The Audio Board's Recommended Gear

[Rodinski]

37 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

Are those any good? What do they sound like?

They aren't EXACTLY the same, but the differences are so minor their isn't any real tangible difference.

 

Here is a review: 

I have the 5s.  Fairly neutral response.  There is a bit of a U shape, but not much.  Detail is phenomenal.

[Pankaic]

Any thoughts on the Stax SRS-2170/SR-207? Zeos seems quite infatuated with them...

 

[Dackzy]

6 hours ago, Pankaic said:

Any thoughts on the Stax SRS-2170/SR-207? Zeos seems quite infatuated with them...

 

I have a thought about Zeos and that is, don't trust him.

[GlassBomb]

8 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

I have a thought about Zeos and that is, don't trust him.

I have learned that you never want to trust any reviewers. Because everyone will be just a bit different. Especially when it comes to audio, something that is really subjective.

 

I personally watch Zeos for his opinions, but I don't take them to heart. And I find him, and his reviewing style charismatic.

[Dackzy]

13 minutes ago, GlassBomb said:

I have learned that you never want to trust any reviewers. Because everyone will be just a bit different. Especially when it comes to audio, something that is really subjective.

 

I personally watch Zeos for his opinions, but I don't take them to heart. And I find him, and his reviewing style charismatic.

I think he is funny, because he is sometimes insanely wrong about things. His reviews are really really opinion based and it does not help that he is really sensitive to highs and from what I can see and hear his hearing is not that good. I would never ever buy something, just because he thinks it is good, I value is oppion to almost nothing.

[SSL]

1 hour ago, GlassBomb said:

And I find him, and his reviewing style charismatic.

 

They make me want to throw up.

 

Him, because of how lame and wrong he can be, and his reviewing style because of the man-cave roller coaster style of filming. Looks like a fucking Cloverfield video.

[GlassBomb]

4 minutes ago, SSL said:

They make me want to throw up.

 

Him, because of how lame and wrong he can be, and his reviewing style because of the man-cave roller coaster style of filming. Looks like a fucking Cloverfield video.

Each to their own.

[Pankaic]

Well, aside from the ad hominem against Zeos's ability to review audio products, do any of you have opinions about the actual headphones? I'm very curious about them.

[vanished]

13 hours ago, SSL said:

 

They make me want to throw up.

 

Him, because of how lame and wrong he can be, and his reviewing style because of the man-cave roller coaster style of filming. Looks like a fucking Cloverfield video.

While we're on this topic, I've been looking around at the possibility of upgrading from my K240's that are older than I am, and I was looking at the M50x.  Everyone seemed to love it until I came across him, which makes them sound terrible.  Any opinions on that? 

[SuicideAnomaly]

9 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

While we're on this topic, I've been looking around at the possibility of upgrading from my K240's that are older than I am, and I was looking at the M50x.  Everyone seemed to love it until I came across him, which makes them sound terrible.  Any opinions on that? 

You're not going to find much love for them 'round these parts.

[vanished]

3 minutes ago, SuicideAnomaly said:

You're not going to find much love for them 'round these parts.

I've heard everything from "best for the money" & "you'd have to spend another $100 easy to match them" to "zero soundstage, sound is pounded into your head" & "painful highs"... so I really don't know that to think.  I was just wondering about opinions on that reviewer honestly but maybe I'll make a new thread about this specifically so I don't drag this off topic. (feel free to answer though )

[SuicideAnomaly]

11 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I've heard everything from "best for the money" & "you'd have to spend another $100 easy to match them" to "zero soundstage, sound is pounded into your head" & "painful highs"... so I really don't know that to think.  I was just wondering about opinions on that reviewer honestly but maybe I'll make a new thread about this specifically so I don't drag this off topic. (feel free to answer though )

They are quite possibly the most over-hyped piece of audio gear on the face of the planet. Also, for us Canucks, they are by no means a good value. If you really want something from that family, you're better off getting the cheaper sibling M40x, as that is where the true value for money is. However, considering your current pair of headphones, I would consider it a side-grade, at best.

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, SuicideAnomaly said:

They are quite possibly the most over-hyped piece of audio gear on the face of the planet. Also, for us Canucks, they are by no means a good value. If you really want something from that family, you're better off getting the cheaper sibling M40x, as that is where the true value for money is. However, considering your current pair of headphones, I would consider it a side-grade, at best.

Yeah I noticed that they are like $120 US which could be about $150 CAD, but yet they typically sell for $200 to $250 for some reason  I actually sent a message to NCIX about this hoping to get some more info on it  

 

Really?  You think a ~30 year old pair of what are now $100 headphones would have about the same sound as the M40x?

[SuicideAnomaly]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah I noticed that they are like $120 US which could be about $150 CAD, but yet they typically sell for $200 to $250 for some reason  I actually sent a message to NCIX about this hoping to get some more info on it  

 

Really?  You think a ~30 year old pair of what are now $100 headphones would have about the same sound as the M40x?

Of course they won't have the same sound, as no two pair of headphones will. Every pair of headphones has its unique sound signature.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, SuicideAnomaly said:

Of course they won't have the same sound, as no two pair of headphones will. Every pair of headphones has its unique sound signature.

ok not the "same" but similar quality then  And thanks for the suggestion on the other thread, I'll definitely have a good look at those!

[Curufinwe_wins]

I'd love to see speaker consensus information here, although segregating a bit into wattage differences might be a good idea (since we all know at the same volume a 7.5W rms speaker is going to be tuned differently than a 300W rms speaker.)

 

And the introduction to how much wattage people will want would be a very good thing (like how 25W 2.1s are almost overkill for a bedroom/small office).

