# bookshelf speakers vs studio monitors?



## romeozdistress

Which do you guys prefer and why? I am looking to upgrade my setup from av40s. and I was wondering what the pro and cons of bookshelf and studio monitors are? I am open to either. Just trying to figure out what would be better for around $400. thanks in advance.


----------



## PurpleAngel

Check out the Monoprice 5" studio monitors ($150) and the Emotiva Airmotiv 4 ($300).
 For passive (unpowered) speakers, check out the Pioneer SP-B22-LR and SP-BS21LR
  
 I'm currently using the Monoprice 5" studio monitors myself, they seem to be rebranded M-Audio BX5s


----------



## Iostream

It really depends on what you are wanting to spend. Studio monitors can be a good deal at the lowest end, in the middle, bookshelf speakers become fairly competitive, at the higher end ($2500), studio monitors generally take it.


----------



## romeozdistress

i was looking into a setup around $400. i wouldnt be opposed to getting a reciever and some floor standing speakers and just play my music there.


----------



## Iostream

In that price range, I would probably skip the receiver + bookshelf and go for Studio Monitors. The Equator D5 would probably be the first place I looked.


----------



## Iostream

Audioengine A5+ also fall into that range, they are aimed a bit more at hifi, but have a decent sound.


----------



## TMRaven

It kinda depends on what you're using them for.  Both 'studio monitors' and bookshelf speakers can have different sound, so it's not as if one is only meant to be used in the studio or for mixing music while the other is only used for musical enjoyment.  If you were using them as TV speakers then I'd get passive bookshelves with a receiver and remote.  Having the convenience of a remote and other features of a receiver far outweigh any possible small jumps in sound quality.  If they were to be used right next to your computer then active speakers might be more of a preference for cost reasons.


----------



## thegunner100

I've heard both the audioengine A5+ and the emotiva airmotiv 4. Not exactly a fair comparison since the A5+ was using the titanium HD while the ASM4 was using an audio-gd nfb-10es2. The ASM4 is more audiophile sounding and neutral whereas the A5+ is more colored. I much prefer the ASM4.


----------



## romeozdistress

I will using them for listening to music mostly.


----------



## PurpleAngel

romeozdistress said:


> I was looking into a setup around $400. I wouldn't be opposed to getting a receiver and some floor standing speakers and just play my music there.


 
 Is this for use with a windows PC?
 Does the computer have an add-on sound card?
 Is this for music only?


----------



## romeozdistress

purpleangel said:


> Is this for use with a windows PC?
> Does the computer have an add-on sound card?
> Is this for music only?


 
 This is a windows pc, i have a asus xonar dgx soundcard, will be getting a soundblaster z sometime in the not too distant future. and i mostly use it for music. i hook my pc up to my tv for movies and use the tvs audio for that.


----------



## johnston21

Don't overlook the Fostex PMO 4.0's...
  
 Also refer to this similar thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/592724/are-you-using-studio-monitors


----------



## PurpleAngel

romeozdistress said:


> This is a windows pc, i have a Asus Xonar DGX sound card, will be getting a Sound Blaster Z sometime in the not too distant future. and I mostly use it for music. i hook my PC up to my tv for movies and use the tvs audio for that.


 
 Save your cash.
 Get the Sound blaster Z with the Monoprice 5" studio monitors, total for everything should be no more the $250.
 Using studio monitors takes up less space then a receiver/speaker setup.


----------



## romeozdistress

one thing i came across was a emotiva mini-X a-100.. have been considering that and some bookshelves or some behringer truth 2031a studio monitors. which setup would give me a higher quality sound? I have extended my budget to around $500 when i get my tax return. i just want some equipment ill use for awhile. having a tough time with these, any suggestions are welcomed. thanks.


----------



## astrallite

Bookshelf speakers are generally more aesthetically pleasing. The drivers are also often of a higher quality in a given price range because you don't need an amp section, or active crossovers, which can be quite pricy. For example the Dynaudio passive speaker line by Dynaudio's own admission have much higher quality drivers than their active line, but their active line gets better performance out of their parts due to the superior qualities of active crossovers and DSP. For example even their Dynaudio AIR series of active speakers ($5000 price range) they use the drivers that are from the lower levels of their passive line, the DM and Focal series, whereas their Contour and Confidence series, which are closer in price to their flagship Actives, have superior drivers, but use less effective passive crossovers.
  
 The best of both worlds would be passive speakers in the hands of a good DIYer who knows how to design crossover slopes, and a high end active crossover unit like DEQX.


----------



## cel4145

Since you are considering the mini-X a-100, you might also look at the HK 3390 for only a little more. Then again, unless you need tons of volume, a good t-amp for under $100 would leave you more budget for speakers, which is where you'll get the best bang for your buck. I suggest looking into the Arx A1b and Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SEs.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Sound on Sound did a survey on this very subject. They came to the conclusion that there wasn't a clear cut difference between 'monitors' and 'hi-fi'.
  
 Some speakers sold as monitors (think KRK and M-Audio)) actually have a stereotypical 'smiley face' hi-fi sound. i.e. bumped in the mid lows and scooped in the high mids and some speakers sold as hi-fi ( B&W did well) actually have a flat frequency response which a tweek might find lacking in bass weight and over-bright. Hence the dreaded fatiguing sound.
  
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jun02/articles/monitors.asp
  
 I personally think under $400 is a difficult price point. You can get fairly decent near field monitoring using 4" or 5" cones for under $200 and you will be delighted with the results at first. Spending more will get you more weight and depth or better build quality but not both. Not until you reach about $500 or more.
  
 Like the OP I started with a pair on AV40 and was very pleased. Until they broke down after less than a year. So I splashed out on a pair of ADAM A3X (5 year guarantee). It wasn't instantaneous love at first sight but I could never consider going back now. Popular speakers designed to sound good with pop and dance music do a job but are not very versatile. Whereas the ADAMs sound fantastic with all program material. Like video and games. They also excel with acoustic muisic. The human voice and piano in particular sound stupendously good.
  
 So good in fact that Mrs Ron demanded a pair for herself and wouldn't be fobbed off with cheaper alternatives. So of course I did the decent thing and gave her mine. Which left me no alternative to getting a bigger pair for myself.
  
 So my recommendation is to save up just a little bit longer and get a real, albiet small, pair of studio monitors from a reputable company.


----------



## cel4145

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Sound on Sound did a survey on this very subject. They came to the conclusion that there wasn't a clear cut difference between 'monitors' and 'hi-fi'.




The fact that Phil Ward in that article makes this claim at the beginning makes the whole article highly suspect:

"But through a technical analysis and investigation of four speakers — two that carry the 'hi-fi' label and two the 'pro' — I'm going to try and discover a little about the typical differences between them."

Certainly, he debunked the generalization that pro audio speakers always have a flatter frequency response than home audio speakers because of the measurements of the DM303s, but one cannot then make one's own generalizations about home audio speakers vs. pro audio speakers by only looking at two of each. That's not enough of a sample set.



ronalddumsfeld said:


> Some speakers sold as monitors (think KRK and M-Audio)) actually have a stereotypical 'smiley face' hi-fi sound. i.e. bumped in the mid lows and scooped in the high mids and some speakers sold as hi-fi ( B&W did well) actually have a flat frequency response which a tweek might find lacking in bass weight and over-bright. *Hence the dreaded fatiguing sound.*




I'm confused by that statement. Are you saying the DM303s would be more fatiguing? Generally fatigue is related to speakers having a bright sound, not a neutral sound. 

Anyway, I own the Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SEs, and have owned a variety of pairs of passive speakers in that price range. I've also listened to many pro audio monitors in the $500 to $600 range. To my ears, the 170s sound better. They have a very neutral response and also incredible transient response making them very accurate. This is why I suggested them and the Arx A1bs. Both of those are Internet speaker vendors. Because they don't have to work a middleman's cut into their price (another reseller) and they don't spend a lot on advertising, the speakers are fantastic price/performance values and can compete in quality with home audio speakers that sell for $600 or $700 at your local hifi store.


----------



## astrallite

cel4145 said:


> The fact that Phil Ward in that article makes this claim at the beginning makes the whole article highly suspect:
> 
> "But through a technical analysis and investigation of four speakers — two that carry the 'hi-fi' label and two the 'pro' — I'm going to try and discover a little about the typical differences between them."
> 
> ...


 
  
 The fact that he claims B&W is neutral is suspect in itself as B&W is the Poster Child for "British Sound" and tipped up bass and treble, in fact a cursory glance through Stereophile and Soundstage measurements shows this to be empirically true.
  
 Also the reason why individuals might find one speaker fatiguing vary due to individual differences in hearing, and age. Younger people are more likely to cite higher frequency cone breakup modes as hearing fatigue due a wider hearing spectrum, older people are more likely to cite a tipped up midrange.


----------



## romeozdistress

I can do $500 no problem.


----------



## Allanmarcus

Consider the Polk Monitor 30 or 40 from Newegg, a $100 sub (there are many), and an amp. The Polk 30's are like $85 a pair and sound great. You might also consider some monitor isolation pads, like the Auralex MoPADs. PSB and NHT also make great speakers. FInally, the Orb 2.1 system is really good.
  
 Polk and Def Tech have active speakers. I heard them at CES a few weeks ago. I think they sounds great, but it was hard to tell in the huge hall. 
  
 http://www.definitivetech.com/products/incline
 http://www.polkaudio.com/products/hampden
  
 So many options.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

ADAM F5 then. No question. You won't be disappointed.
  
http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/f5/technical-data
  
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57586054-47/meet-the-new-champ-of-desktop-speakers-adam-audio-f5/
http://www.musictech.net/2013/06/adam-f5-review/
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar13/articles/adam-f5.htm


----------



## germanium

What some people seem to either forget or not know is that monitor speakers must by nature of their direct connection to the amplifier use a different driver than  a hi-fi system that has a crossover between the amp & driver in order to avoid overly lean sounding bass. Passive crossovers add a substantial impedance between the amp & driver, such that damping factor can be as low as one at some frequencies. Active speakers with active crossovers avoid this loss of damping & as such require a driver with lower magnetic flux or fewer turns of wire directly exposed to the magnetic field in order to have a balanced sound. This does not mean that it is a lower quality driver. Prices for drivers does not always correlate with quality as there is also the factor of demand for said driver & demand can be a fickle thing but once they have a following deserved or not, prices will go up.


----------



## Allanmarcus

ronalddumsfeld said:


> ADAM F5 then. No question. You won't be disappointed.
> 
> http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/f5/technical-data
> 
> ...


 
 The f5's are awesome, but aren't then $250 each? OP was hoping to spend $400.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

romeozdistress quote '*I can do $500 no problem*.'


----------



## Allanmarcus

ronalddumsfeld said:


> romeozdistress quote '*I can do $500 no problem*.'


 
 Awesome! If you get the Adam F5s, let us know. I've never heard them, but I really like the Heil tweeters. I had ESS speakers in the 70's and 80's. The Polk Hamptons sounds good at CES, but I'd wagr money the Adams (or the Amotivs) sound better.


----------



## romeozdistress

my only thing with the ants is the wattage seems kinda low. its like the same wattage im using now. i def would like to improve on sound volume if i can.


----------



## adupree

I'd go with Equator D5. No questions.


----------



## Allanmarcus

adupree said:


> I'd go with Equator D5. No questions.


 
 Umm, interesting. Would you need/want a sub with those? The graph at http://www.equatoraudio.com/D5-Coaxial-Studio-Monitors-p/d5.htm (larger photos) seems to indicate a drop off at 60-70 Hz. I'm not saying that's bad, but does that indicate the "need" for a sub?  I only ask because I too will be updating my system in the next year, and I'm learning what's available in this price range.


----------



## adupree

allanmarcus said:


> Umm, interesting. Would you need/want a sub with those? The graph at http://www.equatoraudio.com/D5-Coaxial-Studio-Monitors-p/d5.htm (larger photos) seems to indicate a drop off at 60-70 Hz. I'm not saying that's bad, but does that indicate the "need" for a sub?  I only ask because I too will be updating my system in the next year, and I'm learning what's available in this price range.


 
 I know people that run them with and without subs. I run mine without a sub, but I use them for music editing and mixing. I truly believe these are one of the best, if not the best values in audio. A lot of people like the KRK Rokits, but they are too muddy and boomy.


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> my only thing with the ants is *the wattage seems kinda low*. its like the same wattage im using now. i def would like to improve on sound volume if i can.




Amplifier power only tells you half the story and doesn't help a lot by itself. How loud speakers will get does depend on the amp, but it also depends on how sensitive the speakers are. For example, my Ascend CBM-170 SEs are rated 89db 1w/1 meter. That means with 1 watt of amplifier power, they will reach 89db when listening from 1m away. Compare those to the ARX A1b I mentioned, which are 86db 1w/1m. 3db difference.

Now that might not seem like much. But the thing is that it takes double the amplifier to produce 3db. So a 50 watt amp only produces 3db more than a 25 watt amp; the CBM-170 SEs will be as loud with a 25 watt amp as the ARX A1b will be with 50 watts of power. 

M-Audio claims 101.5 dB @ 1 meter RMS for the AV40s; Adam F5 is rated ≥106 dB peak. Usually, RMS will have more power output at peak than what is specified. So you may not get much more volume out of the F5s than the AV40s, although most likely the F5s should have better drivers that would maintain their composure better at higher volumes. This all assuming the manufacturers have been honest, which is often not true. Specifications are often exaggerated by audio companies.


----------



## adupree

I always tell people its an AMPLIFIER not a WATTIFIER


----------



## romeozdistress

very tough decision, luckily i have like 3 weeks to decide which direction to go.  swan peeks my interest. ive heard they are very good. like the Swan m200mkIII. just another option to add i guess heh. i also like the idea of buying my first amp or reciever. seems like a fun idea. so many choices lol.


----------



## adupree

romeozdistress said:


> very tough decision, luckily i have like 3 weeks to decide which direction to go.  swan peeks my interest. ive heard they are very good. like the Swan m200mkIII. just another option to add i guess heh. i also like the idea of buying my first amp or reciever. seems like a fun idea. so many choices lol.


 
 The Swann stuff I've heard was fantastic. But they get pricey


----------



## AladdinSane

Some used Swans in a For Sale thread right now. Might be of interest here.


----------



## romeozdistress

These 8 inch monoprice studio monitors have peaked my interest at only $250 hmm... im gonna have to do some comparisons.


----------



## astrallite

romeozdistress said:


> These 8 inch monoprice studio monitors have peaked my interest at only $250 hmm... im gonna have to do some comparisons.


 
  
 Better to do go with a 5 or 6" in a 2-way design, although the ideal monitor IMO would be a 3-way with a 2" or 3" mid and a 5-7" midbass driver.
  
 An 8" driver beams quite a bit (don't know what your seating distance is) and also has trouble resonating fast enough to meet up with a tweeter. There was a member on AVS with a Dynaudio Special 25 who spent over $3k on a DEQX active crossover with 300db/octave crossovers and still couldn't get the 8" woofer to perform in the mids as well as the 6" on a Dynaudio Confidence C1 (both speakers use the same tweeter).


----------



## 1llest

JBL LSR305 
http://www.amazon.com/JBL-Professional-LSR305-Studio-Monitor/dp/B00DUKP37C
  
 Impressions;
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end-theory/867409-jbl-lsr305-vs-adam-f5.html


----------



## romeozdistress

1llest said:


> JBL LSR305
> http://www.amazon.com/JBL-Professional-LSR305-Studio-Monitor/dp/B00DUKP37C
> 
> Impressions;
> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end-theory/867409-jbl-lsr305-vs-adam-f5-2.html


 
 thanks alot man. im all for saving money. very good read.


----------



## 1llest

No problem! Was looking around for new monitors also. Currently have KRK RP5 G2 and want to get something better and the LSR305 seems to be that good!
  
 Also, I accidentaly linked the 2nd page instead of the 1s of that impression thread.


----------



## kid vic

Go with monitors partly for convinience and partly for there "revealing" nature. What kind of sound signature do you like? Also what type of music do you most listen to? That can swing your decision too.


----------



## romeozdistress

I listen to alot of different types all besides pop music. but id say metal is probably my all time favorite. i will be using these for listening to music. i dont need them to mix or anything.


----------



## cel4145

kid vic said:


> Go with monitors partly for convinience and partly for there "revealing" nature. What kind of sound signature do you like? Also what type of music do you most listen to? That can swing your decision too.




One speaker model being more revealing than the other is an indication of difference in speaker quality. Has nothing to do with passive vs active.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.
  
 Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.
  
 Active crossovers increase headroom because the bands are separated reducing the chance of distortion.
  
 Active monitors have amps specially matched to the drivers. Better damping.
  
 Active monitors can connect the bass driver mechanical motion in the amps feedback loop. Better high freq response, reduced ringing, reduces driver distortion. 
  
 Passive crossovers waste energy as heat.
  
 All else being equal active *alway*s beats passive. That's why it's almost impossible to buy high quality, new monitors that aren't active any more.
  
 If you can afford it that's what you want. Active.
  
 So yeah. kids right. Actives will be more 'revealing' because they are by nature more accurate, produce less distortion and play louder.


----------



## adupree

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.
> 
> Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.
> 
> ...


 
 Not true.
  
 Passive speakers can be bi-amped also. Passive speakers can have just as good of a crossover. Headroom is based on making sure the AMPS have enough power available. Passive speakers are typically used in a lot of mastering suites, where they need to most "revealing and accurate" speakers.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Even if that were true. Which it isn't.
  
 Whatever infernal machinations that go on in today's mastering suites can hardly be regarded as anything for an audiophile to aspire too.
  
 They don't care how **** it sounds as long as it's LOUD.


----------



## adupree

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Even if that were true. Which it isn't.
> 
> Whatever infernal machinations that go on in today's mastering suites can hardly be regarded as anything for an audiophile to aspire too.
> 
> They don't care how **** it sounds as long as it's LOUD.


