I have my digital attached to a modern kenwood and standard kenwood shelf speakers right now and they sound great but I also have the audio out attached to a 70's pioneer and speakers that are 95db per watt and they blow most modern equipment away.
Edit: I also have a working mono bi tube amp in my 50's era magnavox cabinet that pumps out 40watts of power. the Pioneer is 27watts per channel 22 with A&B attached. Doesn't sound like a lot of power by todays equipment standards but back then that was plenty considering they did not skimp on the speakers with the cheesy plastic crap they throw in now a days and that a testament at the lasting power and value of vintage equipment trust me you won't want to go back specially for music.
depends. what he meant was getting the 70's solid state stuff from Sansui, Marantz, which were built very well, those are better than whatever off the shelf receivers you can get from BestBuy, for stereo purposes. now if you compare them to modern hi fi solid state stereo amplifiers from McIntosh, Plinius, Classe, Musical Fidelity etc, then that's a different story.rykomatsu said:
beelulzebub
Banned
giga said:
Yeah, I realize $400 for nice speakers is peanuts. I'm just out of college though, haven't found any sort of solid financial footing yet. I'm patient though and can save up for a while. I'll look into those other speakers you suggested. Thanks!
Winged Creature
Member
rykomatsu said:
If your on a budget vintage gear offers great bang for the buck. I dont see where the hate is coming from. If funds arent an issue then ofcourse modern gear is the way to go. If budget is a concern thats when i say go vintage.
Winged Creature
Member
GuessWho said:
A dac will improve the sound for sure. Is there a chance you can trade in the RC-mini for the RC-10 there really is a huge difference in sound. The RC-10s I would say are the best sounding speaker in the price range.
Winged Creature
Member
yes there measurements for dacs, mostly for jitter and the analog output stage based measurements. A good dac can make music shine.
Umm not sure I can trade them but maybe I can use them as dedicated p speakers not sure how I would do that. Anybody know if it's possible or must I need an amp? I'll check out the rc-10 tomorrow. I'm very interested in a dac but im not ready to dish out big bucks. What is the cheapest-quality dac you can get? ThxWinged Creature said:
now hold on a second there, shouldn't the PS3 internal DAC be pretty high quality? i dont have experience with it, but i'd assume so. he has a good amplifier and ps3 as a source, i'd think he could basically get upgraded speakers to boost sound quality. correct me if i'm wrong though...Winged Creature said:
Winged Creature
Member
PS3 has decent internal dacs, but remember its not only the dac chip itself that affects the sound. Alot of cd players have the same dac but sound very different. Its a variety of things one of the most important being the analog output stage. The PS3 doesnt have the greatest analog output stage. Even if it does use quality dacs the way it is implemented may not give as stellar results. Ive AB'd between my PS3 using its analog outs and then using the dacmagic, it was no contest that the dacmagic was better.
Winged Creature
Member
GuessWho said:
best dac that i know on a budget price is the musical fidelity V-DAC
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MFVDAC
edit: RC-10s require an amp as they are passive speakers, why not use your NAD with them and have a usb dac routed directly to the NAD and your PC solution is right there.
Winged Creature said:
That sounds really insane to me. Why the jesus would you spend $300 for a dac with $300 speakers and a old ass cheap amp?
Also, doing an A/B just means you THINK it sounds better.
As for a cheap DAC, Emu0404 is a solid option and very flexible. VDAC should sound better, but it's also $100 more, so it depends on how much you're willing to spend. I would focus on getting the RC10s first and then worry about a DAC later. I prefer the sound of the Emus DAC compared to the PS3, but the main reason to get a DAC at a lower price level would be simply the convenience of being able to switch between audio sources. With the Emu, I can easily pass the PS3 sound through the optical into the Emu and the PC sound through USB. I can switch between either or on the fly or even hear both at the same time. Very useful. The cheapest decent quality DAC I've heard of was a Zero DAC at $99. If you're going to plug your PC in to use the speakers, a DAC is a must, but otherwise, you shouldn't be in a huge rush until you learn that this audio improvement business is for you.
The RC10s are very nice sounding speakers, especially at the price you can get them for. There's a reason that they're constantly recommended at that price range. I just feel that in my system, they are the limiting component. The preamp, amp and dac I have are all more expensive than it, and in your system, the speakers should typically be either the most expensive component or at least around the price range of the other equipment. Still, the RC10 can play a bold and beautiful sound given the right surrounding equipment. I just played the FF12 soundtrack cd with it, and it sounds amazing. The soundstage wasn't huge but the speakers disappeared for that moment.
