DAC and amp vs 2.1 computer speakers

[SSL]

You know what? you earn a cookie. You can stay in your bubble. I don't want spend too much time debating on that

 

I don't blame you.

 

I know what I'm talking about. I own multiple speakers and amps.

And I don't just own headphones only.

 

I mean, so do a lot of people.

[danielhowk]

Don't sass me after talking nonsense.

 

 

You're pretty confused, so I'll go easy.

 

Speakers make sound, any speaker that is good at one "type" of sound will do fine with any sound.

 

Fucking in cars is a false analogy because you're comparing two different classes of activity - driving and sex are not of the same thing, last I checked.

 

 

Well, you could do them at the same time.

 

 

They have warm and smooth sound. But lack of focus(not mistaken for clarity) and also lack of punchly bass.

Honestly i think m50w suits your taste better

i couldnt find Dayton Subwoofer in my country. is there other subwoofer you could recommend for that price range? or give me a few to scout around ?

i think hivi swan mkIII is lacking of bass just tried it today. i even tried the X4 from hivi swan.

is there a sub woofer i could buy to go along with hivi swan mk III ?

[KaminKevCrew]

i couldnt find Dayton Subwoofer in my country. is there other subwoofer you could recommend for that price range? or give me a few to scout around ?

i think hivi swan mkIII is lacking of bass just tried it today. i even tried the X4 from hivi swan.

is there a sub woofer i could buy to go along with hivi swan mk III ?

Any decent subwoofer that you're going to find would take up the cost of your entire budget, and then some.

[danielhowk]

Any decent subwoofer that you're going to find would take up the cost of your entire budget, and then some.

dayton subwoofer was about $120 only. and is good. no other subwoofer on par with dayton ?

[spwath]

dayton subwoofer was about $120 only. and is good. no other subwoofer on par with dayton ?

Most <400$ sub's are not good.

Other than the sandwiches

[KaminKevCrew]

dayton subwoofer was about $120 only. and is good. no other subwoofer on par with dayton ?

A sub that cuts out at 30hz isn't a good sub. 

[SSL]

A sub that cuts out at 30hz isn't a good sub. 

 

It's decent for what it is. BIC F12 is another ok budget sub. Obviously there are real compromises being made in the sub-$500 territory, but that doesn't mean nothing is worth getting if budget is tight. Remember that room gain can help sealed subs on the low-end due to the shallower roll-off.

[danielhowk]

It's decent for what it is. BIC F12 is another ok budget sub. Obviously there are real compromises being made in the sub-$500 territory, but that doesn't mean nothing is worth getting if budget is tight. Remember that room gain can help sealed subs on the low-end due to the shallower roll-off.

 

A sub that cuts out at 30hz isn't a good sub. 

 

Most <400$ sub's are not good.

Other than the sandwiches

i see. should i get a Dac and a 2.0 will that be better than getting a subwoofer ? i tried hivi swan mk III. it was lacking bass. i heard the x4 but im not sure if its worth its price

[danielhowk]

bump

[ColonelPanic]

Get yourself a nice Denon/Cambridge Audio HiFi amplifier, and then the highest set of Wharfedale speakers you can afford (9.0, 9.1, 10.1 are a good place to start looking). Obviously if you can go to some kind of shop and listen to any of them first, then do so, but I'd buy them online, as they'll be cheaper, and shipped.

[Acquire]

For $300 there's plenty of good self powered 2.1 speaker options.  The Swan M50W comes to mind. Great looks and great audio.  At that price range and for a smaller setup I wouldn't bother with a passive a passive speaker setup, but that's just me.  That being said my desktop setup is a passive setup, but I got an all in one amp/dac setup that's several times outside the $300 budget.

[danielhowk]

For $300 there's plenty of good self powered 2.1 speaker options.  The Swan M50W comes to mind. Great looks and great audio.  At that price range and for a smaller setup I wouldn't bother with a passive a passive speaker setup, but that's just me.  That being said my desktop setup is a passive setup, but I got an all in one amp/dac setup that's several times outside the $300 budget.

my budget is about $500 . which 2.0 would you guys recommend ?

[cragger89]

A cheap subwoofer is fine if it does go lower than your 2.0 speakers.

 

A small bookshelf speaker although might have in it's specifications that it will go as low as 40Hz is really not going to cut the mustard if you have heard low bass done properly. Small cones are not going to shift enough air for the bass to be noticeable, especially if you are not in a room which is the size of a butter dish.

 

It pains me when I read of people singing the praises of bass performance from small speakers, commenting even that the bass is "fast" etc, that is nonsense. If you want low bass, you have to have at the very least, a big bass driver. I'm not saying bookshelf speakers are bad, I use multiple pairs across difference systems. They sound great, but they do not go lower, at ordinary listening volumes, than about 70Hz. 

[spwath]

A cheap subwoofer is fine if it does go lower than your 2.0 speakers.

A small bookshelf speaker although might have in it's specifications that it will go as low as 40Hz is really not going to cut the mustard if you have heard low bass done properly. Small cones are not going to shift enough air for the bass to be noticeable, especially if you are not in a room which is the size of a butter dish.

It pains me when I read of people singing the praises of bass performance from small speakers, commenting even that the bass is "fast" etc, that is nonsense. If you want low bass, you have to have at the very least, a big bass driver. I'm not saying bookshelf speakers are bad, I use multiple pairs across difference systems. They sound great, but they do not go lower, at ordinary listening volumes, than about 70Hz.