 
 Wow, So Bob Katz, Bernie Grundman, Ted Jensen and so on are all idiots. Also, all the people who talk about B&W 800, PMC, Lipinksi, Dunlavy, etc. know nothing about quality


----------



## cel4145

adupree said:


> Not true.
> 
> Passive speakers can be bi-amped also. Passive speakers can have just as good of a crossover. Headroom is based on making sure the AMPS have enough power available. Passive speakers are typically used in a lot of mastering suites, where they need to most "revealing and accurate" speakers.




+1

Yeah, he's still buying into that marketing and fanboy rhetoric for active vs. passive speaker setups. My CBM-170's, which are $300 speakers, measure extremely well because the crossover is well-designed and well-matched with the driver and tweeter. I would dare someone to find an active speaker set in the $500 or less range that measure more linear than that. 

So one of the main problems is that kind of over generalizing doesn't help anyone at all to choose between an active setup and passive setup at a given price point. It's very misleading. It could very easily be that one setup is better than other. 

Moreover, DR's argument ignores the great importance of driver transient response and the quality of the tweeter for accuracy and how revealing the sound is. Since music recorded to CDs has--at best--a 96db SNR, it's pretty easy to find an amp for passive speakers with a similar or lower noise floor. My HK 3390 is rated 95db SNR. So that means it would be practically near impossible to discern the noise from the CD from the amp (which is one reason why I'm sure Harman choose to be satisfied with that SNR). On the other hand, differences in driver and tweeter quality will be much more apparent. 

About the best generalization one could make between the two is that, on average, the native response of an active speaker setup is more likely to have a more linear frequency response than a passive speaker setup. Passive speaker models tend to vary more greatly in sonic character, with some being more warm and some brighter, and some neutral.


----------



## adupree

cel4145 said:


> +1
> 
> Yeah, he's still buying into that marketing and fanboy rhetoric for active vs. passive speaker setups. My CBM-170's, which are $300 speakers, measure extremely well because the crossover is well-designed and well-matched with the driver and tweeter. I would dare someone to find an active speaker set in the $500 or less range that measure more linear than that.
> 
> ...


 
 Thank you


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

I've just looked on the website of Europe's biggest seller of pro audio gear Thomann.
 Number of active monitors offered for sale 320. Number of passive monitors for sale 15.
  
 I've looked on the website for London's premier high end studio gear supplier. KMR.
 Number of active monitors offered for sale. 298. no of passive monitors 26.
  
 I rest my case your honour!


----------



## adupree

How does the number of something offered make it better? That's like saying Bose is the best because it is the number 1 seller.


----------



## GearMe

Originally Posted by *RonaldDumsfeld* /img/forum/go_quote.gif


> Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.
> Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.
> Active crossovers increase headroom because the bands are separated reducing the chance of distortion.
> Active monitors have amps specially matched to the drivers. Better damping.
> ...


 
  
 Originally Posted by *adupree* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 





> Not true.
> Passive speakers can be bi-amped also. Passive speakers can have just as good of a crossover. Headroom is based on making sure the AMPS have enough power available. Passive speakers are typically used in a lot of mastering suites, where they need to most "revealing and accurate" speakers.


 
  
  
 Hmmm -- pretty sure Abbey Road can afford whatever speakers/amps/etc. they want.  Don't see active speakers here.
  
 Looks like we should be buying B&W speakers...and Bryston amps.  Never owned a pair but I can personally attest to the sound quality of Bryston amps.
  
 I have to chuckle a little at the HD-600s and the conspicuously absent 800s!
  
*Abbey Road Mastering Equipment (speakers & amps)*
*Monitoring*

B&W 800D speakers with Classe CA-M400 amplifiers
B&W N801 speakers with Bryston 7B amplifiers
PMC TB1 speakers with Bryston 2B amplifiers
Yamaha NS-10M speakers with Bryston 2B amplifiers
  
*Emil Berliner (DG spinoff)*

*Loudspeakers, Headphones*
B&W Matrix 801 Series 2 *
B&W Nautilus 802
B&W Nautilus 805
Geithain RL906 *
AKG K 240 *
AKG K 501 *
Sennheiser HD 580 *
Sennheiser HD 600 *
Sony MDR-7509HD *


----------



## GearMe

adupree said:


> How does the number of something offered make it better? That's like saying Bose is the best because it is the number 1 seller.


 
  
 Or...dare I utter the word...BEATS!


----------



## romeozdistress

gearme said:


> Or...dare I utter the word...BEATS!


 
 yeah i see everyone with beats, it so sad lol. seems like you can get headphones just as good if not better for $50.


----------



## Tablix

WAY off topic with talk of headphones, abbey road studio's and comparing things outside the original budget.  DR was pretty accurate that the best value for money in this price bracket almost always stands in the favor of active speakers (please note the almost).  You cannot talk about Abbey Road as an example as that's not within the boundaries of the OP's budget, you can talk about amplifier and speakers WITHIN budget and how they measure up to studio monitors of a similar price.
  
 The point of active monitors is the fact they are purpose designed as a group of matched components. You also have a single item with dealer mark-up, compared to speaker and amp with individual mark-up.
  
 There is no win situation, or there would only be one choice, so lets actually offer direct options for the OP based on PERSONAL ownership and not random opinions to back up your own individual point of view.
  
 I cannot offer any real objective opinion as I have been in the active camp for a while now and only own 2 sets of monitors, so my bias is far too strong.  It has been well over 5 years since I have owned a passive set-up, and my decision was purely based on my own needs.  
  
 You need to consider many things including how and where you listen to your music, the size and acoustics of the room.  Active montors tend to have a very fine focal point which is not always ideal for home listening 10ft away, and at this price point all the active monitors are designed from nearfield listening.  
  
 I am far from an expert but I would expect the advice from those that are to be more along the lines of, get yourself to a local supplier and use your own ears, rather than arguing back and forth over active>passive or the other way round.  
  
 Just for information I recently bought some KRK RP6 G3's on a whim as a 2nd set of monitors, they are "musical" compared to more professional "FLAT" monitors such as Focal Solo, and they are a HUGE improvement over the G2's IMO having a more natural bass than the previous incarnation. I found the RP5's lacking in bass even on the newer model, so most people would probably want to add in a sub.  While most audio engineers would scoff at these for production I find them very enjoyable for the money, and for home use more than a good investment.


----------



## cel4145

tablix said:


> WAY off topic with talk of headphones, abbey road studio's and comparing things outside the original budget.  DR was pretty accurate that *the best value for money in this price bracket almost always stands in the favor of active speakers* (please note the almost).




That is an opinion with no evidence to support it. How could you possibly know that to be true? 



tablix said:


> The point of active monitors is the fact they are purpose designed as a group of matched components. You also have a single item with dealer mark-up, compared to speaker and amp with individual mark-up.




And the point is? If active speakers are $700 and passive speakers and amp are $700, they could each have the same mark-up percentage??? And even if they didn't, that tells you nothing. Could be one thing is cheaper to produce than another because of economies of scale. Could be one is a better implementation. Who knows? I don't. You can't. 



tablix said:


> There is no win situation, or there would only be one choice, so lets actually offer direct options for the OP based on PERSONAL ownership and not random opinions to back up your own individual point of view.




I would agree. The problem seems to be that we have the active fanboys who have limited experience with speakers proclaiming that they are always superior, and those with a wide range of speaker experience saying that it really depends on the speakers/setup. Given the tons of speaker options available, which seems more likely? LOL


----------



## Tablix

cel4145 said:


> That is an opinion with no evidence to support it. How could you possibly know that to be true?





> Because perhaps I have used more speakers than I currently own, and consider 20 years of experience enough to formulate an opinion.





> And the point is? If active speakers are $700 and passive speakers and amp are $700, they could each have the same mark-up percentage??? And even if they didn't, that tells you nothing. Could be one thing is cheaper to produce than another because of economies of scale. Could be one is a better implementation. Who knows? I don't. You can't.





> Well from my understanding of retail and economics, its most likely.  Not provable but I will accept its possible.





> I would agree. The problem seems to be that we have the active fanboys who have limited experience with speakers proclaiming that they are always superior, and those with a wide range of speaker experience saying that it really depends on the speakers/setup. Given the tons of speaker options available, which seems more likely? LOL





> I accepted I may be biased in my original post due to MY usage which is recording and producing, however your viewpoint is no less biased.  I said I owned 2 sets of active monitors but I have been alive a many decades and have heard and used many speakers active and passive, so unless you been in my house for 25+ years you have no idea my experience with speakers let alone set-up I have experienced elsewhere.





>





> The arguing gets a little tedious and achieves nothing, maybe better to answer the OP and ignore the rest as its all opinionated BS that cant be proven at the end of the day.  I really hate being quoted and argued with as it feels like my opinion is no longer wanted on an open forum.  The more it happens the less likely I am or others are to get involved in debate.  Not good for a community driven website IMO.


----------



## cel4145

tablix said:


> Because perhaps I have used more speakers than I currently own, and consider 20 years of experience enough to formulate an opinion.




I can play that game, too. I have thirty years experience. Bought Mission speakers (during their heyday), an NAD amp, and a Hitachi CD player in 1984 when you could only find a few rows of CDs in an entire store. 

Anyway, 20 years involved in the audio hobby is long enough to recognize when an opinion is untenable instead of getting touchy about it. You should know better anyway because personal listening preference is such a big factor in speaker preference. I know people that like Klipsch Reference bookshelves for computer setups, and I can't understand it because they are fatiguing in even HT setups, much less with nearfield usage. 



tablix said:


> The arguing gets a little tedious and achieves nothing, maybe better to answer the OP and ignore the rest as its all opinionated BS that cant be proven at the end of the day. I really hate being quoted and argued with as it feels like my opinion is no longer wanted on an open forum.




And that is exactly my point. I've listened to examples where your statement about active speakers is definitely disproven. I constantly recommend both active and passive speakers of certain types in these threads because I know that there are good values in both because I've heard them, and I know that there are bad values in both, too. I just don't happen to own any active speakers. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't if it suited my needs. 

So It gets _equally tiring_ to me to hear the active speaker fan club come every time there is a thread like this and try to overly bias an OP with over generalizations. It's not helpful to people seeking advice.


----------



## kid vic

cel4145 said:


> One speaker model being more revealing than the other is an indication of difference in speaker quality. Has nothing to do with passive vs active.


 
  
 What I meant to say was that in my opinion monitors tend to give more to your music in an engaging sense as compared to speakers which I always find enjoyable versus surreal.
  


romeozdistress said:


> I listen to alot of different types all besides pop music. but id say metal is probably my all time favorite. i will be using these for listening to music. i dont need them to mix or anything.


 
 I dont listen to metal but from what I have heard you probably want something that are fast, with good midrange, bass and dynamic range. I think you should stay away from Yamaha monitors (to bright not enough mid), KRK's (oodles of bass but considered kind of sloppy). Swan and Adam would probably work well for you but I have only heard Adams, and those were their higher end ones ($700 a speaker) in passing but they were phenomonal. Also, you might want to check out the Focal XS book ($350 a pair). I use Mackie MR5 mkii's which I love and they cost me $450 for the pair.


----------



## GearMe

Originally Posted by *Tablix* 


 There is no win situation, or there would only be one choice, so lets actually offer direct options for the OP based on PERSONAL ownership and not random opinions to back up your own individual point of view.
  
 Originally Posted by *cel4145* 


 I would agree. The problem seems to be that we have the active _*fanboys*_ who have limited experience with speakers _*proclaiming that they are always superior*_, and those with a wide range of speaker experience saying that it really depends on the speakers/setup. Given the tons of speaker options available, which seems more likely? LOL
  
  
 - Hence the hyperbole in my response to point out the flaw in his declarations.  They _*aren't always better*_ as 'authoritatively' stated by Dumsfeld -- at least not in one professional environment.  And yes, I really do trust the engineers at Abbey Road more than Dumsfeld.  Yet, I do understand the possibility exists that unlimited budget may result in a different buying decision.  Again, hyperbole...to drive a point home and put the 'that's the way it is' argument in perspective.
  
 - In reality, I might even buy the argument that, at the lower to middle end of the spectrum, you could have better luck finding higher quality in individual components by choosing high-value performers from each equipment category with a little research, listening, and patience to get a good deal.  
  
 - BTW, I have no issues whatsoever with posts on either side of this discussion.  I always come down on the side of helping the OP research alternatives based on others opinions (including real experts -- Tyll, ljokerl, etc.) and recommending they then listen for themselves to choose the product that satisfies their unique need/preferences.
 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


>





> The arguing gets a little tedious and achieves nothing, maybe better to answer the OP and ignore the rest as its all opinionated BS that cant be proven at the end of the day.  I really hate being quoted and argued with as it feels like my opinion is no longer wanted on an open forum.  The more it happens the less likely I am or others are to get involved in debate.  Not good for a community driven website IMO.





>





> - Yep...would be great!  The problem is that some folks proclaim themselves as 'Experts' and then people that may be new to the hobby might make decisions based on the 'perceived power' of the 'Expert's' declarations; spending their hard-earned $$$ differently than they would have if there had been a reasonable discussion of alternatives.





>





> - Honestly, I've made similar arguments in the never-ending 'Hate on BEATS' threads that periodically show up on Head-Fi.  FWIW, I don't own any BEATS products; opting for DT770s and Atrio IEMs for my 'basshead' listening.  That said, I don't get the whole 'you're stupid/ignorant if you don't agree with me' schtick!   It '_gets a little tedious'_ to hear people tell others that they're listening preferences are 'inferior'.


 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  
 Originally Posted by *Tablix* 


 WAY off topic with talk of headphones, abbey road studio's and comparing things outside the original budget.
  
 - Thanks, I had no idea.       
 But the 'talk of headphones' demonstrates the point (albeit subtle) that even Mastering Studios at the highest level don't always purchase the most expensive product but choose that they feel is the best one for their application -- which is definitely something worth bearing in mind as it relates to any audio purchase.


----------



## Tablix

I tip my hat in respect to both GearMe and Cel for not taking my post as an attack, I hate these "recommend me" posts as all we can honestly do is offer a starting point for research which is about 10% of the buying process. The other 90% is all about personal situation, use and preference.  Its very difficult to make objective and recommendations when most of us are passionate about the gear we have bought and owned, this often clouds how we offer advice.  To offer anyone a buying suggestion is usually just asking for someone to confirm our own thoughts to kill the insecurities of "upgraditus" or "gear-envy" making us not go shopping for the next level of audio bliss.  
  
 And in terms of fanboys, we would be mad not to be fans of things we have spent thousands of dolars on.  I think we are all equally guilty of loving our gear.


----------



## cel4145

gearme said:


> In reality, I might even buy the argument that, at the lower to middle end of the spectrum, you could have better luck finding higher quality in individual components by choosing high-value performers from each equipment category with a little research, listening, and patience to get a good deal.




And that's a good point. I think sometimes people evaluating passive vs. active setups are looking at MSRP. The truth is that I would not recommend that anyone buy most brick and mortar store company brand speakers (and often receivers) at anywhere near MSRP for any use. For example, the Polk TSi200 are listed at Crutchfield for MSRP $319.99, their price $249. However, those are the same as the Polk Monitor series that Newegg sells, which have historically frequently been on sale well under $200. That makes them a good value at Newegg's price, but nothing special at Crutchfield's. Similarly, the HK 3390 amp I have is an excellent price/performance value at around $250 or less, but not at it's MSRP of $399 :eek: On the other hand, there are Internet direct brands like Emotiva, Ascend Acoustics, EmpTek, etc. that sell their equipment at a good price/performance value. If someone is going to spend full MSRP on passive speaker equipment from Best Buy, then the best active speakers for the same money probably are going to sound better. 

So, like you say, one has to research to discover how to put together that good system. 



tablix said:


> I tip my hat in respect to both GearMe and Cel for not taking my post as an attack, I hate these "recommend me" posts as all we can honestly do is offer a starting point for research which is about 10% of the buying process. The other 90% is all about personal situation, use and preference.  Its very difficult to make objective and recommendations when most of us are passionate about the gear we have bought and owned, this often clouds how we offer advice.  To offer anyone a buying suggestion is usually just asking for someone to confirm our own thoughts to kill the insecurities of "upgraditus" or "gear-envy" making us not go shopping for the next level of audio bliss.
> 
> And in terms of fanboys, we would be mad not to be fans of things we have spent thousands of dolars on.  I think we are all equally guilty of loving our gear.




You and I disagree sometimes, but I respect your opinion.  I'll admit I mostly reacted because you strongly supported DR, who does have a pretty clear agenda represented in his postings, and will often say whatever he can think of (even if not tenable or accurate) to support that agenda. For example, this week, he told someone who was thinking of switching their B&W DM602s to an active setup that the cones likely needed replacing on the 602s because they were about 15 years old. A ridiculous suggestion since the DM602s cones are made out of Kevlar (lol). So I beg you. Try not to enable him. 

I don't actually mind these "recommend me" threads. I'm glad to see people asking these questions because it does, as GearMe says, require research to get a good value for your money. And it's perfectly good when people say they like this or that which they own, or they prefer how it sounds to some other model, and recommend it. The problem is when people categorically say that X is always better than Y, when they know that many people with lots of experience feel differently. That doesn't help an OP because they could be part of the crowd would like the other choice.


----------



## astrallite

adupree said:


> Not true.
> 
> Passive speakers can be bi-amped also. Passive speakers can have just as good of a crossover. Headroom is based on making sure the AMPS have enough power available. Passive speakers are typically used in a lot of mastering suites, where they need to most "revealing and accurate" speakers.


 
  
 Passive speakers currently top off at 24db/octave crossovers. Now most people buy "entry-level" powered monitors, many of them which use a passive crossover anyway, or a very rudimentary active crossover that's makes even a Behringer DCX2496 seem "high end", but at the very top of the food chain, the active crossover processors that cost in the four or five digits range, you can get stuff with 10,000db/octave slopes which a passive crossover just can't match.


----------



## adupree

astrallite said:


> Passive speakers currently top off at 24db/octave crossovers. Now most people buy "entry-level" powered monitors, many of them which use a passive crossover anyway, or a very rudimentary active crossover that's makes even a Behringer DCX2496 seem "high end", but at the very top of the food chain, the active crossover processors that cost in the four or five digits range, you can get stuff with 10,000db/octave slopes which a passive crossover just can't match.