With all of that said, I find DACs can make a very big improvement in sound, given you have decent equipment. My switch from the Emu to the Audio GD DAC19MK2 has been very noticeable. It's not only a good deal more detailed sounding than the Emu, but also has a much more organic sound. I would say it has been one of my biggest improvements to date. When I do choose to upgrade DAC, I'll probably go with Audio GD again and get a Reference 1. If I can get a good deal on a Bel Canto DAC 3, I'll go with that... But that won't be for years.
Another update I've done to my system was getting an M2Tech Hiface USB to spdif convertor which is used as a transport. It has cleaned up the sound even more. You can read about it here:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/us...01-usd-vs-teralink-x-vs-m2tech-hiface-449885/
The RC10s are very nice sounding speakers, especially at the price you can get them for. There's a reason that they're constantly recommended at that price range. I just feel that in my system, they are the limiting component. The preamp, amp and dac I have are all more expensive than it, and in your system, the speakers should typically be either the most expensive component or at least around the price range of the other equipment. Still, the RC10 can play a bold and beautiful sound given the right surrounding equipment. I just played the FF12 soundtrack cd with it, and it sounds amazing. The soundstage wasn't huge but the speakers disappeared for that moment.
With all of that said, I find DACs can make a very big improvement in sound, given you have decent equipment. My switch from the Emu to the Audio GD DAC19MK2 has been very noticeable. It's not only a good deal more detailed sounding than the Emu, but also has a much more organic sound. I would say it has been one of my biggest improvements to date. When I do choose to upgrade DAC, I'll probably go with Audio GD again and get a Reference 1. If I can get a good deal on a Bel Canto DAC 3, I'll go with that... But that won't be for years.
Another update I've done to my system was getting an M2Tech Hiface USB to spdif convertor which is used as a transport. It has cleaned up the sound even more. You can read about it here:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/us...01-usd-vs-teralink-x-vs-m2tech-hiface-449885/
Winged Creature
Member
pj325is said:
Well first thing you will notice is that you can listen to music longer with a good dac cause the highs are not harsh at all. Especially if you listen to metal a dac will make longer listening sessions bareable since it will tame the sizzle. I used the dacmagic when i had the RC-10s and it did make a difference, in soundstage, imaging and much smoother highs. Dont knock it unless you've tried it. A dac isnt the same voodoo as cables. Listen to a sound card then listen to a good dac.
edit: you want measurements, here http://stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/musical_fidelity_v-dac_da_processor/index4.html
Winged Creature said:
That first sentence means nothing to me. What makes highs harsh? What does the sound card do that makes them high? What does the DAC do that prevents this? How do you know it's not just rolling off the highs, which is just sound coloration which could be replicated in any number of less expensive ways. You say it's not the same voodoo, which is true, it's a whole different type of voodoo. You can look inside a DAC and see a bunch of sweet capacitors and shit, it MUST be doing something, right? You're just throwing around all the typical audiophile words that really don't mean anything.
Sound cards and external DACs are irrelevant to me because my HTPC has an optical output that goes to my receiver, and all of my other devices also have some sort of digital connection to the receiver.
Winged Creature
Member
Yes im throwing around audiophile words cause how else am i supposed to explain myself. Your not in the same listening room so i describe it the best I can. Before you go and bash it listen to it first. From what I'm assuming all of your digital listening has been done through the dacs on your receiver. Try this out use the analog out on ur soundcard and then compare to the dac on the receiver, see which sounds better.
edit: as for rolling off the top end, look at the measurements those will show if highs are actually being rolled off
edit: as for rolling off the top end, look at the measurements those will show if highs are actually being rolled off
at this point i'd be iffy...digital signals are 1's and 0's, and are transported via the USB cable as 1's and 0's. when people start talking about differentiating between digital signals and actually different sounding USB cables...that's pretty crazy talk, IMO.kevm3 said:
a quality DAC will convert the digital into quality analog, so yeah DAC is important, and everything else down the chain.
Why would you want to convert back to analog? My standing is leave music be what it was originally meant to be i.e. I can live with cds going through a modern system and my vinyl and tapes running through what it was originally meant to be played with in my case 70's era transistor receivers or if older, tube amps. I think ultimately its gonna come down to ones personal preference and ears.
Winged Creature said:
That would be really difficult to set up. My htpc is a mac mini, which has a combination analog/digital output plug, so I'd have to physically switch it every time. Then I'd have to level match them and figure out some way to quickly A/B on my receiver without being able to tell which is which, because if it's not a blind comparison it's pretty worthless.
Also, since I assume they will sound the same, I'll probably hear no difference, even if they don't sound the same. Just like you'd hear a difference, even if there wasn't one, because you expect to.