[vanished]

48 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I'd love to see speaker consensus information here, although segregating a bit into wattage differences might be a good idea (since we all know at the same volume a 7.5W rms speaker is going to be tuned differently than a 300W rms speaker.)

 

And the introduction to how much wattage people will want would be a very good thing (like how 25W 2.1s are almost overkill for a bedroom/small office).

I can attest to that!   I had a cheap (but shockingly good sounding) 2.1 setup that consisted of two 5.5 W satellites and a 9 W sub.  Never took it above 3/4 volume and even at that it was extremely loud.

[Pankaic]

54 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

And the introduction to how much wattage people will want would be a very good thing (like how 25W 2.1s are almost overkill for a bedroom/small office).

Meanwhile this 200W behemoth... https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-ProMedia-Certified-Computer-Speaker/dp/B000062VUO

[Curufinwe_wins]

4 minutes ago, Pankaic said:

Meanwhile this 200W behemoth... https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-ProMedia-Certified-Computer-Speaker/dp/B000062VUO

Hey, my parents still have some 4 foot tower speakers with 11 inch subs.

 

I don't even know the total wattage of that those things... They are insane, 1/4 volume rocks the whole house.

[vanished]

34 minutes ago, Pankaic said:

Meanwhile this 200W behemoth... https://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-ProMedia-Certified-Computer-Speaker/dp/B000062VUO

Yeah I've never understood setups like that - the hyper-wattage, super-compact 2.1 that's clearly meant for a PC.  There are a few of them actually; iirc logitech makes one too.  you have to wonder A, if they can actually get as loud as you would think, and B, if it sounds any good at those volumes.  Surely the sub would noticeably "separate" from the satellites at that kind of power level.  I know my old 2.1 would.  In those setups where the sub basically has to act as a sub and also the woofers from the satellites, turning it up just makes it all too apparent that the satellites are only handling the high frequencies.

[Pankaic]

28 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah I've never understood setups like that - the hyper-wattage, super-compact 2.1 that's clearly meant for a PC.  There are a few of them actually; iirc logitech makes one too.  you have to wonder A, if they can actually get as loud as you would think, and B, if it sounds any good at those volumes.  Surely the sub would noticeably "separate" from the satellites at that kind of power level.  I know my old 2.1 would.  In those setups where the sub basically has to act as a sub and also the woofers from the satellites, turning it up just makes it all too apparent that the satellites are only handling the high frequencies.

I actually own the ProMedia 2.1s and use them for my PC. They actually can get as loud as you'd expect a system with that much power, but they'll make your ears bleed if you try turning them up that high. I leave everything at about 10% volume and have no complaints, haha. 

[GlassBomb]

46 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah I've never understood setups like that - the hyper-wattage, super-compact 2.1 that's clearly meant for a PC.  There are a few of them actually; iirc logitech makes one too.  you have to wonder A, if they can actually get as loud as you would think, and B, if it sounds any good at those volumes.  Surely the sub would noticeably "separate" from the satellites at that kind of power level.  I know my old 2.1 would.  In those setups where the sub basically has to act as a sub and also the woofers from the satellites, turning it up just makes it all too apparent that the satellites are only handling the high frequencies.

I actually have a pair of Corsair SP2500's that are rated similar to that ProMedia 2.1 setup...

 

Spec sheet says that it is 232 watts total power. 120 of that being the sub. Can probably check how loud I can take these tomorrow when it's not 3am.

[SSL]

3 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I'd love to see speaker consensus information here, although segregating a bit into wattage differences might be a good idea (since we all know at the same volume a 7.5W rms speaker is going to be tuned differently than a 300W rms speaker.)

 

And the introduction to how much wattage people will want would be a very good thing (like how 25W 2.1s are almost overkill for a bedroom/small office).

 

Unless you know something I don't wattage isn't going to be a good predictor of volume, power, quality, or signature. If we do manage to assemble a list of speakers, it will be organized by price, like everything else so far.

[vanished]

14 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

Unless you know something I don't wattage isn't going to be a good predictor of volume, power, quality, or signature. If we do manage to assemble a list of speakers, it will be organized by price, like everything else so far.

Really?  OK, say you had two speakers that promised the same frequency response, but one was rated at 100 W and one at 10 W.  Would the 100 W not be louder?  Or do I have no idea how this works?  

[Curufinwe_wins]

21 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

Unless you know something I don't wattage isn't going to be a good predictor of volume, power, quality, or signature. If we do manage to assemble a list of speakers, it will be organized by price, like everything else so far.

RMS wattage in a speaker is nearly 100% representative of the peak rated loudness (unlike in headphones, speaker impedances are much more uniform generally in the 4-8 Ohm range). At the same distance from the speaker (with the same impedance), a doubling in power output is equivalent to a 3dB gain.

 

Thus a 7.5W Satellite (fairly normal for small desk speakers) outputs at max long-term power (which is what RMS wattage is a rating of), an approximately 15dB lower maximum volume than a 200W Satellite (quite a huge difference).

 

The quality I honestly have no idea about, but it is something I would highly suspect to matter relative to RMS wattage.

 

Imagine for a second that you have a 110 dBA snr (which is obviously the BEST it can be if that is the number advertised), and it probably isn't at either peak or minimum volume (for obvious tuning reasons), thus it is quite probable that a 10W speaker with the same maximum sensitivity as a 200W speaker would give a higher sensitivity at lower volumes (although generally there is a standard to rate SNR at ~2.83V, which is only 1W through a 8 Ohm speaker, and thus obviously next to worthless for playing audio much louder than that).

 

 

In total, unfortunately this makes judging speakers quite a bit more tedious than judging headphones unless we adopt some sort of standard dB to rate at.