 
 Passive speakers can use active crossovers. So they can have the same quality.


----------



## romeozdistress

went to guitar center and tested some speakers out. tested the jbl lsr305. they sounded very good, good bass response. the guy there kept trying to push mackie on me, saying he loved their monitors and hes a huge mackie guy lol. i tested out the mackie mr9mk3s they sounded nice but they are freaking huge. i should have tested out the 8 inch version of the jbls but it slipped my mind. i was too busy getting a lesson on mackie speakers haha. thoughts on mackie products? it was hard to find any metal to listen to. but i like the sound of both. gonna have to go back when i have the cash and make a huge decision.


----------



## astrallite

adupree said:


> Passive speakers can use active crossovers. So they can have the same quality.


 
  
 There's almost no way to directly compare the prices of passive speakers with active crossovers and active speakers, because on the only passive speakers on the market with active crossovers are in the 10k+ range anyway, and this doesn't include the cost of cables of amplification.
  
 The problem is passive speakers with an active crossover is such a niche market with small economies of scale that they end up being much more expensive than an active speaker with active crossovers. So for the same price, it's unlikely, just like pre/pros and power amplifiers are so expensive compared to receivers even if the parts are of the same quality.


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> went to guitar center and tested some speakers out. tested the jbl lsr305. they sounded very good, good bass response. the guy there kept trying to push mackie on me, saying he loved their monitors and hes a huge mackie guy lol. i tested out the mackie mr9mk3s they sounded nice but they are freaking huge. i should have tested out the 8 inch version of the jbls but it slipped my mind. i was too busy getting a lesson on mackie speakers haha. thoughts on mackie products? it was hard to find any metal to listen to. but i like the sound of both. gonna have to go back when i have the cash and make a huge decision.




I don't personally care for the Mackies at their price point over some other powered speakers, but a lot of people do. It's a good brand. If you like them better, get them. 

However, when you have access to actually listen to speakers yourself, you should let your own ears decide and ignore what anyone else says about which sounds better. But definitely take some of your own music for comparison 

Since you commented on the speaker size, be sure to measure your space before buying. It's not uncommon for people to get the speakers home and find that they are too big. 

When considering how much space you need, if the speakers are rear ported like the LSR305s, you should not jam them up against the wall when placing them. The port will need at least a few inches to breathe. That's one advantage of the KRK Rokits. The port is in the front on their speakers, so less of a problem being placed up close to the wall.


----------



## romeozdistress

right now i have everything on a kitchen table lol. i need to either buy a new desk or drill a hole in this for the cables and cords. not sure yet. but size shouldnt be an issue. probably gonna go with either jbl lsr305 or mackie mr5mk3. and then get some budget dac, i can throw my current soundcard on ebay easily no bigger. its only a xonar dgx nothing serious.


----------



## romeozdistress

now i have to learn about dacs lol. maybe $100 since the monitors will be $300. seems about right $100 or less. it would just be easier to control volume id think.


----------



## adupree

astrallite said:


> There's almost no way to directly compare the prices of passive speakers with active crossovers and active speakers, because on the only passive speakers on the market with active crossovers are in the 10k+ range anyway, and this doesn't include the cost of cables of amplification.
> 
> The problem is passive speakers with an active crossover is such a niche market with small economies of scale that they end up being much more expensive than an active speaker with active crossovers. So for the same price, it's unlikely, just like pre/pros and power amplifiers are so expensive compared to receivers even if the parts are of the same quality.


 
 I'm not comparing prices. I'm just correcting bad information. Passive is not better then active nor is active better then passive.


----------



## adupree

Mackie is hit or mis with me. Still, at the price you're looking at I would go with the Equator Audio D5. I will out perform either monitor your looking at.


----------



## astrallite

adupree said:


> I'm not comparing prices. I'm just correcting bad information. Passive is not better then active nor is active better then passive.


 
  
 But you are comparing consumer products. How you compare them is by pricing. Yeah you can make a steam engine as good as a gas powered one, too, the only difference is cost. The only thing worse than bad information is making a correction by presenting bad information.


----------



## romeozdistress

adupree said:


> Mackie is hit or mis with me. Still, at the price you're looking at I would go with the Equator Audio D5. I will out perform either monitor your looking at.


 
 id feel more comfortable getting something i can test with my own music, i have no wya of testing those at all. hmm. how is the bass with those? the bass was pretty strong with the jbls.


----------



## nff

i am pretty much in the same pickle as the OP    i was going to get a pair of behringer (yes i know but they review quite highly )  3030a's (because i found em for 180 each and couldn't afford f5's)  but they got back ordered and my order got canceled.  and now they went up in price.  so im back to square one.  here are some im looking at  perhaps this will give OP some options also?  
  
 http://www.axemusic.com/store/product/32405/Mackie-MR5-mk3-Active-Studio-Reference-Monitor-with-5.25-Inch-Woofer/
  
 http://www.axemusic.com/store/product/31451/Presonus-E5-Eris-2-Way-Studio-Monitor-5.25%22-Kevlar-Woofer-and-1%22-Silk-Dome-Tweeter-70W-Bi-Amp-Power-Sold-Individually/
  
 small and expensive  but  genelec is suposed to be some of the best monitors out there. in league with focal.  they bandwith is pretty narrow though.
 http://www.axemusic.com/store/product/20229/Genelec-6010A-Bi-Amplified-Loudspeaker-System-2-way-Active-Nearfield-Studio-Monitor-Black-Sold-as-Single/
  
 these look nice.
 http://www.axemusic.com/store/product/20291/JBL-LSR2325P-Two-Way-Bi-Amplified-Powered-Studio-Monitor-Set-with-5-inch-Woofer-Sold-as-Pair/
  
 thoughts?
  
 edit  i found a source for comparison tracks. 
 http://www.sonicsense.com/blog/category/studio-monitors/


----------



## kraken2109

Yamaha make some nice monitors.


----------



## nff

kraken2109 said:


> Yamaha make some nice monitors.


 

 if he goes that route  the older hsXXm models are the ones you want.  the HSX series are kinda honky
 https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/yamaha-hs5?in=sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/studio-monitors
 vs
 https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/yamaha-hs50m?in=sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/studio-monitors


----------



## cel4145

nff said:


> edit  i found a source for comparison tracks.
> http://www.sonicsense.com/blog/category/studio-monitors/




One can't judge speakers effectively by listening to recordings of speakers because it's being filtered through a microphone and recording process which might affect the sound (this is definitely true for youtube videos) and then, most importantly, the speakers that you listen to the recordings on. That will affect the tonal quality of how the speakers sound, and then you can't learn anything about imaging that way. You would think a company that sells pro audio equipment would know better.


----------



## nff

cel4145 said:


> One can't judge speakers effectively by listening to recordings of speakers because it's being filtered through a microphone and recording process which might affect the sound (this is definitely true for youtube videos) and then, most importantly, the speakers that you listen to the recordings on. That will affect the tonal quality of how the speakers sound, and then you can't learn anything about imaging that way. You would think a company that sells pro audio equipment would know better.


 
 comparing them to the source material can give you some idea of what they sound like.   i know its not an ideal demoing conditions but its better than not hearing them.


----------



## kraken2109

nff said:


> if he goes that route  the older hsXXm models are the ones you want.  the HSX series are kinda honky
> https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/yamaha-hs5?in=sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/studio-monitors
> vs
> https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/yamaha-hs50m?in=sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/studio-monitors


 
 Can't say I've used any of the new ones, but I remember liking the HS80M.


----------



## cel4145

nff said:


> comparing them to the source material can give you some idea of what they sound like.   i know its not an ideal demoing conditions but its better than not hearing them.




This idea of using speaker recordings to evaluate speakers has already been debunked in audio circles. It's just a logically flawed concept. 

So I don't want to get into a big argument about this (you can research and find explanations of it), but the problem is that your speakers will always influence how the other speakers sound. There's no way around that. Think of it as like adding EQ. If you listen to multiple sets of speakers with no EQ, and then listen to them again with some set of minor EQ adjustments, the EQ can easily privilege one set of speakers sounding better than the others. They definitely will not sound the same once the EQ has been applied because the frequency response curves have been reshaped. And for instance, if one is looking to upgrade from current speakers to a better quality speaker, how can one evaluate the resolution of a recording of a speaker with a speaker that is incapable of the same resolution? Finally, as I already pointed out, you can't get a sense of a speakers imaging capability from listening to recordings because a recording of the original speakers just can't preserve that, and, once again, your speakers imaging ability will shape that experience.


----------



## adupree

astrallite said:


> But you are comparing consumer products. How you compare them is by pricing. Yeah you can make a steam engine as good as a gas powered one, too, the only difference is cost. The only thing worse than bad information is making a correction by presenting bad information.


 
 Where did I compare them? What I said is that arguing active vs passive is pointless. So where was my bad info?
  


romeozdistress said:


> id feel more comfortable getting something i can test with my own music, i have no wya of testing those at all. hmm. how is the bass with those? the bass was pretty strong with the jbls.


 
 The low end is quite good for the size of the speaker, they also have 3 different settings. Plus they are front ported, which is good if you're limited on space.


----------



## germanium

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Active speakers are bi-amped which equals less distortion.
> 
> Active speakers allow better optimisation of the crossover.
> 
> ...



1. Active does result in less distortion generally than passive but not always. Some actives have too weak kneed power supplies such as Tannoy's 5 inch monitors back a couple years ago. They were obviously heavily EQed & lacked the power to match & as such ran into heavy distortion at quite low volumes. This was a built in EQ to get strong bass from a small driver.
 
2.Crossover optimization is another possible benefit that though true not always realized in the final product. See above.
 
3. Active crossovers  do not really increase headroom, The output is not sufficiently narrow band in most cases  too have any benefit. Also generally amps are generally smaller than would be used in a passive setup. Where the benefit is that if you clip the woofer amp the tweeter doesn't get sent the resulting distortion causing it to fry with an active setup which would happen in a passive setup.
 
4. Better damping is definitely a benefit. It is more the other way around as far what needs to be matched to what though as the driver needs to be matched to the amp too prevent from being over damped instead of the amp matched to the driver.. you can match the amp closer to the driver capability power wise though Yes there is such a thing as over damping. Either magnet strength needs reducing or fewer turns of wire needs to be exposed to the magnetic field in order to keep the sound balanced & not bass shy when connected directly to the amp as in an active speaker. .
 
5. this last point needs to be separated into 4 separate points
 
A. Yes woofer can have motion feedback & hence have lower distortion but this is really only applicable to subwoofers as above a certain frequency the feedback becomes positive instead of negative feedback & when that happens distortion increases instead of decreases.
 
B. High frequency response is not increased by motion feedback or damping, Contrary high damping prevents the voltage from rising with impedance as happens with all dynamic drivers as the get near their max frequency response. Result is sooner rolloff with high damping than without. except with electrostats & possibly piezoelectric tweeters.
 
C. Yes, reduced ringing of the driver units especially in the bass. This of coarse does not apply to cabinet resonances, hence poor cabinet design can negative affect the sound though so far most active monitors do ok here, not as well though as some high end passives though
 
D. Yes, reduced distortion
 
6. Yes reduced heat in the crossover compared to a passive design. Parts can be smaller , cheaper & generally higher quality as well than used in many passive speakers, especially cheap passive commonly use cheap poor quality crossover components compared to the components found in the active crossover which though even cheaper they tend to be much higher quality as they don't have to deal with high power they are much smaller.
 
Note that yes I am in the active generally better camp but don't believe that to always be the case


----------



## germanium

nff said:


> i am pretty much in the same pickle as the OP    i was going to get a pair of behringer (yes i know but they review quite highly )  3030a's (because i found em for 180 each and couldn't afford f5's)  but they got back ordered and my order got canceled.  and now they went up in price.  so im back to square one.  here are some im looking at  perhaps this will give OP some options also?
> 
> http://www.axemusic.com/store/product/32405/Mackie-MR5-mk3-Active-Studio-Reference-Monitor-with-5.25-Inch-Woofer/
> 
> ...




The Mackie MR 5 is revamped this year & don't seem quite as bass bloated.

Haven't heard the smaller Presonus-E5-Eris speakers.

The JBL probably have the cleanest tightest bass with excellent extension, however everything else sounds a little on the muffled side.

I haven't heard th Genelec speakers.


----------



## L0SLobos

Do the Adam Audio F5's have built in amplifier? Or do I have to buy a separate amp?
  
 Edit: NVM. found on CNET that they already have class AB amps inside. At only $499 a pair these seem like a great deal, judging by all the stellar reviews they've been getting. I'm also considering getting KEF X300A's at $900/ pair. These guys have built in amp AND 24/96 dac. Anyone tried them?


----------



## nff

just ordered the JBL's  they were going to go up in price at the end of the week so i had to jump on them.


----------



## kid vic

romeozdistress said:


> went to guitar center and tested some speakers out. tested the jbl lsr305. they sounded very good, good bass response. the guy there kept trying to push mackie on me, saying he loved their monitors and hes a huge mackie guy lol. i tested out the mackie mr9mk3s they sounded nice but they are freaking huge. i should have tested out the 8 inch version of the jbls but it slipped my mind. i was too busy getting a lesson on mackie speakers haha. thoughts on mackie products? it was hard to find any metal to listen to. but i like the sound of both. gonna have to go back when i have the cash and make a huge decision.


 
 I own the Mackie MR5 mk2's and love the heck out of em; the MR8's are too much for what you're need them for. If you can test the MR5 mk3's against the JBL LSR305's you can figure out which one you like most. I highly recommend the mackie's but its up to your ears to decide. The MR5's will sound very similar to the MR8's but with a slightly more restrained bass response.


----------



## L0SLobos

Does anyone here have experience with Adam audio studio monitors? I checked gearslutz forums but most people there prefer Focal monitors...


----------



## adupree

I've used Adams. I like them, but the can be kind of bright. I've never dealt with the the F-series though.


----------



## Tablix

Gearslutz is a bunch of people with either buckets of opinion or buckets of money.  I have owned the A7x for about 2 years, and now added some 3rd gen KRK's to the horde, and am perfectly happy with both.  The KRK are certainly less detailed and a little "warm" for production but they sound great for music listening and are a nice comparison against the adam's.  The a7x are more detailed across the board and I find the bass a lot more accurate, however they are still not perfectly flat in response, the mids can be a little weaker than the top and bottom end, but that could also come down to the room I am in.  The higher end Focal's are wonderful, I cant deny, but once you get into the range of $1500 monitors you really need to worry about placement and acoustic treatment for the room, which most people are not prepared to do.  If you are a listening ROOM and a load of spare cash look into the ADAM S3x, or if space is limited the S2x, but most people will be perfectly happy in the low price brackets. 
  
 I am not a fan of wasting money where its for minor gains, and you get FAR more for your money in acoustic treatment, once you get beyond the $1500 mark, then you are building a custom room and then blowing your remaining budget on the best speakers you can afford.  There are loads of high end brands outside focal, adam, genelec and the other usual brands and you should really do your homework before buying.


----------



## romeozdistress

whats up with the thread jacking bro? LOL


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Here is a review of the smaller ADAM monitors from a hi-fi rather than pro-audio source.
  
http://www.audiostream.com/content/adam-professional-audio-a3x
  
 Enjoy.


----------



## Mohjong

I do recommend studio monitors too that I even have a 5.1 setup with 4 Bx5a Deluxe, 1 Genelec 8030a, and a 10" Klipsch sub hooking up to a receiver.  
 But still, I often dream of having just a pair of passive speaker setup as my ultimate, the ones I spend $$$ just to visit and hug all night back in the days.  The Funktion One.


----------



## nff

mohjong said:


> I do recommend studio monitors too that I even have a 5.1 setup with 4 Bx5a Deluxe, 1 Genelec 8030a, and a 10" Klipsch sub hooking up to a receiver.
> But still, I often dream of having just a pair of passive speaker setup as my ultimate, the ones I spend $$$ just to visit and hug all night back in the days.  The Funktion One.


 

 must be a small room  if you are using such beamy speakers as a HT setup.   but i bet it sounds delicious when you find the sweet spot.


----------



## cel4145

mohjong said:


> I do recommend studio monitors too that I even have a 5.1 setup with 4 Bx5a Deluxe, 1 Genelec 8030a, and a 10" Klipsch sub hooking up to a receiver.
> But still, I often dream of having just a pair of passive speaker setup as my ultimate, the ones I spend $$$ just to visit and hug all night back in the days.  The Funktion One.




What are you the Genelec for? The center channel? Normally it's best to have your front three speakers timbre match for the best front soundstage. That generally involves buying the same brand, and often even the same model series.


----------



## Mohjong

It's kind of sad but yes, such setup is in a room within the trailer home.  That's also the reason why I must use near field monitors since I can't play music loud within the community.
  
 I've planned to build the front/center speakers for my home theatre setup with 3 MK sound MPS-1611p cabinets and finding drivers (1" tweeter and 6.5" woofer at 8 ohm) for them.  But the plan never worked out on finding the matching drivers part, so I'm currently using the 8030a as primary.
  
 Originally I had a crazier setup for the center HT channel, a single hypersonic H450.


----------



## romeozdistress

mohjong said:


> It's kind of sad but yes, such setup is in a room within the trailer home.  That's also the reason why I must use near field monitors since I can't play music loud within the community.
> 
> I've planned to build the front/center speakers for my home theatre setup with 3 MK sound MPS-1611p cabinets and finding drivers (1" tweeter and 6.5" woofer at 8 ohm) for them.  But the plan never worked out on finding the matching drivers part, so I'm currently using the 8030a as primary.
> 
> Originally I had a crazier setup for the center HT channel, a single hypersonic H450.


 
 maybe you should improve your living situation first


----------



## L0SLobos

Hmm the review for Adam A3x was pretty clarifying. I think I'll get those and use the leftover money for a good dac unit. What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?


----------



## nff

l0slobos said:


> Hmm the review for Adam A3x was pretty clarifying. I think I'll get those and use the leftover money for a good dac unit. What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?


