Ahh sorry power cables, yea power cables are most likely a myth. I did however notice my speaker set hissed lightly when there was nothing playing but they were turned on, through investigating it, it was the surge protection on my extension thing so I got a non-surge protected one and it didn't hiss no more. I know its not related to the kettle lead, but its still something to do with power. I reckon a power cable will make a difference on like...£20,000+ systems but its something to easily overlook I guess.
I'd still say if you want proper PC speakers buy a used promedia or promedia ultra, good stuff 
Mine is in her 8th year, and still sounds tight and clear, and hopefully will do so for the next 8 years as well. knock-knock-knock.
Mine is in her 8th year, and still sounds tight and clear, and hopefully will do so for the next 8 years as well. knock-knock-knock.If you want your PC sound to be good then just do as i did when i lived at my parents house, provided you have a decent stereo/amp and speakers already....
Buy a decent lead that has a 3.5mm jack on one end that fits into the soundcards line out socket, and a pair of RCA connections on the other end which fill fit the line in connections on most stereo amps.
Thats how i did mine and it sounded epic through my old but big(ish) amp, its only 500w but can run 2 sets of speakers which is perfect, one in each corner of the room.
The only pain for me now is that my decks/mixer/stereo will not fit in the same room as my PC now so i cant run this setup any longer.
Buy a decent lead that has a 3.5mm jack on one end that fits into the soundcards line out socket, and a pair of RCA connections on the other end which fill fit the line in connections on most stereo amps.
Thats how i did mine and it sounded epic through my old but big(ish) amp, its only 500w but can run 2 sets of speakers which is perfect, one in each corner of the room.
The only pain for me now is that my decks/mixer/stereo will not fit in the same room as my PC now so i cant run this setup any longer.
Any audio discussion tread where Watts are used more than once is probably a bad one. Power says nothing about sound volume, and even if it did, sound volume is quickly a lot louder than you'd ever play anyway!
On moderatly efficient speakers you don't need any more than 10W of power to blow your eardrums.
Efficiency is the sound pressure you get with one watt of power. You need 2x this power to get 3dB more noise. If you for some reason need 500W of power, that means the speaker units themselves are not efficient. This isn't ''bad'', efficiency is just a number reflecting how loud it will play, not how good..
On moderatly efficient speakers you don't need any more than 10W of power to blow your eardrums.
Efficiency is the sound pressure you get with one watt of power. You need 2x this power to get 3dB more noise. If you for some reason need 500W of power, that means the speaker units themselves are not efficient. This isn't ''bad'', efficiency is just a number reflecting how loud it will play, not how good..
This is precisely correct, I mean...I never went off watts when I bought my system, because even something with small watts will go loud enough. I wanted precision in sound reproduction which again wasn't exactly found in the technical specifications...the closest I got was frequencies in that sense but the only thing I could go off mainly was reviews, since the set has a built in amp that can obviously also emphasize certain frequencies such as bass or treble...I wanted as balanced as possible.
I looked at the Klipsch range but they weren't as widely available as Acoustic Energy within the UK, and the reviews we're as strong as the set I got anyway. They were definitely on my shortlist though.
Can't believe I'm doing this, but I'm going to step in here and defend Logitech. First of all, I appreciate and desire good sound quality. Secondly, most of the time speakers sound shit because the source is terrible. Good speakers will never make 128 Kbit mp3 files sound any good.
Anyway. Before I left home for uni, I used to listen to my music through a pair of vintage Celestion ditton 44 series ii's, hooked up to a Marantz amplifier. They sounded absolutely fantastic.
My housemate has a set of AE 2.1 speakers that the OP bought. They sound great (the subwoofer has a wooden cabinet FTR). But like most 2.1 systems with such small satellites, there is a degree of seperation between the lower end of the sats and the upper end of the sub. The sub has to produce a lot of midrange to compensate for the small satellites, which is OK if you have all three speakers reasonably close.
