Set of monitors vs. 7.1 surround.

[saya_kucing]

It's that time of week again, the paycheck time.

 

I'm running some creative 5.1 speakers I got for a bargain, but I love my HD movies (district 9, among others utilizing surround sound). I also love my bass and sweet-sweet mids, and I could pick up a set of monitors...

 

Should I got monitors, 7.1 surround or just not spend my money and keep the 5.1?

 

Maybe both?

[SSL]

Don't spend money.

[ShadowCaptain]

SNIP

 

honestly 7.1 has no real benefit over 5.1, especially since not all films are mastered in 7.1, also most rooms are not designed to be set up well with a speaker arrangement like that

 

you should just get some BETTER speakers

 

 

Don't spend money.

 

Well thats silly, thats what its for

[Kobrastachka]

I would go for the monitors 

[Brawhammer]

Don't spend money.

 

What and have it wasting away in the bank account doing nothing but laughing at me. Bah! 

[daytdog]

I'd go for the monitors, but it's your choice. I don't know what you like. 

[SSL]

What and have it wasting away in the bank account doing nothing but laughing at me. Bah! 

 

It won't be the only thing laughing at you otherwise.

[Brawhammer]

It won't be the only thing laughing at you otherwise.

No one can break through my seal of expensive computer equipment. I laugh at those that try enter. For they are not worthy of this throne. Thy laughter is silenced out by the roar of fans and the sound of my enemies being shot down over 7.1 Pure destruction.

 

I may have went a bit far...

[saya_kucing]

I was at my friend's house last night, and he has a production-grade audio rack routing all his instruments through to the monitors. I was equal parts amused and envious when he showed me a youtube clip - turning volume up through this beast...

 

I might be looking at a set of cans before I touch my speaker setup, my razor headset is looking a little worse for wear and I'm keen for something a little more mid to high-end-ish.

[TheUnnamedNewbie]

Don't get monitors for audiolistening. As much as people would like to believe that perfectly linear stuff is great for listening, it's not. You want distortion to "spice up" your sound. Monitors for actual enjoyment gennerally sound sharp, shallow, and lifeless.
 

[dylan43270]

Just going to leave this here...

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/316760-computer-21-sound-setup-under-200-usd/

 

I don't really see the point of having a surround sound setup for your desk, as it is not easy to position the speakers correctly. 

[ShearMe]

Don't get monitors for audiolistening. As much as people would like to believe that perfectly linear stuff is great for listening, it's not. You want distortion to "spice up" your sound. Monitors for actual enjoyment gennerally sound sharp, shallow, and lifeless.

 

 

Since when?  :huh: Even if that were true (which it isn't), that doesn't really answer the question OP is really asking: 7.1 system-in-a-box, or good stereo units. 

 

I'd vote for a good pair of bookshelf speakers/monitors - tiny satellite speakers bundled with those surround sound systems make sound, but not necessarily good sound. Music generally doesn't benefit from surround sound because very little is ever mastered for more than stereo. Movies benefit from a good surround setup, but I wouldn't call a boxed system good. Additionally, room conditioning can play a bigger role on how your system sounds than the system itself. I'd argue that surround is worse than stereo in a bad sounding room, and certainly more difficult to get the best sound from it.

[SSL]

Don't get monitors for audiolistening. As much as people would like to believe that perfectly linear stuff is great for listening, it's not. You want distortion to "spice up" your sound. Monitors for actual enjoyment gennerally sound sharp, shallow, and lifeless.

 

 

I'm a noob when it comes to audio, can you help me understand what you mean by distortion "spicing up" the sound?

[TheUnnamedNewbie]

I'm a noob when it comes to audio, can you help me understand what you mean by distortion "spicing up" the sound?

 

People often like to believe that their audiosetup should be perfectly flat to give the best experiences. This is however not really true. For instance: even 500 euro Beyerdynamic T90s, are regarded as being amongst the "best in their class", yet (with exception of some 15khz+ if i'm not mistaken) a ATH-50 has better frequencyresponse - a T90 has a ("beyerdynamic signature") reverse slight v-shape. Even beyerdynamic's own "lower end" DT880 has a flatter response. It's the same reason why some people like tube amplifiers: they tend to give the sound a more pronounced lower-mid section "warming up" the sound. I would be lying if I were to claim I know the nitty-gritty details of why and how, but if monitors were the best option in terms of sound-enjoyment, nobody would spend money on things like Bowers and Wilkins speaker sets and high-end amplifiers and everyone would have monitors in their house.

 

My source: http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=963&graphID[]=2941&graphID[]=4143&scale=15

 

The only region where the "best headphone" actually has the best response is between 700Hz and 3kHz (upper mids). You can clearly see the "beyer signature" hump in both the DT880 and T90.

[KaminKevCrew]

I would say go for a pair of monitors. The audioengine A5+ is supposed to be pretty good, as far as computer audio goes. If you are looking for something a little more exotic, and you have the budget for them (And the hardware with your computer to complement them) the KEF LS50 mini speakers are pretty much the best bang for your buck speakers in their price range. Just be aware that they cost around $1500 new. But KEF gear is really really good. A local audio shop sells a lot of their stuff, and I have been nothing but impressed with the sound that their setups provide. (If I had $1500 to spend, that's right up there at the top of the list for me.)

[spwath]

I'm a noob when it comes to audio, can you help me understand what you mean by distortion "spicing up" the sound?

Your a noob?

Sure.

That makes me a fetus.

[ShearMe]

.

Firstly, differences in frequency response are generally not considered distortion. You can't argue against a flat sound signature just because some people like a non flat signature, nor are "monitors" always flat in the first place. Your point about the headphones doesn't take into account HRTF which can be different between individuals, and T90 actually has less THD (the D stands for distortion) than the M50 if you were going to argue your case based off two random headphones.

Lastly, who the hell told you the T90 is the best headphone? There isn't a consensus on which headphone is the best, but the T90 surely isn't it.

Your a noob?

Sure.

That makes me a fetus.

He was just trying to get the unnamed newbie to spout whatever he learned from Head-Fi so we could correct him.

[spwath]

Firstly, differences in frequency response are generally not considered distortion. You can't argue against a flat sound signature just because some people like a non flat signature, nor are "monitors" always flat in the first place. Your point about the headphones doesn't take into account HRTF which can be different between individuals, and T90 actually has leads THD (the D stands for distortion) than the M50 if you were going to argue your case based off two random headphones.

Lastly, who the hell told you the T90 is the best headphone? There isn't a consensus on which headphone is the best, but the T90 surely isn't it.

He was just trying to get the unnamed newbie to spout whatever he learned from Head-Fi so we could correct him.

That's what I figured.

[SSL]

People often like to believe that their audiosetup should be perfectly flat to give the best experiences. This is however not really true. For instance: even 500 euro Beyerdynamic T90s, are regarded as being amongst the "best in their class", yet (with exception of some 15khz+ if i'm not mistaken) a ATH-50 has better frequencyresponse - a T90 has a ("beyerdynamic signature") reverse slight v-shape. Even beyerdynamic's own "lower end" DT880 has a flatter response. It's the same reason why some people like tube amplifiers: they tend to give the sound a more pronounced lower-mid section "warming up" the sound. I would be lying if I were to claim I know the nitty-gritty details of why and how, but if monitors were the best option in terms of sound-enjoyment, nobody would spend money on things like Bowers and Wilkins speaker sets and high-end amplifiers and everyone would have monitors in their house.

 

My source: http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=963&graphID[]=2941&graphID[]=4143&scale=15

 

The only region where the "best headphone" actually has the best response is between 700Hz and 3kHz (upper mids). You can clearly see the "beyer signature" hump in both the DT880 and T90.

 

Yeah, "beyer signature" hump:

 

 

... or not.

Good try, though.

[ShearMe]

Yeah, "beyer signature" hump:

 

 

 

... or not.

 

Good try, though.

 

Everyone knows its a spike, not a hump, get a load of this goy.