But at lower price points, one can not get a decent sub

[cragger89]

But at lower price points, one can not get a decent sub

 

Decent is a subjective thing. For a garden party at our local bar recently, I was asked to loan them some speakers to use outside, so I used weatherproof Bose 101 monitors, with the amp being an old Sony AVR and I used my Yamaha P1600 amp, bridged, into a cheap Pioneer car subwoofer. The crossover was set at 100Hz so the Pioneer was even doing some midbass. Granted, I had to use a second amplifier, but the car subwoofer was a cheap driver in a cheap box - it sounded fine in that environment even at high volumes. I picked cheap gear which wouldn't matter if it got broken and it actually sounded very nice.

 

Gear simply does not need to be expensive for it to do its job. Asking a cheap subwoofer to provide the sub bass for the LFE channel when watching a movie at high volume is not going to be an audio nirvana experience, but it will certainly cover the lower end of the spectrum we are all addicted to for music and gaming with a small pair of monitor speakers on our desks.

 

I completely do recognise that a cheap subwoofer for music duties is still not going to equal a "good" subwoofer - the one in my system is a small MJ Acoustics Reference 100Mk2, it has a 10" driver and doesn't go any lower (we measured it) than my Yamaha NS-1000Ms. The subwoofer was £500.00 - it is good for music and taking the bass duties away from the Yamahas during a movie, but it isn't a true by definitition "subwoofer" because it doesn't do the frequencies you can feel as opposed to hear.

 

All gear serves its purpose - the cheap stuff has its uses also.

[spwath]

Decent is a subjective thing. For a garden party at our local bar recently, I was asked to loan them some speakers to use outside, so I used weatherproof Bose 101 monitors, with the amp being an old Sony AVR and I used my Yamaha P1600 amp, bridged, into a cheap Pioneer car subwoofer. The crossover was set at 100Hz so the Pioneer was even doing some midbass. Granted, I had to use a second amplifier, but the car subwoofer was a cheap driver in a cheap box - it sounded fine in that environment even at high volumes. I picked cheap gear which wouldn't matter if it got broken and it actually sounded very nice.

Gear simply does not need to be expensive for it to do its job. Asking a cheap subwoofer to provide the sub bass for the LFE channel when watching a movie at high volume is not going to be an audio nirvana experience, but it will certainly cover the lower end of the spectrum we are all addicted to for music and gaming with a small pair of monitor speakers on our desks.

I completely do recognise that a cheap subwoofer for music duties is still not going to equal a "good" subwoofer - the one in my system is a small MJ Acoustics Reference 100Mk2, it has a 10" driver and doesn't go any lower (we measured it) than my Yamaha NS-1000Ms. The subwoofer was £500.00 - it is good for music and taking the bass duties away from the Yamahas during a movie, but it isn't a true by definitition "subwoofer" because it doesn't do the frequencies you can feel as opposed to hear.

All gear serves its purpose - the cheap stuff has its uses also.

Sure, sure.

My 100$ sub works great for games, but for music I actually leave it off on most songs as it sounds bad.

[cragger89]

Sure, sure.

My 100$ sub works great for games, but for music I actually leave it off on most songs as it sounds bad.

 

Yup.

 

My MJ subwoofer sounds dreadful with the Mission speakers in my gaming rig system - for games though it is OK. With music, it just doesn't work well with the Missions at all - probably because the amp is a general stereo one and I have no crossover to redirect bass from the 2.0 channels to the subwoofer. I could get around it with a Minidsp or something cheaper, for that matter, I just can't be bothered.

[spwath]

Yup.

My MJ subwoofer sounds dreadful with the Mission speakers in my gaming rig system - for games though it is OK. With music, it just doesn't work well with the Missions at all - probably because the amp is a general stereo one and I have no crossover to redirect bass from the 2.0 channels to the subwoofer. I could get around it with a Minidsp or something cheaper, for that matter, I just can't be bothered.

Yeah I have a nice Onkyo receiver I got for 15$.

My next upgrade is deff my sub.

Because when I use it for music I like having a sub, but it just sounds bad.

[cragger89]

When you set your subwoofer up, do seriously consider using a measuring device to ensure you're not setting it too quiet or too loud. Even a +10dB or negative adjustment can sound "fine" to our ears which would be enough to really reap havoc with room nodes.

 

Subs can be quite tricky to dial in - I had my friend use Audyssey installed on a laptop with a suitable measuring microphone to tune mine - which was when we discovered my MJ Ref 100 doesn't go lower than 50Hz - so for music, I don't use it. Ha.

[danielhowk]

A cheap subwoofer is fine if it does go lower than your 2.0 speakers.

 

A small bookshelf speaker although might have in it's specifications that it will go as low as 40Hz is really not going to cut the mustard if you have heard low bass done properly. Small cones are not going to shift enough air for the bass to be noticeable, especially if you are not in a room which is the size of a butter dish.

 

It pains me when I read of people singing the praises of bass performance from small speakers, commenting even that the bass is "fast" etc, that is nonsense. If you want low bass, you have to have at the very least, a big bass driver. I'm not saying bookshelf speakers are bad, I use multiple pairs across difference systems. They sound great, but they do not go lower, at ordinary listening volumes, than about 70Hz. 

 

 

But at lower price points, one can not get a decent sub

whats a good subwoofer for about $150-180

i know Dayton subwoofer was good but my country doesnt have it

[danielhowk]

bump