I didn't buy a set of AE's though. I decided to go for the cheaper Logitech Z2300's. TBH I am happy enough with them, they are great for uni. The subwoofer is very powerful, too much so in fact on the default bass setting, but is fine on 1/4 or so, and the satellites are suprisingly good, even without a tweeter. They do however lack any substance in the lower midrange, and the set looks quite cheap and tacky if I'm honest. But play a good quality piece of audio through them, with the sub on low, and they sound pretty close to the AE's if I'm honest. They also make for great houseparty's when you wanna get obliterated, as they go very very loud - louder than the AE's. Can't really argue with that for 30 pounds less, especially when you're a student.
Logitech do go down the route of marketing BS to an extent, and the cheaper systems (x-230 etc) are cheapy rubbish, but I think the Z systems are pretty good value.
Anyway. Before I left home for uni, I used to listen to my music through a pair of vintage Celestion ditton 44 series ii's, hooked up to a Marantz amplifier. They sounded absolutely fantastic.
My housemate has a set of AE 2.1 speakers that the OP bought. They sound great (the subwoofer has a wooden cabinet FTR). But like most 2.1 systems with such small satellites, there is a degree of seperation between the lower end of the sats and the upper end of the sub. The sub has to produce a lot of midrange to compensate for the small satellites, which is OK if you have all three speakers reasonably close.
I didn't buy a set of AE's though. I decided to go for the cheaper Logitech Z2300's. TBH I am happy enough with them, they are great for uni. The subwoofer is very powerful, too much so in fact on the default bass setting, but is fine on 1/4 or so, and the satellites are suprisingly good, even without a tweeter. They do however lack any substance in the lower midrange, and the set looks quite cheap and tacky if I'm honest. But play a good quality piece of audio through them, with the sub on low, and they sound pretty close to the AE's if I'm honest. They also make for great houseparty's when you wanna get obliterated, as they go very very loud - louder than the AE's. Can't really argue with that for 30 pounds less, especially when you're a student.
Logitech do go down the route of marketing BS to an extent, and the cheaper systems (x-230 etc) are cheapy rubbish, but I think the Z systems are pretty good value.
I really really beg to differ. The price>quality ratio on logitech is far away from "even". Its like ... seriously far.
Transient response is most important. You can have a subwoofer with sensitivity of 100dB/1W/1m, being given a 50W RMS, 0.01%THD signal, but if it's too underdamped or too overdamped, it'll still sound horrible. Hence the importance of the enclosure that said driver is inside of.
Also don't forget that in proper blind test, properly encoded 128kbit mp3 can most likely not be distinguished from the original non compressed audio..
There is a huge difference between 128kbit mp3 and uncompressed audio. But yeah, most people wouldn't notice. I prefer vinyl. Zero latency.
I can't tell the difference from 192 up, but certainly can from 128 up. Anyway, most music on people's itunes and ipods and other icrap is generally overcompressed, several time encoded rubbish anyway. Heck, alot of people are satisfied with listening to music from youtube..
No there isn't a huge difference. You're probably overrating your ears. A proper blind test and oops.. where has that big difference gone? You're highly unlikely to be any different from the usual ears, you will probably not notice the difference!
Many have been CONVINCED mp3 sucked only until the point they couldn't distinguish it.. Then most continued to be convinced and pulled out all sorts of conspiracy theories in order to justify their spending of silly amounts of money on mostly useless audio equipment..
Many have been CONVINCED mp3 sucked only until the point they couldn't distinguish it.. Then most continued to be convinced and pulled out all sorts of conspiracy theories in order to justify their spending of silly amounts of money on mostly useless audio equipment..
When I encode to MP3 using whatever Winamp uses, I encode 192kbps...I haven't tried 128kbps to be honest but mp3s always seem 'flat' compared to encoding as flac...maybe it's the encoder?
I tend to use MP3 for playback on my PC if i rip a cd or whatever, but if i want to burn a disk to play in the car (and to prevent scratching the hell outta the original CD, one of my special skills ) i usually choose WMA lossless, as there is a huge sound difference when playing it back in the car.