 

 moded out  schiit bitfrost?


----------



## cel4145

mohjong said:


> It's kind of sad but yes, such setup is in a room within the trailer home.  That's also the reason why I must use near field monitors since I can't play music loud within the community.
> 
> I've planned to build the front/center speakers for my home theatre setup with 3 MK sound MPS-1611p cabinets and finding drivers (1" tweeter and 6.5" woofer at 8 ohm) for them.  But the plan never worked out on finding the matching drivers part, so I'm currently using the 8030a as primary.
> 
> Originally I had a crazier setup for the center HT channel, a single hypersonic H450.




That's no fun having to keep the volume down 

Yeah I understand about finding drivers. Most people don't realize that the tweeter, driver, and crossover have to all match and be correct for the enclosure size. Can't just stick any driver and tweeter inside even if they do fit. It can sound horrible. 

If you could ever replace your left and right in the front with a pair of Genelec 8030Bs (since they don't make the 8030A any more), I bet that would sound great.


----------



## cel4145

l0slobos said:


> Hmm the review for Adam A3x was pretty clarifying. I think I'll get those and use the leftover money for a good dac unit. What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?




Do you need a way to plug in headphones, too?


----------



## cel4145

l0slobos said:


> Hmm the review for Adam A3x was pretty clarifying. I think I'll get those and use the leftover money for a good dac unit. What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?




One other thought: Is bass important to you? If so, you might grab a Schiit Modi for a DAC, then get an SVS SB-1000 or SVS PB-1000 for a sub. One of those would give you some pretty awesome sounding midbass and deeper bass extension than the Adam 3X. IMO, way more of an SQ upgrade than spending more on the DAC.


----------



## romeozdistress

i have been looking at the presonus audiobox. would that be good to control the new monitors as opposed to a internal card?


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> i have been looking at the presonus audiobox. would that be good to control the new monitors as opposed to a internal card?




I can't remember if you ended up the JBLs or not. That DAC has balanced outputs, which might or might not make an SQ difference in your setup. 

If you want to explore different external DAC options, you might want to look in Head-Fi's Dedicated Source Components forum and post there since there are a lot of people into DACs who won't read this section of the website.


----------



## romeozdistress

havent got anything yet. i have narrowed it down between the jbls and mackies.


----------



## nff

it looks like the bandwidth on the jbl's is superior (given there are no tolerances stated for either)


----------



## adupree

nff said:


> it looks like the bandwidth on the jbl's is superior (given there are no tolerances stated for either)


 
 By bandwidth do you mean frequency response?


----------



## nff

adupree said:


> By bandwidth do you mean frequency response?


 
 yes that is what i am referring to


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

> What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?


 
  
 Since the active monitors you are interested in offer a stereolink function whereby the volume knob on the front of one speaker controls both you don't really need a DAC if your on-board audio is recent. Anything later than Realtek ALC 889 is considered transparent to the human ear if properly implemented.
http://stephan.win31.de/music.htm#onboard
  
 If you do want a DAC and most people do, if only for the convienience and headroom, look for something that offers you more than what you already have. There is an entire class of devices called audio interfaces designed specifically to work with active nearfield monitors. They tend to come from the same pro and semi pro audio sources as the monitors themselves. Don't worry about the quality of the actual converters. Many of these companies want to sell sophisticated $500++  Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) software. It's not in their interests to skimp.
  
 Starting from about $200 you can get a reliable interface from an established brand with the following features.
  
 Volume control, headphone output with separate volume control, multiple channels out, so you can listen to something different on phones or satellites at the same time or drive a less expensive sub woofer, better inputs than on-board so you can connect up a quality microphone, turntables, wireless receiver etc.Balanced outs to drive the monitors and help avoid ground loops. A very sophisticated EQ and effects package. MIDI so you can use a control surface to control software functions. etc etc....
  
http://uk.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-2i4
http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/microbook
http://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/audio-interfaces/komplete-audio-6/
  
 Roland, Steinberg and Avid among others make competitive products.
  
 Towards the top end of your budget these look very attractive.
  
http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_babyface.php
http://spl.info/de/produkte/interfaces/crimson/in-kuerze.html
http://www.motu.com/products/motuaudio/ultralite-mk3
  
 RME are the runaway market leader with a reputation for the best software and what to buy if you can afford it. The SPL is newer and has excellent monitor control and listening facilities inc 2 headphone amps The MOTU has the most convenient multichannel capabilities, 10 in and 14 out.


----------



## L0SLobos

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Towards the top end of your budget these look very attractive.
> 
> http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_babyface.php
> http://spl.info/de/produkte/interfaces/crimson/in-kuerze.html
> ...


 
 The RME looks very nice with all the inc features. However, isn't it more of a pro audio dac? The guy earlier before you also suggested getting a subwoofer if bass is important (it is). I think I'll get a sub first and just use my AQ dragonfly as a dac in the meantime.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Fair enough. Good question though. You might even be back.
  
 Those devices are designed to deal with issues people who have bought powered/active speakers regularly bring to the forum.
  
 Such as. How do i integrate a sub-woofer into my system? How do I control the volume? Can I use headphones independently? How can I avoid ground loops? Can I use balanced connections and should I? etc etc.
  
 So thanks for letting me put it out there. Some people might even benefit.


----------



## adupree

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Since the active monitors you are interested in offer a stereolink function whereby the volume knob on the front of one speaker controls both you don't really need a DAC if your on-board audio is recent. Anything later than Realtek ALC 889 is considered transparent to the human ear if properly implemented.
> http://stephan.win31.de/music.htm#onboard
> 
> If you do want a DAC and most people do, if only for the convienience and headroom, look for something that offers you more than what you already have. There is an entire class of devices called audio interfaces designed specifically to work with active nearfield monitors. They tend to come from the same pro and semi pro audio sources as the monitors themselves. *Don't worry about the quality of the actual converters.* Many of these companies want to sell sophisticated $500++  Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) software. It's not in their interests to skimp.
> ...


 
 You realize there is a huge difference in quality of converters. That's why Grace, Prism, Apogee are considered so much better.


----------



## Iostream

RME is an incredible interface, but you are spending a lot of money for upgraded input preamps and the lowest latency drivers you can get. Important when making music, a waste when just listening to it. I have a dragonfly 1.2 that I use for checking samples, audio bits with a different app when I am working inside my DAW because my DAW keeps exclusive access to my ASIO drivers. I would say it sounds as good as my interface for listening. The biggest problem with dragonfly -> monitors is volume control, there are plenty of monitor controllers that solve that problem. Many also allow for multiple sets of monitors so you have your monitors on one set and headphones on another.  Another option is to use a preamp with fixed output record outputs.  Main outs go to your monitors, record outs go to a proper headphone amp.  A few even offer sub integration if you are trying to mix a hifi sub with pro monitors, though pro subs have their own integration built in.


----------



## L0SLobos

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Since the active monitors you are interested in offer a stereolink function whereby the volume knob on the front of one speaker controls both you don't really need a DAC if your on-board audio is recent. Anything later than Realtek ALC 889 is considered transparent to the human ear if properly implemented.
> http://stephan.win31.de/music.htm#onboard
> 
> If you do want a DAC and most people do, if only for the convienience and headroom, look for something that offers you more than what you already have. There is an entire class of devices called audio interfaces designed specifically to work with active nearfield monitors. They tend to come from the same pro and semi pro audio sources as the monitors themselves. Don't worry about the quality of the actual converters. Many of these companies want to sell sophisticated $500++  Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) software. It's not in their interests to skimp.


 
 I just reread your post and it seems I was worrying about getting a dac for nothing. Headphone out from my onboard audio is clean and noise free; powerful enough to drive 32ohm headphones to high spl at around 30-40% on volume bar. Though I just might buy one of those pro dac's because of their awesome eq effects and midi/recording inputs. Anyways thanks for the info!


----------



## cel4145

l0slobos said:


> The RME looks very nice with all the inc features. However, isn't it more of a pro audio dac? The guy earlier before you also suggested getting a subwoofer if bass is important (it is). I think I'll get a sub first and just use my AQ dragonfly as a dac in the meantime.




You have an Audioquest Dragonfly? I've never heard one, but a lot of head-fiers consider that to be a killer DAC. You could spend a lot to upgrade over what it costs and might not get any SQ benefits.


----------



## Tablix

adupree said:


> You realize there is a huge difference in quality of converters. That's why Grace, Prism, Apogee are considered so much better.


 
 I tend to disagree, having used fiio, Roland and focusrite gear at home, and have used benchmark, RME and separate AD and DA setups elsewhere, and have found the difference in quality very very small.  Even with $3000 genelec monitoring setups changing from my roland quad capture and laptop to in-house studio systems the difference is very small, so saying converters make a huge difference is just not true.  Maybe 5-10 years ago, but these days you can get very good DAC for a budget price, what you pay for is brand and features.  People over-state these things when the single biggest thing after the speakers is room treatment, as a rooms acoustics will mess up the very best speakers.


----------



## adupree

tablix said:


> I tend to disagree, having used fiio, Roland and focusrite gear at home, and have used benchmark, RME and separate AD and DA setups elsewhere, and have found the difference in quality very very small.  Even with $3000 genelec monitoring setups changing from my roland quad capture and laptop to in-house studio systems the difference is very small, so saying converters make a huge difference is just not true.  Maybe 5-10 years ago, but these days you can get very good DAC for a budget price, what you pay for is brand and features.  People over-state these things when the single biggest thing after the speakers is room treatment, as a rooms acoustics will mess up the very best speakers.


 
 I know plenty of people who would agree with me that they will make a noticeable difference. I have experience with many setups and final results will vary dependent upon equipment. I also feel that acoustics is just as important if not more than speakers.


----------



## cel4145

tablix said:


> I tend to disagree, having used fiio, Roland and focusrite gear at home, and have used benchmark, RME and separate AD and DA setups elsewhere, and have found the difference in quality very very small.  Even with $3000 genelec monitoring setups changing from my roland quad capture and laptop to in-house studio systems the difference is very small, so saying converters make a huge difference is just not true.  Maybe 5-10 years ago, but these days you can get very good DAC for a budget price, what you pay for is brand and features.  *People over-state these things when the single biggest thing after the speakers is room treatment, as a rooms acoustics will mess up the very best speakers.*




Agreed. 

Room treatments, and then knowing how to EQ your speakers, too, after treating the room for final corrections to produce the smoothest response. 

It's easy enough to buy a DAC for under $200 that is transparent in sound reproduction by all known measurements.


----------



## Iostream

adupree said:


> I know plenty of people who would agree with me that they will make a noticeable difference. I have experience with many setups and final results will vary dependent upon equipment. I also feel that acoustics is just as important if not more than speakers.


 
 I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who agree with you on the D/A side of things with audio interfaces.  This doesn't mean that higher end interfaces are a waste of money, in fact they are a great investment to the musician.  Higher end interfaces often provide drastic improvements in the pre-amps for inputs, and several other areas, but D/A output is typically not a drastic improvement.
 And yes, room treatment is even more important than speakers (also a smaller investment).


----------



## adupree

iostream said:


> I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who agree with you on the D/A side of things with audio interfaces.  This doesn't mean that higher end interfaces are a waste of money, in fact they are a great investment to the musician.  Higher end interfaces often provide drastic improvements in the pre-amps for inputs, and several other areas, but D/A output is typically not a drastic improvement.
> And yes, room treatment is even more important than speakers (also a smaller investment).


 
 Again, I personally know lots of people who will agree with me. Dynamic range, jitter, THD all are effected by converters. This is why if you look at any larger studio you will see them run high-end converters. I can't think of a single studio I've worked at that isn't running Apogee, RME, Prism, Antelope, SSL, Lynx, Benchmark or other similar converters.


----------



## nff

adupree said:


> Again, I personally know lots of people who will agree with me. Dynamic range, jitter, THD all are effected by converters. This is why if you look at any larger studio you will see them run high-end converters. I can't think of a single studio I've worked at that isn't running Apogee, RME, Prism, Antelope, SSL, Lynx, Benchmark or other similar converters.


 
 but you have to remember  studio's start with the room  THEN the move to the hardware.  you wont see a large studio that  has  bad acoustics  and you also have to remember  that  studio's  have budgets specifically to equipment.  sometimes new expensive equipment is purchased solely as a tax write off.


----------



## adupree

nff said:


> but you have to remember  studio's start with the room  THEN the move to the hardware.  you wont see a large studio that  has  bad acoustics  and you also have to remember  that  studio's  have budgets specifically to equipment.  sometimes new expensive equipment is purchased solely as a tax write off.


 
 I understand they start with the room first, I've been involved in building a few. But I don't see how people don't get the difference in converters.


----------



## nff

adupree said:


> I understand they start with the room first, I've been involved in building a few. But I don't see how people don't get the difference in converters.


 
 i know there is a difference  but the difference is pointless unless you have the room  to use it.  so why bother until you can utilize it.


----------



## adupree

nff said:


> i know there is a difference  but the difference is pointless unless you have the room  to use it.  so why bother until you can utilize it.


 
 All I'm saying is that there is a difference lol I totally agree that they entire system and room should be equivalent.


----------



## Iostream

adupree said:


> Again, I personally know lots of people who will agree with me. Dynamic range, jitter, THD all are effected by converters. This is why if you look at any larger studio you will see them run high-end converters. I can't think of a single studio I've worked at that isn't running Apogee, RME, Prism, Antelope, SSL, Lynx, Benchmark or other similar converters.


 
 Now you are talking about a whole different beast.  I never said converters couldn't get better than what you find in a fairly basic pro interface.  There are many reasons people run RME, their DACs aren't usually one of them (certainly not the reason I bought mine).  Their DAC isn't bad, but it isn't a major step up either. Either you run a babyface for latency and decent preamps for the price, or you move up and go to a separate DAC from the RME interface.  Apogee is similarly eh until you get to the Symphony range, again, DACs are broken out form the interface, Of course studios run higher end DACs, and interfaces, but if you think your Apogee duet or RME babyface is a major step up for audio output, you are mistaken. There are many things they do better which make them worth the money, but for the same money, you can go with something else for listening only and have a better solution.  I still stand by the opinion that at the Sub $1k interace level, improvements are in drivers latency, number of I/O channels, and preamps, not the output stage.  Over $1k sure, but you are basically buying a digital interface with external preamps, AD and DA.


----------



## adupree

iostream said:


> Now you are talking about a whole different beast.  I never said converters couldn't get better than what you find in a fairly basic pro interface.  There are many reasons people run RME, their DACs aren't usually one of them (certainly not the reason I bought mine).  Their DAC isn't bad, but it isn't a major step up either. Either you run a babyface for latency and decent preamps for the price, or you move up and go to a separate DAC from the RME interface.  Apogee is similarly eh until you get to the Symphony range, again, DACs are broken out form the interface, Of course studios run higher end DACs, and interfaces, but if you think your Apogee duet or RME babyface is a major step up for audio output, you are mistaken. There are many things they do better which make them worth the money, but for the same money, you can go with something else for listening only and have a better solution.  I still stand by the opinion that at the Sub $1k interace level, improvements are in drivers latency, number of I/O channels, and preamps, not the output stage.  Over $1k sure, but you are basically buying a digital interface with external preamps, AD and DA.


 
 Calm down man. I am speaking about converters. I don't understand why you would assume I'm referring to a Duet or Babyface or something similar. The reason I mentioned SSL, Antelope, Prism, Apogee (and yes the Symphony) in-particularly is because they are what I use regularly. I initially just said that their is a quality difference in them in response to RonaldDumsfeld's statement about not to worry about the quality of the converter.


----------



## Tablix

For most people and general playback they will not notice the difference between a $200 and a $2000 DAC ,in a home environment, even more so on budget monitors.  So in some respects RD was pretty accurate.


----------



## romeozdistress

picked up a presonus audiobox usb today for $99 new. wanted to grab it while I could for that price. should have my tax return within the next two weeks or so. just gotts decide if i wanna settle for 5 inchers or get bold and go for $8. its like a $200 difference though.


----------



## nff

romeozdistress said:


> picked up a presonus audiobox usb today for $99 new. wanted to grab it while I could for that price. should have my tax return within the next two weeks or so. just gotts decide if i wanna settle for 5 inchers or get bold and go for $8. its like a $200 difference though.


 
 whats the room size?  and  do you value bass over soundstaging?


----------



## romeozdistress

its my living room so its a decent size. and id like some bass. i have 4 inch drivers in these maudios and the bass doesnt satisfy me. but im sure even the monitors with 5 inch drivers would. just a big decision. $200 is a decent amount of money.


----------



## nff

romeozdistress said:


> its my living room so its a decent size. and id like some bass. i have 4 inch drivers in these maudios and the bass doesnt satisfy me. but im sure even the monitors with 5 inch drivers would. just a big decision. $200 is a decent amount of money.


 

 hmm im assuming your talking about the jbl's right? or the mackies?


----------



## romeozdistress

i want the jbls. they seem to have more bass than the mackies.


----------



## nff

romeozdistress said:


> i want the jbls. they seem to have more bass than the mackies.


 

 yea  i can understand that. i went for the 305's personally.  they go down pretty low for a 5''  43hz is pretty low for a speaker that small. that and they behave more like midfields than nears with that huge sweet spot.  go with the 305's  with the option of getting a sub at a later date.


----------



## adupree

nff said:


> yea  i can understand that. i went for the 305's personally.  they go down pretty low for a 5''  43hz is pretty low for a speaker that small. that and they behave more like midfields than nears with that huge sweet spot.  go with the 305's  with the option of getting a sub at a later date.


 
 The issue is that JBL doesn't say what the -/+dB value is for the frequency. So it may do 43Hz, but at -15dB, so without that little piece of extra information it's useless. Genelec which is known for their low-end publishes 58Hz-20kHz (+/- 2 dB) for their 8030B model which is their 5in driver.


----------



## romeozdistress

not sure guitarcenter carries them.


----------



## cel4145

adupree said:


> The issue is that JBL doesn't say what the -/+dB value is for the frequency. So it may do 43Hz, but at -15dB, so without that little piece of extra information it's useless. Genelec which is known for their low-end publishes 58Hz-20kHz (+/- 2 dB) for their 8030B model which is their 5in driver.




JBL has measurements posted in their product information on their Amazon page with their speaker in the top left.


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> i want the jbls. they seem to have more bass than the mackies.




If bass is important, it would be worth waiting/saving for the larger LSR308s. Big difference in potential bass capability for filling a room between a 5" driver and an 8" driver. 

Or, get the LSR305 and save for a sub. Subs are the best way to get killer bass


----------



## romeozdistress

cel4145 said:


> If bass is important, it would be worth waiting/saving for the larger LSR308s. Big difference in potential bass capability for filling a room between a 5" driver and an 8" driver.
> 
> Or, get the LSR305 and save for a sub. Subs are the best way to get killer bass


 
 its not that big of a deal. i figure it out. all boils down to wether i wanna spend $300 vs $500 heh. at least i got the audiobox outta the way.


----------



## adupree

cel4145 said:


> JBL has measurements posted in their product information on their Amazon page with their speaker in the top left.


 
 Can you read what it says? I can't make it out :/ I've looked for a better pic.


----------



## cel4145

adupree said:


> Can you read what it says? I can't make it out :/ I've looked for a better pic.




The roll off starts around 60hz. I just count the lines from 100hz.


----------



## adupree

I found one a little better it looks like it is about a -8dB drop.


----------



## cel4145

adupree said:


> I found one a little better it looks like it is about a -8dB drop.




Making it to around 60hz before it starts to roll off seems pretty good to me for a 5 1/4" driver.


----------



## adupree

cel4145 said:


> Making it to around 60hz before it starts to roll off seems pretty good to me for a 5 1/4" driver.


 
 Totally agree


----------



## romeozdistress

anybody hear anything about the Behringer Truth B2031As? they have dropped in price to $199 each. 8 inch drivers too. very interesting.
  
 EDIT: then i look on sweetwater and they have the 8 inch jbls, buy one get one half off until feb 28th. i wouldnt be able to resist that deal.


----------



## adupree

Please don't consider behringer. They are garbage.


----------



## romeozdistress

adupree said:


> Please don't consider behringer. They are garbage.


 
 ah okay probably wont now since the jbls have a sale going.


----------



## kid vic

romeozdistress said:


> ah okay probably wont now since the jbls have a sale going.


 
  
 If you like the JBL's more get them especially since they're on sale, sub's aren't always necessary with near field's; my Mackies pack a punch with 5's. Do you have the desk space for 8's? They will sound terrible if they are to close together and ESPECIALLY if they're to close to a wall (8 inches minimum from the wall behind)


----------



## romeozdistress

yeah im currently using an old kitchen table. gonna buy a new desk as well.


----------



## romeozdistress

my next thing is figuring out what to do for a desk lol. i dont wanna spend a ****load either. hmmmmmmmm


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> my next thing is figuring out what to do for a desk lol. i dont wanna spend a ****load either. hmmmmmmmm




Your local Craiglist is your best bet. People sell used desks for much cheaper than you can buy them new, often because they just want to get them out of their house because of other new furniture.


----------



## AxelCloris

+1 to Craigslist. Ikea also has a lot of reasonably priced desks with adequate space, assuming there's one near you.


----------



## romeozdistress

ill look into it. might just keep my desk i have and buy some speakers stands for like $100. sweetwaters buy one get one free really opened things up for me. my refund is suposed to be here before the 6th. so this is going to be a fun week.


----------



## kid vic

romeozdistress said:


> my next thing is figuring out what to do for a desk lol. i dont wanna spend a ****load either. hmmmmmmmm


 
 +2 craigslist; hahaha if you were in victoria I'd sell so my desk for cheap!


----------



## romeozdistress

kid vic said:


> +2 craigslist; hahaha if you were in victoria I'd sell so my desk for cheap!


 
 ill figure something out lol. im using a kitchen table but its hard to get all the cords to stretch to the surge protector haha. ill figure something out. might use my old small desk and get some $100 speaker stands.


----------



## nick v

I didn't have a chance to read through this entire thread, but it seems to have evolved quite a bit from the first few pages. For the $500 price limit, I would definitely go with Active Monitors. The problem with making a comparison to passive speakers in that price range is that you have to compare the active speakers to a pair of lesser priced passive speakers, as you have to include the price of amplification and volume control (pre-amplification) in the total system price.
  
 I didn't want to have a separate sub in my computer system, so I decided to go with a larger pair of studio monitors. I went with the M-Audio BX8 D2's. They use 8" drivers, and are easily the best value audio purchase that I've ever made! I use them with a fairly high quality Asus Xonar Essence ST sound card and Jriver Media Player (I have quite a bit of high-res music). They are very resolving of low level details, have great dynamic impact and pretty decent mid to low bass (down to ~ 40Hz), and a surprisingly wide and deep soundstage. I was lucky in that I only paid $380 for the pair. The addition of Auralex ProPads had a fairly significant effect in tightening up the bass, mid-bass and low midrange.
  
 I couldn't be happier with the M-Audio BX8 D2's for the price! Once I get my new DAC (LH Labs Pulse with Femto clock, upgraded op-amps & LPS) I might be tempted to sell the M-Audios and upgrade to a pair of Dynaudio DBM 50's for ~ $800/pair.  
  
 To give you some perspective on the size (which undoubtedly wouldn't work for everyone) here is a picture of my setup. The speakers are beside a 27" monitor if that helps to give some perspective.
  

  
 Here is a link to a review:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/m_audio_bx8_d2_e.html


----------



## TopQuark

l0slobos said:


> Hmm the review for Adam A3x was pretty clarifying. I think I'll get those and use the leftover money for a good dac unit. What dac's do you recommend in the $300-$600 region?


 
  
 Might as well go balanced since A3X have balanced connectors.  I'll either go for Gungnir for $700+ or, if you can wait until July, Pulse X also for $700+ with LPS should be a great candidate.  These are $100 over your budget but they will be well worth it.


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

I'd like to explain the definition between active and passive systems in some detail because it is clear that not everyone posting in this thread understands the difference.
  
 It has nothing to do with the location of the amplifiers. It is dependent on the type of crossover used. The part that divides up the input signal so that the high notes go to the little speakers and the low notes go to the big speakers.
  
 In an active system the crossover comes before the amplifiers. Each size speaker has a separate amplifier. In a passive system there is an amplifier and the crossover then divides up the frequencies. A powered system is exactly the same as a passive system except the amplifier is stuffed into one of the boxes.
  
 It should be clear that an active system presents many potential advantages, except maybe cost! In fact both pro and domestic manufacturers have always understood this. High end expensive (and powerful) systems have almost always been active for over 3 decades. Genelec didn't invent actives. They were just the first to realise that if they miniaturised everything they could fit it all into one box. (digital switching amps made this practical)  Hence the quality of actives with added convenience  and some cost saving. Really big and powerful high end systems are almost always active. It's just that the amplifiers and crossover units are not necessarily co-located in the same enclosure.
  
 Apologies for the pedantry but it's important we all understand the terms we are using. Carry on...


----------



## romeozdistress

I ordered the JBL LSR305s. decided to go with the smaller ones. got them $242 shipped and since sweetwater is in the same state ill get them tomorrow. pretty excited. decided to go with the smaller ones so I have more space and ill probably team them up with a sub later. sweetwater had buy one get one half off of JBL LSR series. Im sure either way it will be a huge improvement over my av 40s. thanks for everything guys.


----------



## nff

romeozdistress said:


> I ordered the JBL LSR305s. decided to go with the smaller ones. got them $242 shipped and since sweetwater is in the same state ill get them tomorrow. pretty excited. decided to go with the smaller ones so I have more space and ill probably team them up with a sub later. sweetwater had buy one get one half off of JBL LSR series. Im sure either way it will be a huge improvement over my av 40s. thanks for everything guys.


 

 nice let us know what you think of them.  since it looks like mine are going to take a little wile to get here since my order is waiting for backordered items.


----------



## romeozdistress

nff said:


> nice let us know what you think of them.  since it looks like mine are going to take a little wile to get here since my order is waiting for backordered items.


 
 def will do. man too bad you cant cancel and get them from sweetwater sound. they have the buy one get one half off until feb 28th.


----------



## nick v

ronalddumsfeld said:


> I'd like to explain the definition between active and passive systems in some detail because it is clear that not everyone posting in this thread understands the difference.
> 
> It has nothing to do with the location of the amplifiers. It is dependent on the type of crossover used. The part that divides up the input signal so that the high notes go to the little speakers and the low notes go to the big speakers.
> 
> ...


 

 If this is in response to my above post, I wasn't making a comment on crossover design topologies, I was simply making a comment regarding the value proposition of comparing active monitors in this price range (there are lots of good options to choose from that provide great value) to passive bookshelf speakers + amp & preamp/receiver/integrated or whatever you might be using to power them and control the volume. I'm well aware of the differences between active and passive systems.
  
 Congrats on the purchase of your new JBL monitors!! I haven't had the chance to hear them but it looks like you got a great deal and they should be a serious upgrade over your previous speakers.


----------



## Leonarfd

JBL LSR305s are a great, used em for a week before I tried out the M-Audio bx8 d2. The JBL are more accurate but also more boring, but I couldnt have the BX8 as it was too big on the desk(also that low buzz/hum that is always noticable when there is little to no music/sound playing).

Actually I ended up with a pair of FLUID AUDIO F5, better lows than the JBL and easier on the ears. So for me better sounding but probably less accurate, use em mostly for music and gaming when im not in the headphone mood.

Before all this I have been using passive speakers with a little amp on my desk, speakers with 4-6inch elements, all the active monitors ive tested have been more fun listening to and much clearer sounding.


----------



## nick v

I have no hum/buzz from my BX8's at my listening position. I have to get within a couple inches of the tweeter to hear a faint noise. I did have a bit initially, but that went away when I switched to high quality RCA to XLR cables (SignalCable Analog Two).
  
 There are so many good options for active monitors in this price range, it's tough to go wrong. I've heard some Yamaha, Mackie, Fostex, KRK and M-Audio monitors around this price, and I thought they all sounded pretty great for the money!


----------



## Leonarfd

I'ts a big thread with complaints on the BX8 D2 about the noise, noise were even hearable from around 2 meters when silent. With and without signal cables. Might be some batch problems that differs from region. I'm no basshead but I must say I loved the low end on the BX8's.


----------



## romeozdistress

hmm what should i said the LF and HF db on? any ideas? dont know much about this.


----------



## cel4145

Leave them set to flat (0) and get used to the speaker for awhile. Then, you can adjust them by ear to suit your personal preferences.


----------



## kraken2109

romeozdistress said:


> hmm what should i said the LF and HF db on? any ideas? dont know much about this.


 
 They're for room adjustment


----------



## romeozdistress

kraken2109 said:


> They're for room adjustment


 
 can you explain?


----------



## cel4145

romeozdistress said:


> can you explain?




Your room affects the frequency response of the speakers. 

Unfortunately, unless you have measuring equipment to find out the frequency response of your speakers at the listening position, you can't really correct for that. So best thing to do is to use those adjustments to suit your personal listening tastes.


----------



## Tablix

Some interesting reading here http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul00/articles/faqacoustic.htm but this is mainly for sudio/recording environment.  This http://homerecording.com/bbs/general-discussions/studio-building-acoustic-treatment/small-room-acoustics-365127/ may also be worth reading.
  
  
 Unless you have a dedicated listening room/studio it may not be possible to deal with all acoustic issues, but a little understanding of the basic principles of sound reflection can help you make basic room adjustments to help your personal situation.  I really haven't got time to list a bunch of links, but there is loads of information out there.  A quick google on acoustic treatment is a good start, then look at sites such as homerecording.com and gearslutz and dig into recording/studio based forums.  There are simple and expensive solutions, and its well worth researching before spending $2k on upgrading your speakers.
  
 If I get a chance I will try to post a few more links in the near future.


----------



## kraken2109

cel4145 said:


> Your room affects the frequency response of the speakers.
> 
> Unfortunately, unless you have measuring equipment to find out the frequency response of your speakers at the listening position, you can't really correct for that. So best thing to do is to use those adjustments to suit your personal listening tastes.


 
 You can often guess from the room shape and where the speakers are. e.g. if the speakers are close to a wall bass is boosted so you want to cut it a bit.


----------



## robbybrown99

I have the cerwin vega ls-5's. Only 100 dollars on eBay used. I am very happy with them, check them out


----------



## GearMe

ronalddumsfeld said:


> I'd like to explain the definition between active and passive systems in some detail because it is clear that not everyone posting in this thread understands the difference.
> 
> It has nothing to do with the location of the amplifiers. It is dependent on the type of crossover used. The part that divides up the input signal so that the high notes go to the little speakers and the low notes go to the big speakers.
> 
> ...


 
  
 There's a variety of good sounding scenarios for manufactured 'active' speakers, bi and tri-amped 'passive' speakers, and single amped passive speakers.  
  
 For example, I've had the 'same' speakers in 3 different configurations:
  

Bi-amped with the 'Big' speakers fed by one solid state amp, and the 'Little' speakers (midrange and tweeter) fed by another solid state amp.  
Bi-amped again except adding a passive subwoofer (no built-in amp) with an electronic crossover and feeding it with one of the amps (bridged to mono) while letting the other amp feed the entire main speakers (woofer, midrange and tweeter).  
Tri-amped with the mids/highs fed by a tube amp, the woofers fed by a solid state, stereo amp, and the subwoofer fed by the monoblock SS amp.  
  
 This last setup for these speakers yielded the best sound to me.  _In the end you need to judge what suits your taste -- with your ears._  
  
 It's been my experience that _the listening room has a lot to do with how speakers sound._  In fact, I've had excellent high end speakers with very nice amps & preamps sound mediocre only to have the listening experience improve greatly when we changed the placement, added some 'sound treatments', or even changed rooms in our house.
  
 We all hear things a little differently than the next guy.  Given that, I'd prefer the ability to change my amp(s) any day of the week for my speakers and my headphones.  I currently have tube and solid state amps; they each pair better with some cans than others.  One need not go any farther than the whole tube vs solid state debate within Head-Fi to understand that.


----------



## germanium

astrallite said:


> The fact that he claims B&W is neutral is suspect in itself as B&W is the Poster Child for "British Sound" and tipped up bass and treble, in fact a cursory glance through Stereophile and Soundstage measurements shows this to be empirically true.
> 
> Also the reason why individuals might find one speaker fatiguing vary due to individual differences in hearing, and age. Younger people are more likely to cite higher frequency cone breakup modes as hearing fatigue due a wider hearing spectrum, older people are more likely to cite a tipped up midrange.




A speaker can actually sound bright without being fatiguing. Fatiguing sound can actually be the result of poor amplification or source material.

1.Not fully representing the harmonics of the instrument. This is most noticeable on instruments with very high harmonic content such as piano & cymbals

2.being able to hear something is there In The background but sound murky or clouded. I hear this type thing a lot on even some upper level equipment & recordings. Yes some re cording are poorly done using cheap components & techniques.

3. Excess bass can also cause fatigue.


----------



## Nimzerz

Hey guys, quick question....
 I have the emotiva mini-x for my he-500, but now i want a pair of bookshelf speakers. Anyone know any good passive speakers for near-field listening but some occasional nice room-filling sound? I want something around $200-$300 but if you guys really think that it's not worth buying at this price point and that I should save up and wait (would be a long time...) then so be it. Any opinons, or suggestions? Thanks guys.
  
 I've looked at the Celestion 5 (vintage, recommended by Modulor), Klipsch RB series
 and I've also looked at active speakers (but i feel like its a waste since i already have the mini-x) like the JBL earlier posted and the Airmotiv 4 and 5


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> Hey guys, quick question....
> I have the emotiva mini-x for my he-500, but now i want a pair of bookshelf speakers.




ARX and Ascend Acoustics are as well known in home audio for their speakers as Emotiva is for their electronics. Check out the Arx A1b and Ascend CBM-170 SE. Either will work quite well for nearfield usage. 

It would be best to experience the Klipsch RB series before going with them. Many people find them fatiguing for HT usage, much less in a nearfield situation.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> ARX and Ascend Acoustics are as well known in home audio for their speakers as Emotiva is for their electronics. Check out the Arx A1b and Ascend CBM-170 SE. Either will work quite well for nearfield usage.
> 
> It would be best to experience the Klipsch RB series before going with them. Many people find them fatiguing for HT usage, much less in a nearfield situation.


 

 I've seen the CBM recommended so often, are they that good? Also the Arx planar tweeter...that's caught my attention! How well are the JBL compared to these kinds of speakers, they've gotten some crazy reviews...
  
 Also, of those two you recommended, what's the main pros/cons between their differences?
  
 Which one of these require distance behind the speaker? I currently have about 2-3ft but depending on if I move my gear to my room or not it might be against the wall. Then again, if the SQ is worth the need to adjust speaker placement then I'd take SQ over convenience tbh..
  
 Edit: I did find this review: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1512562/arx-a1b-vs-ascend-acoustics-cbm-170-se-vs-wharfedale-diamond-10-1-update-1-30-14
 From this review it seems the Arx A1b is better


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> I've seen the CBM recommended so often, are they that good? Also the Arx planar tweeter...that's caught my attention! How well are the JBL compared to these kinds of speakers, they've gotten some crazy reviews...Also, of those two you recommended, what's the main pros/cons between their differences?




You can look through these two threads over at AVS:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/629769/ascend-se-owners-thread
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1429229/the-official-arx-owners-thread-a1-a1b-a2-a2b-a3-a5-etc

They are both fairly neutral speakers that are repeatedly found to be more similar than different. I think the differences between them will come down to personal listening tastes and your room acoustics/placement more than anything you could determine by reading on the Internet. It would be like trying to decide between two different apples that come equally recommended when you've never tasted an apple before. The primary differences that do seem to stand out are that the A1bs tend to extend just a little deeper, but the Ascends have a little better sensitivity. As for the tweeters, know that the Ascend tweeter is a better model of Seas tweeter than is used in the NHT Classic Threes (Seas tweeters are well recognized in home audio circles). So don't get too caught up in the planar magnetic tweeter hype; both have equal quality tweeters and implementation. 

I haven't demoed the JBL's yet. But I haven't heard any other powered monitors in the <$600 range that stand out as definitively better than those two.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> You can look through these two threads over at AVS:
> http://www.avsforum.com/t/629769/ascend-se-owners-thread
> http://www.avsforum.com/t/1429229/the-official-arx-owners-thread-a1-a1b-a2-a2b-a3-a5-etc
> 
> ...


 

 Sensitivity is unimportant to me as long as they can get decently loud with the Mini-x, and I'm pretty sure the A1b would be able to, right? I'd probably choose the A1b as it sounds a lot like the he-500 vs he-6 debate, warmer more intimate sound vs more detailed and analytical sound. I'm more toward enjoying relaxed music without too much treble and the A1b seems to have GREAT reviews as well. Thank you so much for the recommendations. It'll probably be a long time till I decide and actually buy a pair of speakers, but these will probably remain at the top of my list.


----------



## adupree

nimzerz said:


> Sensitivity is unimportant to me as long as they can get decently loud with the Mini-x, and I'm pretty sure the A1b would be able to, right? I'd probably choose the A1b as it sounds a lot like the he-500 vs he-6 debate, warmer more intimate sound vs more detailed and analytical sound. I'm more toward enjoying relaxed music without too much treble and the A1b seems to have GREAT reviews as well. Thank you so much for the recommendations. It'll probably be a long time till I decide and actually buy a pair of speakers, but these will probably remain at the top of my list.


 
 Uuummmmm........Sensitivity is extremely important to you. It will determine the dB output of the speaker when combined with the amp.


----------



## Nimzerz

adupree said:


> Uuummmmm........Sensitivity is extremely important to you. It will determine the dB output of the speaker when combined with the amp.


 

 Hence why I said "as long as it can reach decent SPL with the Emotiva"
 Plus, I just read someone was using the Emotiva with the arx a1b speakers so I'm sure it'll work out well


----------



## AxelCloris

Might be the best place to ask this. I'm looking for a set of 5" or possibly 8" speakers that have balanced inputs so I can run them from my Geek Pulse X when it comes in. I have the Audioengine A2 currently and I will be using the larger set as a compliment to the smaller A2. Ideally I wouldn't break the bank with the pair, maybe $5-600 tops. Thoughts?


----------



## Nimzerz

I've come across these as well so far, any opinions?
  
 http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/hb-1.html
  
 http://www.htd.com/Products/level-three-speakers/Level-THREE-Bookshelf-Speakers
  
 Another one I'd consider is the Energy RC-10
  
 Still have my eye on these though:
  
 http://www.theaudioinsider.com/product_info.php?products_id=65


----------



## cel4145

The RC-10s are an excellent value at Fry's current price of $200, although they are not as neutral as the Ascends or Arx nor quite as resolving. They have a warm sound, and the tweeter is not quite as refined to me.


----------



## Nimzerz

Hmm... Between the arx, rc-10 and the behringer (I've seen this all over the place when looking through forums) which would you choose for near field listening? I've seen the rc-10 praised so much that I feel like it will be the best one. I also read that although the bass of the arx a1b is great, the crossover at the upper frequencies is off. Coming from the he500 being pretty much perfect in treble to me, I think a somewhat warm sound is fine, though the arx I read is also already somewhat warm, so are the rc-10s extremely warm or what?


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> Hmm... Between the arx, rc-10 and the behringer (I've seen this all over the place when looking through forums) which would you choose for near field listening? I've seen the rc-10 praised so much that I feel like it will be the best one. I also read that although the bass of the arx a1b is great, the crossover at the upper frequencies is off. Coming from the he500 being pretty much perfect in treble to me, I think a somewhat warm sound is fine, though the arx I read is also already somewhat warm, so are the rc-10s extremely warm or what?




Arx over the RC-10. I used to have the RC-10s in my computer setup, then the Energy Veritas V5.1s, and now finally the Ascends. To me, each speaker was a bit better overall than the previous, and I had a chance to listen to the Arx since, and I definitely think that they are a better speaker than the RC-10. Next step up in class. 

The Arx are not warm. The RC-10s are definitely considered a warm speaker. 

RC-10 shows a midbass hump and a dip in the upper mids (thus the warmth):



Arx is more linear



and then here are the Ascends, also more linear than the RC-10s:



Unless someone has a trained ear (e.g., speaker designer, pro audio engineers, etc.), I would not trust subjective listening judgements on how a speaker that measures fairly neutral like that is supposedly colored warm or cold. Room acoustics and speaker placements (and choice of source material and personal listening preferences, of course) are far more likely the factors in how the speaker seems colored, and will also influence how it sounds to you in your room. So subjective interpretations of frequency response are even less trustworthy when it comes to speakers than headphones because very few people are listening to speakers in a properly setup room.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> Arx over the RC-10. I used to have the RC-10s in my computer setup, then the Energy Veritas V5.1s, and now finally the Ascends. To me, each speaker was a bit better overall than the previous, and I had a chance to listen to the Arx since, and I definitely think that they are a better speaker than the RC-10. Next step up in class.
> 
> The Arx are not warm. The RC-10s are definitely considered a warm speaker.
> 
> ...


 

 I gotta say, that bass is so linear...same with the rest of it. Wow.


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> I gotta say, that bass is so linear...same with the rest of it. Wow.




Yeah. These are the real deal. Most people just don't know about these speaker brands because they are an Internet only, just like your Emotiva amp, which is a great piece of technology for the price, too. 

Of course if you go with the Arx, the next step after that is an SVS sealed sub. I have my SB-1000 (which also has an uber linear response) running hot so that I get extra bass emphasis starting in the midbass range where my crossover is set.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> Yeah. These are the real deal. Most people just don't know about these speaker brands because they are an Internet only, just like your Emotiva amp, which is a great piece of technology for the price, too.
> 
> Of course if you go with the Arx, the next step after that is an SVS sealed sub. I have my SB-1000 (which also has an uber linear response) running hot so that I get extra bass emphasis starting in the midbass range where my crossover is set.


 

 I think I'm sold on the Arx... Just gotta sell some things for the $$ and it'll be mine


----------



## Nimzerz

One more thing, would a USED pair of Emotiva airmotiv 4 put up a battle? I know they're active, but I do read that active have their advantages as well.


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> One more thing, would a USED pair of Emotiva airmotiv 4 put up a battle? I know they're active, but I do read that active have their advantages as well.




I like the Airmotiv 4s. They are a very good $350 speaker/amplifier set. But they are only 4" driver speakers. What you are looking with the A1b and the mini-x is a very good $550 speaker/amplifier set. If you want to look at something comparable, try the Airmotiv 5. I haven't heard them, but I think would be the more competitive comparison. Or the Adam F5s.


----------



## Nimzerz

Well since it's for near field use, would the size difference show that much?

But that's true...with the a1b woofer comparable to 6.5" woofers a 4" would sound weak in comparison.


----------



## Iostream

nimzerz said:


> Well since it's for near field use, would the size difference show that much?
> 
> But that's true...with the a1b woofer comparable to 6.5" woofers a 4" would sound weak in comparison.


 
 Not familiar with the particular speakers, but yes, size does matter even in nearfield. Last time I used a speaker with 4" woofers, They sounded fantastic at typical volumes, but on occasion when I would turn them up, they would compress and not sound so great. My current nearfields are B&W 805 with a 6.5" woofer and I can't drive them to compression at an level I could tolerate.


----------



## cel4145

iostream said:


> Not familiar with the particular speakers, but yes, size does matter even in nearfield. Last time I used a speaker with 4" woofers, They sounded fantastic at typical volumes, but on occasion when I would turn them up, they would compress and not sound so great. My current nearfields are B&W 805 with a 6.5" woofer and I can't drive them to compression at an level I could tolerate.




Agreed. 

Also, my experience with the Airmotivs was that while the bass didn't sound bad, it was not as textured as I would have liked.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Also, my experience with the Airmotivs was that while the bass didn't sound bad, it was not as textured as I would have liked.


 

 Alright, thanks for the tips and help with deciding so far. Arx does seem hard to beat  Just wish they would look a little nicer


----------



## nick v

axelcloris said:


> Might be the best place to ask this. I'm looking for a set of 5" or possibly 8" speakers that have balanced inputs so I can run them from my Geek Pulse X when it comes in. I have the Audioengine A2 currently and I will be using the larger set as a compliment to the smaller A2. Ideally I wouldn't break the bank with the pair, maybe $5-600 tops. Thoughts?


 

 There are an awful lot of good options in this price range. I'm using M-Audio BX8D2's with great success. There are apparently some complaints about a buzz/hum problem from the tweeters, but mine are dead quiet until you put your ear within an inch or so of the tweeter (I use good quality RCA to XLR cables from 'SignalCable' if that makes a difference). I especially like them at the price (I paid around $360 for the pair).
  
 I bought them mostly because I don't want to use a subwoofer in my computer system. They really have a nice clean, punchy bass. They aren't a one trick pony either. I've been very surprised by the quality and subtlety of their presentation in general. Imaging and soundstaging are very precise. With proper placement, the soundstage extends slightly beyond the speakers. Installing a set of Auralex ProPads helped to tighten up the bass even more, and helped to clean up the entire presentation up into the lower midrange. Helped to add a bit of focus as well. 
  
 I also have a Pulse X on order. Can't wait to run the monitors fully balanced when it shows up, I already have a pair of balanced xlr cables ready and waiting!


----------



## romeozdistress

nick v said:


> There are an awful lot of good options in this price range. I'm using M-Audio BX8D2's with great success. There are apparently some complaints about a buzz/hum problem from the tweeters, but mine are dead quiet until you put your ear within an inch or so of the tweeter (I use good quality RCA to XLR cables from 'SignalCable' if that makes a difference). I especially like them at the price (I paid around $360 for the pair).
> 
> I bought them mostly because I don't want to use a subwoofer in my computer system. They really have a nice clean, punchy bass. They aren't a one trick pony either. I've been very surprised by the quality and subtlety of their presentation in general. Imaging and soundstaging are very precise. With proper placement, the soundstage extends slightly beyond the speakers. Installing a set of Auralex ProPads helped to tighten up the bass even more, and helped to clean up the entire presentation up into the lower midrange. Helped to add a bit of focus as well.
> 
> I also have a Pulse X on order. Can't wait to run the monitors fully balanced when it shows up, I already have a pair of balanced xlr cables ready and waiting!


 
 i just got the mopads they seem good enough, couldnt figure my self spending $150 for something like that lol.


----------



## romeozdistress

one thing i never bothered to ask just seemed using trs was the way to go? was that good idea or do mos tpeople prefer xlr? whats is the difference between the two?


----------



## adupree

The only difference is the connector. Nothing else, same quality.


----------



## Nimzerz

Will I be disappointed going from HE-500 to the Arx A1b speakers?
  
 Oh yeah, and can you think of anything used at the same price that would be better?


----------



## L0SLobos

nimzerz said:


> Will I be disappointed going from HE-500 to the Arx A1b speakers?
> 
> Oh yeah, and can you think of anything used at the same price that would be better?


 
  
 It depends on what you are looking for. With small cheap speakers such as these you will undoubted be losing quite a bit of detail and resolution as well as bass that does not extend as deep nor hits as fast, you will gain a much larger soundstage and better imaging. The music will "feel" more natural, and for obvious reasons the bass response will create pleasant vibrations that you can feel. After buying a pair of Adam Audio A3X's I find myself barely using my B&O H6's at home anymore except during the night when I don't want to bother my parents, as I much prefer the larger soundstage and naturality of speakers over the high resolution of headphones.


----------



## Nimzerz

I definitely could care less about detail/resolution compared to good tonality and balanced frequency response and crisp/tightness to the sound. Crisp treble with punchy/tight lows is what I mean. I can deal with lower resolution however.

Would you guys choose towers over bookshelves at this price point? Magnepan mmgs?


----------



## L0SLobos

nimzerz said:


> I definitely could care less about detail/resolution compared to good tonality and balanced frequency response and crisp/tightness to the sound. Crisp treble with punchy/tight lows is what I mean. I can deal with lower resolution however.
> 
> Would you guys choose towers over bookshelves at this price point? Magnepan mmgs?


 
 I chose small studio monitors over larger ones/floorstanders for a few simple reasons:
 1. I don't have room for them in my roughly 20x12 foot bedroom.
 2. Quality floorstanding speakers cost volumes more than bookshelf studio monitors (high end bookshelves can be had for $1500-$2000; 3/4 way full size speakers can cost $10 000 - the sky's the limit)
 3. Room treatment is necessary for large speakers, it is less of a factor for bookshelf speakers you will be using at your desk (near-field monitors).
  
 I personally dont own magnepan's or any electrostatic speakers for that matter, but an audiophile friend of my father's has a pair of Martin Logan Summit X's and having experienced them several times while over at his place for dinner, I can say that the level of tonality and detail/resolution is superior to speakers with dynamic drivers at the same price range. I would think they can play with the big boys costing twice their price.
  
 To answer your question, at the price you're looking for ($300 was it) bookshelf speakers are definitely the way to go. Any floorstanders in that range will be absolute crap if I do say so myself.


----------



## adupree

nimzerz said:


> I definitely could care less about detail/resolution compared to good tonality and balanced frequency response and crisp/tightness to the sound. Crisp treble with punchy/tight lows is what I mean. I can deal with lower resolution however.
> 
> Would you guys choose towers over bookshelves at this price point? Magnepan mmgs?


 
 If you could care less about the detail then electrostatics are the way to go. But they sound best with tube amps. If you couldN'T care less about detail, then go with a traditional driver. But realistically, good detail is part of the tone and balanced frequency response.


----------



## cel4145

What L0SLobos said about $300 towers. Even at $600 (the cost of the Maggie MMG), bookshelves may be a better option. More drivers do not inherently make a speaker better. Towers often have the advantage of better low end extension due to the additional driver(s), and often they will have better dynamics than bookshelves in the same speaker line (more drivers can handle more SPL) and thus fill a larger room better. 

However, at a given price point, you would often have to go down a speaker line class compared to a bookshelf at the same price. So you have to look for very good deals. The only one I know of right now from a brick and mortar store speaker brand is a little more than those Maggies: FOCAL Chorus 717V and FOCAL Chorus 814V. At those prices, you could also look into EMP Tek E55Ti and Arx A5s. Of course then you would be close to the price of Philharmonic Philharmonitors or Ascend Sierra1s, which both get rave reviews for bookshelves at under $1000. 

Best thing to do is stay with your budget 

As far as the Maggies, I don't own any either, but I understand they are more sensitive to placement than many other speakers. You might want to research that before spending more time considering them.


----------



## adupree

I've heard several sets of Magnepans, and yes, like all electrostats they are directional. So if you step out of the sweet spot, you loose a ton of the audio. But if they are set up up right and you are in the sweet spot they are fantastic!


----------



## Nimzerz

adupree said:


> I've heard several sets of Magnepans, and yes, like all electrostats they are directional. So if you step out of the sweet spot, you loose a ton of the audio. But if they are set up up right and you are in the sweet spot they are fantastic!


Since you have experience with them (I have also heard my cousins 1.6/qr off of my emo) would you pick the mmg over bookshelves?


----------



## adupree

It depends what you listen too, what you will amp them with and what you want to hear. If you want lowend, then no, really good detail then yes. Solid state amp, no, tube amp, yes.


----------



## Nimzerz

adupree said:


> It depends what you listen too, what you will amp them with and what you want to hear. If you want lowend, then no, really good detail then yes. Solid state amp, no, tube amp, yes.


 

 Amping with Emotiva mini-x, I don't listen to much classical / jazz, but low end can be made up for with a sub in the future.


----------



## adupree

nimzerz said:


> Amping with Emotiva mini-x, I don't listen to much classical / jazz, but low end can be made up for with a sub in the future.


 
  
  


adupree said:


> It depends what you listen too, what you will amp them with and what you want to hear. If you want lowend, then no, really good detail then yes. *Solid state amp, no, tube amp, yes*.


----------



## Nimzerz

adupree said:


>


 

 That would explain why the 1.6/qr still sounds bright on my cousin's vintage McIntosh 200wpc peak amp..
  
 So I guess I'm still set on the A1b then


----------



## Nimzerz

I've been looking on craigslist and have found these two postings. Any opinions?
 http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/ele/4326812605.html
 http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/ele/4326843036.html
 http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/ele/4321221216.html


----------



## adupree

nimzerz said:


> I've been looking on craigslist and have found these two postings. Any opinions?
> http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/ele/4326812605.html
> http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/ele/4326843036.html
> http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/ele/4321221216.html


 
 Energy's connoisseur line sounds awful. I don't think I've heard that set of ML, but I will say I love most of the stuff they make. I think Klipsch is one of the most over rated companies out there, not to mention you can buy a brand new set for the same price.


----------



## Nimzerz

Oh wow, I had my hopes up on the connoisseur... Welp, back to looking around then lol


----------



## Nimzerz

How about these?! 
http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/ele/4323937234.html

http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/ele/4324513326.html


or these?
http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/ele/4321347507.html

http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/ele/4318285590.html

or these?
http://seattle.craigslist.org/oly/ele/4326732392.html

http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/ele/4326807040.html

This one in particular is very special:
http://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/ele/4318249686.html


----------



## cel4145

You'd be better of buying the Focal Chorus for new: http://www.musicdirect.com/p-41245-focal-chorus-705v-bookshelf-speakers-pr.aspx


----------



## Nimzerz

O.o did not see that coming. Sm450, arx a1b, focal chorus. A1x sure is hard to beat...


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> O.o did not see that coming. Sm450, arx a1b, focal chorus. A1x sure is hard to beat...




It is. 

Just be careful you aren't getting caught up in decision remorse/buyer's remorse. It can drive you nuts. Sometimes it's better just to pull the trigger


----------



## Nimzerz

I know what you mean. I can probably get a pair of definitive tech bp-10s for $300-350 tho. Would you say that's a great deal?
Edit: he said $400 for the pair. Would you guys take this deal?


----------



## AxelCloris

nimzerz said:


> I know what you mean. I can probably get a pair of definitive tech bp-10s for $300-350 tho. Would you say that's a great deal?
> Edit: he said $400 for the pair. Would you guys take this deal?


 
  
 If you don't, I'd be interested in grabbing them, depending condition of course. I've been looking for a good pair of DefTech towers to turn my DefTech 5.1 into a 7.1. I was eyeing the BP7006 before. Wonder what shipping on those big guys would be.


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> I know what you mean. I can probably get a pair of definitive tech bp-10s for $300-350 tho. Would you say that's a great deal?
> Edit: he said $400 for the pair. Would you guys take this deal?




Def Tech's bipolar series are more finicky about placement than your average tower because of the bipolar design. Be sure to research their setup and that you have the space/place for them.


----------



## Nimzerz

cel4145 said:


> Def Tech's bipolar series are more finicky about placement than your average tower because of the bipolar design. Be sure to research their setup and that you have the space/place for them.


 

 If I can't fit them in this room that I am in, I have a bigger room that I can move into in this home that should have more than enough space. Prob big enough for maggies too.


----------



## adupree

Def Techs are good for movies and gaming, but for music not so much, they can become very muddy quickly and like CEL4145 said, they are picky with placement. Focal is an awesome company, really can't go wrong with them. As for the KEF, one of my favorite brands, but saying that model came out in the mid 80's their surrounds are most likely dry rotted and need a recone. I'd stick with the Focal personally.


----------



## Nimzerz

adupree said:


> Def Techs are good for movies and gaming, but for music not so much, they can become very muddy quickly and like CEL4145 said, they are picky with placement. Focal is an awesome company, really can't go wrong with them. As for the KEF, one of my favorite brands, but saying that model came out in the mid 80's their surrounds are most likely dry rotted and need a recone. I'd stick with the Focal personally.


 

 Yeah I gathered the same conclusion with the Def Techs...that theyre better for gaming and HT. The Focal > Arx though? That's the only remaining options TBH
  
 The KEF is actually known to be one highly regarded pair of speakers from back then and when repaired have some great sound. I looked it up yesterday when I saw that posting. Quite interesting TBH but yeah, unreliable = no go.


----------



## L0SLobos

nimzerz said:


> Yeah I gathered the same conclusion with the Def Techs...that theyre better for gaming and HT. The Focal > Arx though? That's the only remaining options TBH


 
 Yep Focal is well reputed.


----------



## Nimzerz

Can anyone think of a pair of used speakers that I should look up that would be better than these two options? I feel like I'd get more use of my money buying them used...saving me money and also saving the future money for when I want to sell these--little loss.
  
 Any opinion on the Boston Acoustics VR-m50/m60?


----------



## nick v

nimzerz said:


> Can anyone think of a pair of used speakers that I should look up that would be better than these two options? I feel like I'd get more use of my money buying them used...saving me money and also saving the future money for when I want to sell these--little loss.


 

 Do you already have an amp and preamp or receiver/integrated for these speakers?
  
 If not I'd maybe look into something like these:
  
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-mackie-hr624-great-sound-great-condition-2014-02-02-speakers-15044-gibsonia-pa
  
 Otherwise, if you're set on passive bookshelf speakers, I'd look at these:
  
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-vienna-acoustics-haydn-beech-2014-02-05-speakers-18444-moscow-pa
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-focal-chorus-706-speakers-2014-02-04-speakers-96746-kapaa-hi
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-sonus-faber-concerto-home-piano-black-lacquer-bi-wire-posts-2014-01-31-speakers-95110
http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-kef-uniq-15-2-bookshelf-monitors-2014-01-22-speakers-92672-san-clemente-ca
  
 I also like those Focal speakers, but generally used bookshelf speakers provide the best bang for your buck that you can find.


----------



## cel4145

nimzerz said:


> If I can't fit them in this room that I am in, I have a bigger room that I can move into in this home that should have more than enough space. Prob big enough for maggies too.




It's not just room size, but they need a lot of openess for the bipolar design to work correctly. For instance, I have a big living room, but I would not be able to accommodate all the space they need. Just be sure before you buy


----------



## Nimzerz

nick v said:


> Do you already have an amp and preamp or receiver/integrated for these speakers?
> 
> If not I'd maybe look into something like these:
> 
> ...


 

 Thanks for the recommendations. I really wish I could get a direct comparison of the Arx A1b to all of these lol, really would help me decide :/
  
 I'm really diggin the Focal look  These might (Really big might) be out of my budget, unless I wait about a month in which they might be within my budget.
  
 Also, if you didn't see in my signature, I have the Emotiva mini-x a-100 that I will use for the speakers.
  
 Martin Logan is so sexy :3 http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-martin-logan-lx-16-dark-cherry-2014-02-09-speakers-59937
  
 Is this a good deal? http://app.audiogon.com/listings/monitors-focal-chorus-705-2014-02-07-speakers-45429
  
 Should I take a look at Bowers and Wilkins? Do they have any well competing speakers at this price point?


----------



## nick v

I have no experience with the ARX speakers, although they appear to have a very low price for what they're offereing.
  
 If you really don't know what you like, I would suggest going to a couple of local hi-fi stores with some of your favorite music (and even bring your amp along with you) and just listen.

 Metal tweeters typically sound slightly different than silk tweeters, that sound different from planars and ribbons, etc.
  
 People tend to offer suggestions based on what suits their preferences, or based on what they themselves own (positively reinforcing their purchase).
  
 I'd find out what I like first, then go from there.


----------



## turbo911

What do you guys think would better suit my needs, Audioengine A5+ or JBL LSR305?
 I will be connecting them to my computer and maybe later on buying a DAC. Not sure if Schiit Modi will work with them well.
 It will be for music listening and watching movies/tv shows.
  
 Seems like Audioengine's are little bit better looking, have remote, and easier to connect to DAC (if using computer), while JBL's offer better sound? (based on reviews). I am new to this and wanted to upgrade my old PC speakers.
  
 Thanks.


----------



## cel4145

Well, for the price of the A5+, you can get the DAC you want and the LSR305s. The LSR 305s are currently on sale at Sweetwater, buy one, get one half off. 

The thing is that the A5+ don't have a headphone amp. So if you are into headphones, you could get a combined DAC/headphone amp and the LSR 305s.


----------



## turbo911

That's the reason why I considered LSR 305, as they are on sale at sweetwater, $224 shipped, compare to A5+ $314 shipped.
  
 Do JBL's produce more base than A5+?
 What DAC would you recommend for JBL's?
  
 I was going to buy Beyerdynamic DT880 600ohm and Schiit Magni, but now I am not sure if I want speakers instead, as I use speakers more than headphones.


----------



## Nimzerz

Should I even consider the jbl? I feel like half of the price is the amp tho...


----------



## adupree

nimzerz said:


> Should I even consider the jbl? I feel like half of the price is the amp tho...


 
 Get the Focal, ARX, or Ascends


----------



## Nimzerz

Ok, then it remains a battle between the focal and arx. Anyone know the differences between them?


----------



## Nimzerz

Idk why but I keep imagining the arx sounding very similar to the he500. Great bass, smooth mids, and extended yet laid back treble. It's what's got me to somewhat not want to part with buying it but the thing holding me back is of course that it's brand new and I'd be losing $$ selling it in the future.


----------



## Nimzerz

Nevermind...


----------



## adupree

Gonna throw another one in the mix, Mordaunt Short Aviano 2. http://www.amazon.com/Mordaunt-Short-Aviano-Speakers-Black/dp/B003J1ORNS/ref=pd_sim_sbs_e_50
  
 and these  http://www.amazon.com/Wharfedale-DIA101-ROS-WHARFEDALE-DIAMOND-ROSEWOOD/dp/B0079XG4TW/ref=pd_sim_sbs_e_3
  
 I have a set of the Aviano 2 and love them. At that price I'm thinking about buying another set


----------



## Nimzerz

Eh, I still think the Arx would be a better choice  I have high hopes for that one


----------



## fuzzyash

nimzerz said:


> Eh, I still think the Arx would be a better choice  I have high hopes for that one


 
  
 theres a review/comparison of the arx, cbm-170, and wharfedales on the avs forum speaker section


----------



## Nimzerz

I've already read through that, it's why I chose the a1b


----------



## DarKen23




----------



## murphythecat

if you want serious bass in a 2-way, ime, you need at least 8 inch woofer.
 With 5 inch, you will want a good subwoofer, but even then, the mid bass will be missing some grunt that a 8 inch delivers.
  
 I have gone through tons of monitors:
 focal cms 50
 salk continuum
 yorkville ysm1p
  
 So far, my two favorites that an satisfy me are:
 dynaco a 25 with 10 inch woofer
 ref 3a decapo be with a 8 inch woofer.


----------



## Gryphus0204

Hi guys I know this thread has been inactive for sometime but I'm hoping to get some advice on my next desktop speakers. I'm currently using a Harmon Kardon Soundstick III and am looking to upgrade it. My setup is Sabre U2 DAC --> Bravo V2 amplifier. I'm not really sure whether this is a suitable set up desktop audio? But I'm looking at bookshelf speakers, possibly the LSR305 or something similar, within the $250 price range.
  
 I would mainly be using the monitors for games, listening. Not much of studio recording and stuff like that. And I'm worried that studio monitors might be a little too neutral for the activities I'm using it for? I would prefer a slightly brighter sounding speaker, possibly like my AKGQ701. 
  
 Any advice?


----------



## richard51

the best speakers 2.1 systems for music i know for the price is Swan M10...... the most musical desktop .... Swan has some desktop for gaming also.... My Swan m10 transformed itself with a good cable ( Morrow ) and a preamplification ( had the Ember project for that).... The Swan M10 are powered by gainclone amp...I had owned the Bravo and you may use his preamp function with the Swans...If you want to upgrade your amp purchasing The Ember will be a good idea... The ember can manage ANY headphone...The hifimediy dac is very useful.... But if you want to upgrade the Stanley Beresford Dac are a most.... best regards


----------



## cel4145

richard51 said:


> the best speakers 2.1 systems for music i know for the price is Swan M10...... the most musical desktop .... Swan has some desktop for gaming also.... My Swan m10 transformed itself with a good cable ( Morrow ) and a preamplification ( had the Ember project for that).... The Swan M10 are powered by gainclone amp...I had owned the Bravo and you may use his preamp function with the Swans...If you want to upgrade your amp purchasing The Ember will be a good idea... The ember can manage ANY headphone...The hifimediy dac is very useful.... But if you want to upgrade the Stanley Beresford Dac are a most.... best regards




A $200 RCA interconnect for $120 speakers :eek:

There are better speakers in the $300 range than those Swans which would sound better with a $10 pair of RCAs.


----------



## richard51

cel4145 said:


> A $200 RCA interconnect for $120 speakers
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 first: the interconnect cost me 79 dollars (used) and its made difference with the headphone listening ( hifiman) not only with the swans....and the basic morrow cost 40 dollars....
  
 second: The swans cost is 100 dollars us.... an the marketing in general for desktop speakers target game player and cinema viewer not audiophile listerner of music in the first place...This Swan M10 is an exception below 300 hundred dollars speakers...
  
 third: its make perfect sense to buy product that will upgrade in the future with other element of the gear system
  
 this is the reason for my purchase of good cable....and that made a good  difference....ifyou prefer  cheap rca i will not object go with that....
  
 p.s. i dont want to buy a ton of headphones and a ton of amps ..... I want the best for a minimum cost...and i am satisfied with my present gear..... After hours of reading reviews i had great success with my purchase in audio......next upgrade will be the last.... cheap price old stax...and Swan top model desktop speakers or mini maggies....I am interested more in the music than to try  new gear....
  
 best regards


----------



## Gryphus0204

richard51 said:


> the best speakers 2.1 systems for music i know for the price is Swan M10...... the most musical desktop .... Swan has some desktop for gaming also.... My Swan m10 transformed itself with a good cable ( Morrow ) and a preamplification ( had the Ember project for that).... The Swan M10 are powered by gainclone amp...I had owned the Bravo and you may use his preamp function with the Swans...If you want to upgrade your amp purchasing The Ember will be a good idea... The ember can manage ANY headphone...The hifimediy dac is very useful.... But if you want to upgrade the Stanley Beresford Dac are a most.... best regards


 
 Then what's the next one after the Swan M10? and would studio monitors suit the activities that i use my speakers for?


----------



## richard51

gryphus0204 said:


> Then what's the next one after the Swan M10? and would studio monitors suit the activities that i use my speakers for?


 
   for music swan at 100 us dollars is impossible to beat......studio monitors are passive you must buy an amp......Swans are powered by an internal amp.... If gaming is your main activity i recommend to you the swan systems for gaming :  Swans GT1000 2.1 Game Theatre...


----------



## cel4145

richard51 said:


> for music swan at 100 us dollars is impossible to beat......studio monitors are passive you must buy an amp......Swans are powered by an internal amp.... If gaming is your main activity i recommend to you the swan systems for gaming :  Swans GT1000 2.1 Game Theatre...




Studio monitors often are not passive; they tend to be powered speakers.


----------



## richard51

cel4145 said:


> Studio monitors often are not passive; they tend to be powered speakers.


 

 yes its true...you had a point....For myself i prefered powered speakers....The Swan M10 are powered and they are not monitors but a 2.1 systems without a sub but with a  midwoofer....hence more for music than for games...


----------



## Tablix

Richard51 what ARE you talking about? Swans are home high end multimedia speakers from my perspective compared to active monitors which are designed exclusively for critical listening, and are  just as capable for gaming too.  Monitors can also be hooked up to a sub or used without, and with some careful shopping can offer you 10x the bang for buck.  Swans remind me of some other high street brands with a higher emphasis on style>substance.  If you compared some Swan monitors to similar priced JBL, Mackie, KRK or other brand studio monitors you would most likely change your opinion.


----------



## richard51

tablix said:


> Richard51 what ARE you talking about? Swans are home high end multimedia speakers from my perspective compared to active monitors which are designed exclusively for critical listening, and are  just as capable for gaming too.  Monitors can also be hooked up to a sub or used without, and with some careful shopping can offer you 10x the bang for buck.  Swans remind me of some other high street brands with a higher emphasis on style>substance.  If you compared some Swan monitors to similar priced JBL, Mackie, KRK or other brand studio monitors you would most likely change your opinion.


 

 my Swan m10 cost me 100 us dollars....and their potential upgrading with other par of my gear dont compare with many similar priced gear....


----------



## Tablix

what you paid is not even close to retail price and almost certainly came with no warranty, so maybe comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## germanium

You want accuracy? A quality studio monitor is the way to go. A quality studio monitor will do all types of music & gaming equally well. 

I have a set of M-Audio BX5's along with a Tannoy TS10 both modified for higher resolution without affecting frequency balance & the results are incredibly good. I have listened gear that cost tens of thousands of dollars & was not as pleased as I am with this setup which cost me less than 1 thousand & that includes the cost of the parts needed for the modifications. Every one that heard my system has been amazed by the sound I'm getting from this system. Truth is that even though these are low end studio monitors thier drivers & amps had a lot of untapped potential. I was fortunately able to draw that potential out of them. These are true studio monitors with active crossovers & biamplification inside.

Note that not all studio monitors are setup to be neutral sounding so buyer beware. The original BX5's were with the exception that they lacked in the lower midbas & deep bass frequencies which I made up for with my Tannoy TS10 subwoofer. Result is a very well balanced system.


----------



## cel4145

germanium said:


> I have a set of M-Audio BX5's along with a Tannoy TS10 both modified for higher resolution without affecting frequency balance & the results are incredibly good.




How do you modify a sub (or speakers for that matter) for higher resolution?


----------



## GearMe

gryphus0204 said:


> Hi guys I know this thread has been inactive for sometime but I'm hoping to get some advice on my next desktop speakers. I'm currently using a Harmon Kardon Soundstick III and am looking to upgrade it. My setup is Sabre U2 DAC --> Bravo V2 amplifier. I'm not really sure whether this is a suitable set up desktop audio? But I'm looking at bookshelf speakers, possibly the LSR305 or something similar, within the $250 price range.
> 
> I would mainly be using the monitors for games, listening. Not much of studio recording and stuff like that. And I'm worried that studio monitors might be a little too neutral for the activities I'm using it for? I would prefer a slightly brighter sounding speaker, possibly like my AKGQ701.
> 
> Any advice?




Given the price range, I'm guessing you've looked at KRKs, M-Audios, etc.

Might be worth considering Emotivas...the 5s are $332 and the 4s are $284 on Amazon.

They seem to get good reviews...here's one http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/emotiva-airmotiv-5-active-monitor-speakers


----------



## Gryphus0204

gearme said:


> Given the price range, I'm guessing you've looked at KRKs, M-Audios, etc.
> 
> Might be worth considering Emotivas...the 5s are $332 and the 4s are $284 on Amazon.
> 
> They seem to get good reviews...here's one http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/emotiva-airmotiv-5-active-monitor-speakers


 
 What about the Audio Engine A2+? It already has an integrated DAC and USB output as well, which wouldn't be necessary The Emotivas looks promising and I would definitely consider them.


----------



## GearMe

gryphus0204 said:


> What about the Audio Engine A2+? It already has an integrated DAC and USB output as well, which wouldn't be necessary The Emotivas looks promising and I would definitely consider them.




Yeah...didn't realize the Audioengines had a built in DAC. That's a nice feature if it's well implemented! Looks like a very solid value if you like their sound.

I guess the benefits to the the Emotivas (and possibly some of the other monitors) is that they are bi-amped individually...which theoretically should be better. However, this might depend on the amp quality and the implementation as well. They also have 5" woofers which should dig deeper than the A2+'s


----------



## cel4145

The A2+ only has a 2.75" driver, which is really small. They are tiny little speakers. To make it seems like it has more bass extension than it does, Audioengine artificially added in an upper midbass hump to the speaker. 

So the A2+ is very good for someone who has to have that sized speaker. But even the Emotiva Airmotiv 4 are going to be a better speaker than the A2+.


----------



## germanium

cel4145 said:


> How do you modify a sub (or speakers for that matter) for higher resolution?


 

  By  removing all capacitors leading to ground from the negative feedback loop & bypassing power supply electrolytic filter capacitors with large value metalized film capacitors. Works wonders. Same mods to my soundcard. http://www.head-fi.org/t/705284/germaniums-sound-blaster-zxr-mod-thread The speaker are all internally amplified with active crossovers.
  
  Also eliminated all electrolytic coupling capacitors.
  
 The sub modifications gave me the capacity to reproduce deeper bass & to work better with my BX5 satellite speakers. The higher resolution is not something you will hear by playing the sub by itself. It must be auditioned as a whole system to appreciate the enhanced resolution


----------



## cel4145

germanium said:


> By  removing all capacitors leading to ground from the negative feedback loop & bypassing power supply electrolytic filter capacitors with large value metalized film capacitors. Works wonders. Same mods to my soundcard. http://www.head-fi.org/t/705284/germaniums-sound-blaster-zxr-mod-thread The speaker are all internally amplified with active crossovers.
> 
> Also eliminated all electrolytic coupling capacitors.
> 
> The sub modifications gave me the capacity to reproduce deeper bass & to work better with my BX5 satellite speakers. The higher resolution is not something you will hear by playing the sub by itself. It must be auditioned as a whole system to appreciate the enhanced resolution




I can see how that might be helpful with the speakers, but how does that work with the sub on producing deeper bass? The driver and cabinet are tuned to determine the frequency response. Well, I guess if the sub amp has an eq in it (which sometimes manufacturers do often adjust with some kind of built in EQ adjustment), then you might be changing the frequency response.


----------



## germanium

cel4145 said:


> I can see how that might be helpful with the speakers, but how does that work with the sub on producing deeper bass? The driver and cabinet are tuned to determine the frequency response. Well, I guess if the sub amp has an eq in it (which sometimes manufacturers do often adjust with some kind of built in EQ adjustment), then you might be changing the frequency response.




Yes crossover is in fact changed. Subwoofers resonant frequency became the crossover frequency & active crossover in the sub becomes an EQ correcting for the natural rolloff below resonance. Subsonic filter was removed. This is a sealed sub so the subsonic filter was not really needed. The crossover is a 12db/octive active crossover that I'm using to correct for the natural 12db/ octive rolloff below resonance giving me flat response to 25Hz instead of 55-60Hz before stating to rolloff.


----------



## cel4145

OK. You took out the subsonic filter. That make sense about where you get the extra bass extension, although I wonder how usable it is. And you right. I wonder why they put the subsonic filter in there to begin with as it's definitely not needed for a sealed sub.


----------



## germanium

cel4145 said:


> OK. You took out the subsonic filter. That make sense about where you get the extra bass extension, although I wonder how usable it is. And you right. I wonder why they put the subsonic filter in there to begin with as it's definitely not needed for a sealed sub.




Believe me, in my room it very usable. There is about 14db of correction between the resonant frequency & the lower active crossover frequency perfectly correcting the drop in output below resonant frequency.


----------



## Gryphus0204

gearme said:


> Yeah...didn't realize the Audioengines had a built in DAC. That's a nice feature if it's well implemented! Looks like a very solid value if you like their sound.
> 
> I guess the benefits to the the Emotivas (and possibly some of the other monitors) is that they are bi-amped individually...which theoretically should be better. However, this might depend on the amp quality and the implementation as well. They also have 5" woofers which should dig deeper than the A2+'s


 
  
  


cel4145 said:


> The A2+ only has a 2.75" driver, which is really small. They are tiny little speakers. To make it seems like it has more bass extension than it does, Audioengine artificially added in an upper midbass hump to the speaker.
> 
> So the A2+ is very good for someone who has to have that sized speaker. But even the Emotiva Airmotiv 4 are going to be a better speaker than the A2+.


 
 Would it be worth it to go up to the Emotiva Airmotiv 5? Would the sound improvement be worth the extra money? I'm also worried about the distance to the speakers as it is a desktop speaker so I'm worried maybe if I go for the 5's it would be a tad too big?


----------



## GearMe

Don't know your desk size but the 5" Studio Monitors all seem to be roughly the same size...from smallest to largest BX5 < 5s < Rokit 5 < LSR305

Going to a 4" Studio Monitor saves you roughly an inch on each dimension. For my money, I'd purchase the 5" monitors.

From my perspective, I'm hoping I'll like the sound of these a little better based on reviews, past experiences with ribbon vs dome tweeters, and how they fit my sound signature preferences.


----------



## sizzlincok

5" studio monitors are among the most popular size for home computer setups. Even for passives. Going larger, the user usually has deep pockets or specifically know what they want.


----------



## Gryphus0204

Hmm I see. I was about to purchase the Airmotiv 5s yesterday, until i realized they only ship with 110V power cords. Because I'm residing in Singapore which uses UK pins and 230V, would purchasing my own power cord myself be self sufficient? Or would i need a transformer for that as well?


----------



## BigTerminator

gryphus0204 said:


> Hmm I see. I was about to purchase the Airmotiv 5s yesterday, until i realized they only ship with 110V power cords. Because I'm residing in Singapore which uses UK pins and 230V, would purchasing my own power cord myself be self sufficient? Or would i need a transformer for that as well?


 
 Hey, I recently purchased a pair of Emotiva Airmotive 5S's couple weeks ago. They are big but not anything a desk should not be able to handle. They will definitely give you much fuller sound. I use them with a sub but even without I can tell they make much more bass the my M-Audio Bx5's. The imaging is wonderful. They fill the room with accurate sound, creating a large sweet spot. The tweeter is very good. They are very powerful. Compared to the 4s, unless if space and transport are that much of a concern spend the extra to get the 5s. It will go a lot lower and produce fuller sound. In my opinion their is no competition between these and Audio Engines. That being said they play better in a big room. Small room I have, the benefits over my M-Audio was not huge because I used a sub. I can tell they are better when playing loud, not much when I am listening low. Without any eq they are better than my M-Audios. 
  
 Also these speakers look stunning, some of the best looking monitors out there. 
  
 As for using them with 230v. You have to replace the fuse. https://emotiva.com/resources/manuals/airmotiv_5s_user_v10.pdf Go to page 7 and they will tell you. Maybe you can call Emotiva and ask them to make it 230v ready for you. Worth a shot.


----------



## Gryphus0204

bigterminator said:


> Hey, I recently purchased a pair of Emotiva Airmotive 5S's couple weeks ago. They are big but not anything a desk should not be able to handle. They will definitely give you much fuller sound. I use them with a sub but even without I can tell they make much more bass the my M-Audio Bx5's. The imaging is wonderful. They fill the room with accurate sound, creating a large sweet spot. The tweeter is very good. They are very powerful. Compared to the 4s, unless if space and transport are that much of a concern spend the extra to get the 5s. It will go a lot lower and produce fuller sound. In my opinion their is no competition between these and Audio Engines. That being said they play better in a big room. Small room I have, the benefits over my M-Audio was not huge because I used a sub. I can tell they are better when playing loud, not much when I am listening low. Without any eq they are better than my M-Audios.
> 
> Also these speakers look stunning, some of the best looking monitors out there.
> 
> As for using them with 230v. You have to replace the fuse. https://emotiva.com/resources/manuals/airmotiv_5s_user_v10.pdf Go to page 7 and they will tell you. Maybe you can call Emotiva and ask them to make it 230v ready for you. Worth a shot.


 
 Hmmmm i see. I recently emailed them and they said there is a switch behind the Airmotiv 5s that would allow it to switch to 230v, and all i needed to do was to purchase my own power cord. I'm inching closer and closer to buying them. What are your thoughts on the Airmotiv 5s without a Subwoofer? Would they be able to crank up enough bass by themselves?


----------



## BigTerminator

gryphus0204 said:


> Hmmmm i see. I recently emailed them and they said there is a switch behind the Airmotiv 5s that would allow it to switch to 230v, and all i needed to do was to purchase my own power cord. I'm inching closer and closer to buying them. What are your thoughts on the Airmotiv 5s without a Subwoofer? Would they be able to crank up enough bass by themselves?


 
 I would call them to make sure of everything. When you buy the monitors they do give you spare fuses so I am sure you would have to switch them out with something 230v compliant. 
  
 No speaker of 5 inches or even 8 inches can give me satisfaction without the need for a sub. It is not the amount of kick or thump I need from the sub, it is the weight and fullness that it brings to music. I have a sub bypass switch and when I run the monitors by themselves so much life and impact is sucked out. Running test tones, they do go all the way down to 50hz without any drop off. But 50hz is not very low, my previous sub went down to 35hz and I could hear I was missing depth to the bass. My current sub goes to 25hz and you can hear much deeper bass. Upgrading my subwoofer did more for sound quality than upgrading my monitors. 
  
 If your ears are not used to having a subwoofer than you will be fine. The day I got my M-Audios I thought the bass was enough. Of course once you go down the road of having a subwoofer you cannot go back. If your listening environment is small I would recommend even getting a $100 sub as it will make the music twice as good. I run my monitors full range and cross the sub at 70hz.


----------



## Gryphus0204

bigterminator said:


> I would call them to make sure of everything. When you buy the monitors they do give you spare fuses so I am sure you would have to switch them out with something 230v compliant.
> 
> No speaker of 5 inches or even 8 inches can give me satisfaction without the need for a sub. It is not the amount of kick or thump I need from the sub, it is the weight and fullness that it brings to music. I have a sub bypass switch and when I run the monitors by themselves so much life and impact is sucked out. Running test tones, they do go all the way down to 50hz without any drop off. But 50hz is not very low, my previous sub went down to 35hz and I could hear I was missing depth to the bass. My current sub goes to 25hz and you can hear much deeper bass. Upgrading my subwoofer did more for sound quality than upgrading my monitors.
> 
> If your ears are not used to having a subwoofer than you will be fine. The day I got my M-Audios I thought the bass was enough. Of course once you go down the road of having a subwoofer you cannot go back. If your listening environment is small I would recommend even getting a $100 sub as it will make the music twice as good. I run my monitors full range and cross the sub at 70hz.


 
 Hmm... I think I'll probably get the Airmotiv first, and then decided whether i need a subwoofer. Any recommendations for a good and cheap one? And would i need a pre amplifier to connect the whole thing together?


----------



## cel4145

gryphus0204 said:


> Hmm... I think I'll probably get the Airmotiv first, and then decided whether i need a subwoofer. Any recommendations for a good and cheap one? And would i need a pre amplifier to connect the whole thing together?




Good and cheap? Depends on what you mean by cheap. A subwoofer is a big driver in a big enclosure with an amp. Quality is not cheap, IMO.

You could always buy a sub with line level pass through. Or split the output to the speakers and the sub.


----------



## BigTerminator

If it is a small room then a cheap sub of $100-200 will suffice. Look for your typical budget home theater subs from BIC, Klipsch, Polk sells refurbished DSW units on their ebay store real cheap.  You do not need a preamp. You could split the audio signal, one going to the monitors, another into the sub and then crossover the sub til you get the sound you want. My subwoofer has a bunch of crossovers and fancy input outputs but all I do is cross the sub at 70hz with monitors running full range. Polk DSW Pro subs come with input outputs for 2.1 use.


----------



## sizzlincok

I'm a bass head myself and I'm in a very small room. I used to use a Z680 sub and I thought that was amazing. Once I upgraded to an Infinity Home Theater sub, I felt that the bass was so much cleaner.

So I ended up settling with 2 Infinity HT subs in the corner. Bad for untreated room acoustics, but they're for when I want that bass thump anyway.


----------



## Gryphus0204

Crap. I was going to purchase the Airmotiv 5s from Amazon the other day and then i realized that they do not ship to Singapore. I then treid the Airmotiv website, but i decided against it as the shipping fee was 200 SGD, which is insane. I think i might audition the Cerwin Vega XD5 in my country


----------



## RonaldDumsfeld

Gryphus - The Airmotivas appear to be based on designs made popular by ADAM Audio of Germany. The Airmotivas are cheap in the US because they are available mail order only and some of the saving on dealer margin is passed on to the customer. ADAM do have a distributer in Singapore. The F5 and A3X are the models to ask about.
  
 Other classic entry level near field monitors also available Worldwide and with distributers in Singapore are from Mackie (MR5), Yamaha (HS5) and JBL (LSR305).
  
 If these models are still too expensive for you right now take a look at lesser but still excellent models from KRK (RP5), M-Audio (BX5) and similar designs from Samson and Fostex.
  
 All these manufacturers have dealers in Singapore. Unfortunately I cannot make the websites quote prices to me here. If you coud be arsed it would be interesting if you could post them up. I would have thought they would be cheap what with Singapore being a free port and all but it all depends on taxes and import duty etc.


----------



## GearMe

gryphus0204 said:


> Crap. I was going to purchase the Airmotiv 5s from Amazon the other day and then i realized that they do not ship to Singapore. I then treid the Airmotiv website, but i decided against it as the shipping fee was 200 SGD, which is insane. I think i might audition the Cerwin Vega XD5 in my country




Yeah...that's a bummer!

Not sure if you've already explored this for other Studio Monitors but from what I can tell there is a Amazon search criteria (checkbox) called AmazonGlobal Eligible that allows you to see which products can be shipped to Singapore. Emotivas don't pop up but JBL, KRK, M-Audio, etc. do.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_left_v4_sib?ie=UTF8&nodeId=201214770


----------



## Gryphus0204

ronalddumsfeld said:


> Gryphus - The Airmotivas appear to be based on designs made popular by ADAM Audio of Germany. The Airmotivas are cheap in the US because they are available mail order only and some of the saving on dealer margin is passed on to the customer. ADAM do have a distributer in Singapore. The F5 and A3X are the models to ask about.
> 
> Other classic entry level near field monitors also available Worldwide and with distributers in Singapore are from Mackie (MR5), Yamaha (HS5) and JBL (LSR305).
> 
> ...


 
  
  


gearme said:


> Yeah...that's a bummer!
> 
> Not sure if you've already explored this for other Studio Monitors but from what I can tell there is a Amazon search criteria (checkbox) called AmazonGlobal Eligible that allows you to see which products can be shipped to Singapore. Emotivas don't pop up but JBL, KRK, M-Audio, etc. do.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_left_v4_sib?ie=UTF8&nodeId=201214770


 
 Alright thanks guys for all your help! I will probably be going around the few distributors show rooms these few weeks and then I will decide!


----------



## relaximjoking

bigterminator said:


> I would call them to make sure of everything. When you buy the monitors they do give you spare fuses so I am sure you would have to switch them out with something 230v compliant.
> 
> No speaker of 5 inches or even 8 inches can give me satisfaction without the need for a sub. It is not the amount of kick or thump I need from the sub, it is the weight and fullness that it brings to music. I have a sub bypass switch and when I run the monitors by themselves so much life and impact is sucked out. Running test tones, they do go all the way down to 50hz without any drop off. But 50hz is not very low, my previous sub went down to 35hz and I could hear I was missing depth to the bass. My current sub goes to 25hz and you can hear much deeper bass. Upgrading my subwoofer did more for sound quality than upgrading my monitors.
> 
> If your ears are not used to having a subwoofer than you will be fine. The day I got my M-Audios I thought the bass was enough. Of course once you go down the road of having a subwoofer you cannot go back. If your listening environment is small I would recommend even getting a $100 sub as it will make the music twice as good. I run my monitors full range and cross the sub at 70hz.


 
 How do you hook up a subwoofer to your emotivia 5s? I was having trouble figuring out if that's even possible.


----------



## BigTerminator

relaximjoking said:


> How do you hook up a subwoofer to your emotivia 5s? I was having trouble figuring out if that's even possible.


 
 To see how I do it, look up my subwoofer model (Presonus T10) and you will see its bass management system. For a subwoofer without bass management you can do a couple things. First is split one of the audio channels from your speakers and run it to the sub with the subs crossover set to whatever, your speakers will be running full range. You can also buy an external crossover to handle low and high pass filtering. You can buy a set of these http://www.parts-express.com/harrison-labs-fmod-inline-crossover-pair-70-hz-high-pass-rca--266-272 if you do not want your speakers running full range.


----------



## relaximjoking

are there other subs like this or is the one you have the best for that price range?


----------



## BigTerminator

relaximjoking said:


> are there other subs like this or is the one you have the best for that price range?


 
 The only subwoofers in a reasonable price range with bass management are "studio subwoofers" (look up the term on google). Out of the sub $400 subwoofers I would "imagine" the Presonus being the best. Compared to the KRK 10S subwoofer, many people have said it is better. Compared to others I do not know. Spec wise is it the most impressive. The most impressive thing was that I only paid $265 for it at ProAudioStar. For $265 you really cannot do much better especially with the cool features it has. I love mine, completely overpowers the room. It goes LOW which I love. Will probably buy a SubDude platform to take away wall rattling at high volumes. For a small computer setup, get a studio subwoofer if you can for below $300. If the room is big, than look into home theater subs. I already convinced one guy here to buy one


----------



## cel4145

The Def Tech Pro Sub series has 80hz high pass filters on the speaker level outputs for use with passive speakers and an amplifier. 

I would probably be wary of the FMOD inline filters. I've heard very mixed reviews about them, with some people speaking negatively about how they affect the signal sent to the speakers. 

But I caution thinking more about what you want to achieve with your sub before buying. 

If you only want a sub to add to the natural roll off of your speakers (as opposed to setting a higher crossover), then consider the Outlaw Audio M8 subwoofer. Great little sub for a desktop setup with a small footprint. 

For a big powerful budget sub for big room filling sound, the JBL ES250P is on sale. 

Got a small budget? The Polk PSW505 is on sale through this weekend. 

Got a budget around $500 to $600? You should be looking at HSU VTF-1 MK 2 (no high pass filter), SVS PB-1000 or SVS SB-1000 (80hz high pass filter on the line out pass through).


----------



## relaximjoking

How would this compare to a Adam Sub8? would it fit better with A7xs?


----------