Winged Creature
Member
Timedog said:
seems like thats what he's saying
Winged Creature
Member
pj325is said:
Well i wouldnt jump to conclusions if you havent compared. Im just sharing my experiences with good dacs and soundcards on pc's and giving my reccomendations. In the end I hope the person who takes my advice does the comparison for themself.
Winged Creature
Member
pj325is said:
Just out of curiosity whats your take on old cd players vs modern cd players. Im not talking about megabuck cd players but your standard cd player from the 80s and the standard cd player sold today.
Winged Creature
Member
pj325is said:
Its not illogical if it sounds better to you.
nitewulf said:
I know that. The oP might as well just buy any generic off the shelf receiver with generic speakers then. The post did ask for audiophile speakers that will output from a pc source I guess the question is what card and what type of output are we talking about? I have digital out to a kenwood vr-615 which more than suffices for my daily gaming and youtube needs and the stereo output is out to my pioneer sx-626 with cs-99a speakers which sound great.
pj325is said:
Do you know anything about DAC design that would make you assume that there is no difference?--or are you assuming there is no difference because you'll feel better about not spending the money, and feel superior to those "suckers" who are likely paying for nothing?
A good DAC makes a difference. I have no idea if the 300 dollar one you guys are talking about is good or not. But if you haven't tried a good one out, then your assumptions are what is meaningless.
to be honest w/ you, everything can be equalized...you would probably be happy equalizing w/ winamp, which would tone down harsh highs. never minding that some people may preffer very harsh highs, as it is more involving and forward sounding.pj325is said:
we are a little bit more into this stuff, just our hobby yeah?
Winged Creature said:
I haven't come to any conclusion because I haven't seen any proof either way. My default view is "don't spend money on it." And nothing I've seen so far has swayed that position. I'm not going to try every stupid widget that's supposed to make my system sound better.
Winged Creature
Member
pj325is said:
How are you gonna see proof if you dont experience it for yourself?
not to mention if you already have your mind made up that "i am not going to hear a difference because i do not expect to."
:lol :lol
nice bubble you have setup. i like it. very political. descartes would have been impressed.
actually i am impressed. you sound like all the libertarians i know.
:lol :lol
nice bubble you have setup. i like it. very political. descartes would have been impressed.
actually i am impressed. you sound like all the libertarians i know.
pj325is said:
Thats good way to go about it. Spending tons of money is not going to make a difference unless you make yourself believe it because well you've spent a ton of money on something you think will be superior to the last thing. look if it sounds great to you go for it.
Winged Creature said:
I think it's illogical to implicitly trust your ears. So many factors go into how you perceive sound that without very controlled conditions, any results you get are highly suspect.
I don't know, I don't have a 1980s CD player on hand. I assume they all sound basically the same, and I bet people wouldn't be able to distinguish between them in a blind test. Especially if they're just used as transports.
Timedog said:
I don't feel superior to anyone. I don't snicker when I see people beaming with pride over their new monster cables or whatever. It makes me sad that they wasted their money.
I'm assuming there's no difference because that should be any consumer's default position on whether they should buy something. I think what most audiophiles don't want to admit is that this hobby is a dead end, and after a fairly reasonable level of equipment, the ROI on improvements drops like a stone to practically zero. Researching this stuff is fun, the internal debate on which of two competing products is fun, buying new toys and hooking them up is fun, and there's the argument that perception is reality, so if you think it sounds better, it does.. but I'm not that desperate to spend my money.
nitewulf said:
No no, my highs aren't the ones that were harsh, I was using Winged Creature's experience as an example. Also, you can't dismiss my interest in the hobby just because I'm not as willing to throw cash at it. My concern is that people get turned off by the hobby because of all the flowery, esoteric language that gets used to sell the snake oil, and people think they need to spend 5 grand to get a great sounding stereo, or they think it's all bullshit and go back to their TV speakers. People skulk into threads on audio forums and talk about their "meager" systems that only cost $1000, like they're peons, wasting the time of the REAL audiophiles, when they should be proud of what they have. Not that people who spend more make fun of those who spend less, but there's this constant race to the top because people get accustomed to what they have and are always looking for their next fix.
Winged Creature said:
That's what measurements are for. The DAC in a sound card adds, what, $5 (probably more like $0.10) to the cost at absolute most? Shouldn't there be a measurable difference for something that costs sixty (or 3000...) times as much?
nite wulf said:
Yeah but see, that's where the proof comes in.
For me, it goes:
See product -> see proof that product is better -> buy product -> evaluate, probably hear difference, regardless of reality
For you guys, it's:
See product -> (optional) read reviews in stereophile or on forums -> buy product -> evaluate, probably hear difference, regardless of reality
- Status