My mate has a band and i got given a lot of various promo CD's by him but with only 2 or 3 tracks on each one so i ripped them all as MP3 and burned them to one CD for the car and it did indeed sound 'flat' in comparison to the original disks, the bass was still there but less precise and not as punchy, it just sounded a little wobbly and less bassy in general, plus the top end was much less clear as well, you couldn't pick out each individual symbol 'tssh' as well as before, it was still there but much less clear and crisp.
So i ripped them all again using lossless WMA and re burned them, sounds spot on now!
) i usually choose WMA lossless, as there is a huge sound difference when playing it back in the car.My mate has a band and i got given a lot of various promo CD's by him but with only 2 or 3 tracks on each one so i ripped them all as MP3 and burned them to one CD for the car and it did indeed sound 'flat' in comparison to the original disks, the bass was still there but less precise and not as punchy, it just sounded a little wobbly and less bassy in general, plus the top end was much less clear as well, you couldn't pick out each individual symbol 'tssh' as well as before, it was still there but much less clear and crisp.
So i ripped them all again using lossless WMA and re burned them, sounds spot on now!
The reproduction of mp3 depends quite a lot on the type of music (and how well it's mastered, but that's another matter).
High symbols sound crap on mp3 regardless of bitrate - it filters and/or distorts the very high frequencies too much. The lower the bitrate, the more noticeable it is, but it is still distinguishable at the higher rates.
Mids/high mids tend to be reproduced fairly well by mp3 >128k, although it goes downhill from there.
As a general rule: 128k absolute minimum. OK for el cheapo speakers.
192k seems to be good for the vast majority of people.
Encoders can make a difference - LAME is supposedly one of the better ones.
Depending on the genre of music, I can tell the difference between mp3 and lossless - yes, in blind tests in as much as I think "why does this sound so nasty?", then look at the bitrate/format and my question is answered.
Regarding speakers, I used to have a set of 5.1 Genius speakers (I forget the model) which sounded pretty good for the power (27.5w RMS). I now have a set of Creative 7.1 speakers, which are noticeably better.
An ex housemate has a set of Z-5500s, which are better, but not worth the extra cost quality wise. They keep the quality up to painful volumes, and the sub is no less than brutal, so probably worth it if you like that sort of thing.
If you have a good amplifier, don't ruin it by using a mini-jack to phono cable and relying on the analog preamp in your sound card. Run digital signal, or you're wasting your money.
The quality of the power cable is completely irrelevant as long as it's not arcing somewhere. If you really care when using an expensive high end system, use a signal rectifier for the AC.
*Disclaimer: I am far from an audiophile, but I have been into fairly regular contact with high quality, high power FOH sound-systems so I know quality when I hear it.
Perhaps I can tell the difference between mp3 more than many other people, because I don't like the compression artefacts and others like the 'smoother' mp3 sound. Who knows.
High symbols sound crap on mp3 regardless of bitrate - it filters and/or distorts the very high frequencies too much. The lower the bitrate, the more noticeable it is, but it is still distinguishable at the higher rates.
Mids/high mids tend to be reproduced fairly well by mp3 >128k, although it goes downhill from there.
As a general rule: 128k absolute minimum. OK for el cheapo speakers.
192k seems to be good for the vast majority of people.
Encoders can make a difference - LAME is supposedly one of the better ones.
Depending on the genre of music, I can tell the difference between mp3 and lossless - yes, in blind tests in as much as I think "why does this sound so nasty?", then look at the bitrate/format and my question is answered.
Regarding speakers, I used to have a set of 5.1 Genius speakers (I forget the model) which sounded pretty good for the power (27.5w RMS). I now have a set of Creative 7.1 speakers, which are noticeably better.
An ex housemate has a set of Z-5500s, which are better, but not worth the extra cost quality wise. They keep the quality up to painful volumes, and the sub is no less than brutal, so probably worth it if you like that sort of thing.
If you have a good amplifier, don't ruin it by using a mini-jack to phono cable and relying on the analog preamp in your sound card. Run digital signal, or you're wasting your money.
The quality of the power cable is completely irrelevant as long as it's not arcing somewhere. If you really care when using an expensive high end system, use a signal rectifier for the AC.
