Jump to content

SSL

Member
  • Posts

    13,629
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SSL

  1. What does it matter what you paid for yours? The OP isn't you. Stop being defensive about me calling a spade a spade. No problem. The speakers I mentioned before, the Logitech and Klipsch sound like about what you need. They aren't terrible and should fit the footprint. I would be more comfortable recommending the $300 speakers, but quality can't always be the top priority.
  2. Wrong. They're objective trash and there are better speakers around the price range. Seeing as the OP has a budget of $100, there really isn't any point even acknowledging their existence.
  3. Vanatoo Transparent Zero. $300. May be slightly bigger than you are looking for, but in the scheme of things these are small speakers. The iLoud Micro Monitor is also supposedly good; same price but even smaller. Avoid the Audioengine A2+. These speakers are a bit overpriced and sound a bit crap. Hot garbage. If going logitec, the z623 is far superior.
  4. Small, cheap, good. Pick any two. Typical recommendation of Klipsch Promedia 2.1 or Logitec z623 for craptastic multimedia speakers that fit on a desk.
  5. Get quality monitors (i.e. speakers). Headphones are not accurate enough for serious sound production and probably never will be. JBL LSR305 at minimum and even then these are extreme budget, though you get a lot of performance per dollar. Some (used) Genelecs would be a significant step up in performance and price. Well, yes and no. Yes in that headphones don't have real soundstage period, no in that the HD 650 does not have a sense of space at all. If the headphones were new, it could be that the pads were not broken in. If not, then it was an amp/source problem. HD 650 is more closed in for sure, but it sounds dead inside with pleb-fi source gear. HD 800 needs careful selection of source components, EQ, and mods, and even then may not be suitable to all tastes or genres. They are also not strictly "accurate" throughout the frequency range, even compared to something less expensive like the HD 600. $1000 probably isn't enough to build a proper system around them. No such thing with headphones. Look to professional studio monitors if you don't want to wallow in headphone purgatory.
  6. In the scheme of things, the Magni and Fulla might as well be the same when you compare them even to something like the Valhalla. Painting the Magni as "much better" is just specious nonsense. I happen to own the HD 650 and Magni and Valhalla. The Magni frankly isn't a great pairing with the HD 650, but at least the Fulla includes a DAC for the same price.
  7. SSL

    DAC or AMP

    It's amp, not "AMP". Short for "amplifier". Good to know exactly what you're buying. Echoing the above, e10k is poop, fulla 2 is the go-to.
  8. Not really a significant issue in the long term. As self-driving cars become ubiquitous, I imagine that municipalities will work towards installing navigation aids tailored specifically for autonomous vehicles. Using image recognition to detect human-readable signs seems like a temporary workaround regardless of this hack.
  9. So you know that the Fulla 2 does not have enough power via what reasoning...?
  10. SSL

    AMP for K7XX

    But have you used a Valhalla 2 heh heh.
  11. Might not be an upgrade, seeing as the AKG line of K6--/7-- headphones are a little cleaner in the bass. The HD 650 has more bass, though. So, it depends on your personal preferences. The K612 is a good headphone for the money so I would hesitate to upgrade from it unless you have specific aspects of the sound that you want to improve.
  12. SSL

    AMP for K7XX

    Because you've totally tried one and not just read stuff on Reddit.
  13. No specifications, no PCB shots, and LED lighting on an audio card. Who the hell calls this the "return" of sound cards?
  14. Then you didn't try.
  15. This argument makes no sense. While "regular" people may or may not care, terrorists absolutely do care and if a particular app stops offering encryption they will simply use other communication channels. It's that simple. The only course that even remotely makes sense from your perspective would be to legally curtail the use of encryption - and this would be nearly impossible given that so many public encryption standards are available. And this presumes that encryption is even used by these people.
  16. The uncomfortable reality is that terrorism has become a fact of life. Desperate attempts by Western governments to stop all attacks by any means look no less than childish. Mitigation should be approached with standard intelligence-gathering procedures, which by all accounts have been effective. Aside from that, terrorism is a psychological weapon and this kind of nonsense is just fuel to the fire. Another thing to think about is that law enforcement should not be excessively easy. This is counterintuitive, but making the government work a little bit to catch criminals helps to preserve the balance of freedom. As I said before regarding terrorism, some crime is inevitable and law enforcement is only one among many tools to reduce criminality overall in a society. "Perfect" law and order is as inadvisable as it is unattainable.
  17. The "easy" way is to listen. If you can't tell if there is a difference or aren't sure if there is a difference, then it doesn't matter. Really.
  18. Then you've basically dismissed the entire counter-argument by rejecting any reason based on the exact antithesis of surveillance. Any argument against surveillance must be grounded in the philosophical and functional benefits of privacy. Rejecting it out of hand suggests you are either not arguing in good faith, or have a very weak understanding of both sides of the discussion. Perhaps you could take some time to understand why 1984 is frequently referenced in discussions about privacy and government surveillance by actually reading it. Read Brave New World while you're at it. Brave New World is certainly a bit more relevant to the direction that most Western governments have taken over the past century. This would also be a good starting place in understanding the functional benefits of privacy, and the specific risks that come from government infringement upon it. I can also recommend the books by Bruce Schneier, particularly Data and Goliath.
  19. Whenever I remember, maybe every 1-3 months. With positive pressure and decent filters, dust buildup happens very slowly.
  20. Depends on the headphone. There is no one sound signature that characterizes all studio monitor headphones. It's a loosely defined label. Doesn't mean much in practice, beyond an isolating closed-back design. Professional headphones may be more rugged or have higher impedance, but not always. Not if you like the way they sound. See above. Depends what the headphone is used for. Monitoring is fine, mixing and mastering should be and generally are done on speakers.
  21. Okay, so speakers do not directly "put out" the rated power handling. This number is the RMS electrical power input the speaker can safely tolerate without damage. The output sound power level produced for a given electrical power input will depend on the design and specs of he speaker. On top of that, the actual sound pressure level (decibels SPL, the loudness at the listening position) will be dependent on listening distance and the acoustic characteristics of the surroundings. To determine the amount of amplifier power you will need, it is necessary to know the sensitivity and impedance of your speakers, and then determine what level you will typically be listening at, in terms of decibels. 60W is probably plenty, but it again it depends on variables; there is no single answer that is correct in every situation.
  22. This is what, 2017 now? The HD 650 has definitely undergone some silent revisions over the decades and cannot be called veiled at this point. I came from the DT 880 treble cannon and HE-560 desert sun upper mids and there is no veil to my ears. As @seduce_me mentioned, any slight overdamping can be compensated with mods or careful amp selection.
×