*Disclaimer: I am far from an audiophile, but I have been into fairly regular contact with high quality, high power FOH sound-systems so I know quality when I hear it.
Perhaps I can tell the difference between mp3 more than many other people, because I don't like the compression artefacts and others like the 'smoother' mp3 sound. Who knows.
Useless for listening, but not useless for DJing, or music production where oversampling really makes a huge difference. Anyway, compression doesn't really have much do do with spending silly amounts of money. I mean, uncompressed audio is less taxing on the CPU because there's no uncompressing to be done. Though more taxing on the memory. And i've done a blind test before. I could tell the difference between 128kbit and 192kbit, but anything over 192kbit sounded the same. Anyway, I prefer ogg vorbis to mp3, it really is a superior codec. I cannot tell the difference between 64kbit vorbis and 320kbit mp3.
I see lots of people are talking about logitech/creative/pc-speakers as they are any good for serious listening to music. They are all actually total crap.
Myself made a big mistake recently by buying creative T-40 series II because the studiomonitors i had before were broken. These highly rated creative speakers are really total crap too.
Any pc-speakers (except maybe the ones of klipsch, never had to change to hear those, has a few or several big faults for example. A few examples:
-high frequenties may be seriously distorted; hard, or none existent, too soft or too loud
-mids, sound like tin-cans, sounds just wrong, or it may be missing, sounding like there is a hole in the music.
-low's: some frequencys resonate violantly, some frequentys may be missing, any bass may be muddy
-Bit more complex music becomes one wall of sound, very noticable with many rock/gothicrock/hard rock music. It just gives you an headache when played on pc-speakers.
The creative T-40 series two, really have serious issues in the low range, they cannot produce more than one low frequency at a time and some low frequenties(80-100hz) are completly missing while others cause serious resonations. Some frequencies in the high-range are also too loud. For 100+ euro speakers it is just crap.
For really good sound on your pc: get an amp with two bookself speakers(not optimal since those are not designed for near-field listening) or two decent studio-monitors. Pc-speakers just don't not even get close to the sound quality of many low-range studio-monitors but creative does claim it is an excellent product. (logitech does the same for their more expensive product ranges).
I will in about one or two months buy serious studio-monitors again, since those are not so cheap (150-300 euro's each) I'll have to wait before i get them, because theere are other prioritys too(house, furniture, car, etc.)
Myself made a big mistake recently by buying creative T-40 series II because the studiomonitors i had before were broken. These highly rated creative speakers are really total crap too.
Any pc-speakers (except maybe the ones of klipsch, never had to change to hear those, has a few or several big faults for example. A few examples:
-high frequenties may be seriously distorted; hard, or none existent, too soft or too loud
-mids, sound like tin-cans, sounds just wrong, or it may be missing, sounding like there is a hole in the music.
-low's: some frequencys resonate violantly, some frequentys may be missing, any bass may be muddy
-Bit more complex music becomes one wall of sound, very noticable with many rock/gothicrock/hard rock music. It just gives you an headache when played on pc-speakers.
The creative T-40 series two, really have serious issues in the low range, they cannot produce more than one low frequency at a time and some low frequenties(80-100hz) are completly missing while others cause serious resonations. Some frequencies in the high-range are also too loud. For 100+ euro speakers it is just crap.
For really good sound on your pc: get an amp with two bookself speakers(not optimal since those are not designed for near-field listening) or two decent studio-monitors. Pc-speakers just don't not even get close to the sound quality of many low-range studio-monitors but creative does claim it is an excellent product. (logitech does the same for their more expensive product ranges).
I will in about one or two months buy serious studio-monitors again, since those are not so cheap (150-300 euro's each) I'll have to wait before i get them, because theere are other prioritys too(house, furniture, car, etc.)
Bluebird, what would you recommend for about €150?
I know I'm not Bluebird. Well the prices for anything by Logitech etc are currently a rip off, so I would definately recommend the AE's referred to in the OP for that budget.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/ ... p;catid=22&subcat=173
1
2
Well impressed! (speakers) :D
(45 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG