$200-$500 Dorm / Apartment 2.1 Speakers

Hello everyone. I have been frequenting this forum for a while but have not posted very often.


Scroll down for the shorter version:


Longer version:
I am currently in the market for a 2.1 system. I have considered 5.1 and 7.1 but decided that I do not have the space for surround sound and would rather just have higher quality drivers to begin with. I currently live in a small dorm room with 1 other person (I do not know the dimensions but they are small of course). When I am home for the summer I am living in a small 3 room apartment with my girlfriend. Because space is an issue I have pretty much ruled out floor standing speakers and am most probably looking for near-field monitors. However, if for some reason sound quality and power could be increased significantly, I wouldn't mind giving up a little bit of extra walking room.

I am currently leaning toward active monitors to save on the cost and space of a receiver. I have looked at the Swan speakers on theaudioinsider.com. I have also looked at the Behringer MS40 speakers. As well as following a few other suggestions from other posts such as the M-Audio AV-40, the Klipsch ProMedia series and even KRK Rokit V8's.

I am willing to buy used if I can find a solid bargain. I've even searched my local craiglists for speakers (this is where I found the KRK's).



Shorter version:

Overall I have a few main questions.

-Should I go active or passive if I do not plan on upgrading for quite a while?
-If I do go passive can I pick up a quality receiver from craiglists / ebay on the cheap? Especially if they are an older model?
-Is $550 even enough to justify passive?
-Is there a significant difference in price to quality ratio between desktop monitors and floor standing models?
-If I go active and grab a 2.0 system and buy a separate sub, how would I go about controlling the output of the sub and speakers? (Sometimes I would want it very loud and other times much quieter in relation to the rest of the system.)



Below is a summary of what I am looking for so that anyone can help give suggestions.

Summary:
-My budget is between $200-$550 shipped.
-I have limited space but don't mind sacrificing it for sound.
-I would prefer sound quality over small size / aesthetics. (Used with nicks etc. is fine)
-I want a 2.1 system.
-I love loud and "ghetto" bass every once in a while. (An overkill sub is a plus)
-I listen to all genres of music. (In order of most listened to: Rock -> Techno / Electronica -> Classic / Acoustic -> Rap -> Country)
-I can wait up to a month to purchase.
-I am willing to buy used.
-I will be playing these mostly from my computer with onboard realtek 7.1 sound for now. (I may buy a sound card in the future).


One setup I really liked was here:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1384202

Can anyone help me get something similar for cheap?

you can get the exact setup you pictured:
http://www.amazon.com/Behringer-MS40-Powered-Studio-Monitors/dp/B000IKSIOM
http://www.amazon.com/BX10S-10-Stud...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1257740231&sr=1-1

$350 + $130 = $480

fits within your $550 budget
should qualify for free shipping

even leaves you about $100 for a soundcard if you wanted to just grab that as well

now regarding your questions from short version:
1. Doesn't matter, its just a benefit that you aren't upgrading that makes active "less stupid", but either is really fine imo

2. Yeah, don't see why not, just takes a lot of time to find something decent, and may require you to repair/refurbish (or at minimum clean) a unit, don't assume 1998 is "old" and don't assume 1974 is "too old"

3. Yeah, why is the notion of passive speakers some "audiophile super expensive" concept, studio monitors are just trendy right now, theres really no uber benefit of passive speakers, quality wise, you just don't get a built in amplifier, which can be good or bad depending on your situation, theres good and bad actives and good and bad passives

4. What do you mean? are desktop monitors/bookshelves more bang for the buck? or what? floorstanding speakers are a bad idea in a small area, especially if you're gonna treat them like furniture, because they aren't in an optimal setting (larger speaker likes larger room), given your summary, I'd probably get bookshelves/monitors based on space

5. You're gonna connect the stereo signal to the sub, and an HPF out to the stereo speakers' input, there will be some variable controls on the sub for xover and gain, as well as on the stereo speakers, will let you do what you want

Thank you for the reply.

However, since I am a poor college student I am attempting to avoid the upper end of my budget unless it truly is worth it.

I was also wondering if it would be a stupid idea to try and save some money and use an H100 as the sub.

http://cgi.ebay.com/H100-BIC-Acoust...mQQptZSpeakers_Subwoofers?hash=item4835cf53ce

It is a little larger but I really don't mind sacrificing space to save money.

Does anyone know how this sub or any other larger + cheaper sub will compare to the BX10S?

Remember, I don't mind used and/or ugly and/or large as long as it sounds great and saves me some cash.


Thanks for your time.

-Should I go active or passive if I do not plan on upgrading for quite a while?

Click to expand...

I'm personally a fan of passives.

-If I do go passive can I pick up a quality receiver from craiglists / ebay on the cheap? Especially if they are an older model?

Click to expand...

You may find it hard to believe, but if you are looking for excellent quality of sound for cheap, vintage equipment is THE way to go. There is definite truth in the saying 'they don't build them like they used to.' You can very easily find a solid receiver and a pair of speakers for much less than a new system. Browse around ebay.

Be careful with your sub selection. In a small room or apartment, you don't need much to really fill the space.

-Is $550 even enough to justify passive?

Click to expand...

Yes it is. If you choose to go vintage or even buy new, $550 will net you a solid system. If you can catch a good deal at Fry's or elsewhere, it gets even better. I picked up a pair of Infinity 362 for $99 each from Fry's. Depending on the speakers you do get, you may be able to skip the sub.

-Is there a significant difference in price to quality ratio between desktop monitors and floor standing models?

Click to expand...

Not enough to influence your decision.

-If I go active and grab a 2.0 system and buy a separate sub, how would I go about controlling the output of the sub and speakers? (Sometimes I would want it very loud and other times much quieter in relation to the rest of the system.)

Click to expand...

The sub will take the input and filter out what it wants (low frequencies). There are controls on the back of the sub for adjusting its volume and crossover.


Take a look on some of the dedicated audio forums if you want more specific or detailed help. The guys over at audiokarma are a great help source.

AnimusImmodicus said:

Thank you for the reply.

However, since I am a poor college student I am attempting to avoid the upper end of my budget unless it truly is worth it.

I was also wondering if it would be a stupid idea to try and save some money and use an H100 as the sub.

http://cgi.ebay.com/H100-BIC-Acoust...mQQptZSpeakers_Subwoofers?hash=item4835cf53ce

It is a little larger but I really don't mind sacrificing space to save money.

Does anyone know how this sub or any other larger + cheaper sub will compare to the BX10S?

Remember, I don't mind used and/or ugly and/or large as long as it sounds great and saves me some cash.


Thanks for your time.

Click to expand...

used equipment is hard to suggest, because mostly you never know what you're gonna get
take a look around, google is your friend for finding info about vintage gear, see what you can find and so on

as far as "will a larger sub be better", yes and no, big can mean slow, which can mean flabby, but big can also mean loud, which can mean authoritative, it really depends on the sub itself

honestly I really wouldn't go for the biggest possible sub in a small room, it'll just be overpowering (a 10" home audio sub is nothing like a 10" car or computer audio sub, it *will* bump)

Definitely purchase passive speakers and a used receiver.

Are tower speakers an option?

I would definitely purchase a subwoofer, but your neighbors may not like it. The Energy C-200 bookshelf speakers should fit the bill nicely. I bought a speaker kit from Parts-express and am extremely happy. I also added a Dayton Elite (HSU) 10" sub to my computer since I love bass.

There are quite a few threads on good 2.1 setups. The BIC-100 is supposed to be a respectable sub, but I haven't heard it. I can vouch for the Epik Dynasty though.

I would go with the KRK monitors, myself. No need for a subwoofer, and the sound will be louder, cleaner, and fuller than virtually anything available in the hi-fi universe. One thing should be remembered about studio monitors, though. They cast an amazing stereo field (almost like wearing headphones), but they will sound bad if you are not sitting directly in that stereo field.

BakedA|aska said:

I would go with the KRK monitors, myself. No need for a subwoofer...

Click to expand...

I can hear below 48 Hz. Nothing compares to a proper sub that can go below 20 Hz at -3db. I would definitely buy the KRK Monitor 8's over the other KRK monitors though if you do go that route.

OP, also remember that using optical out to a receiver negates the need to purchase a soundcard. That saves you money now. If you buy any monitor speakers, they need an analog signal from the motherboard or soundcard and you will likely hear feedback with the integrated audio. Therefore, you will have to purchase a soundcard now if you purchase studio monitor speakers.

BakedAlaska, the specs on my BR-1 speakers state 43 Hz at -3dB (lower than the KRK monitors), but I don't notice a drop until ~35 Hz. My HSU VTF2-MK3 sub goes down to 18 Hz, and my Epik Dynasty goes down to 14 Hz. I know what real bass is: it's sitting in my family room.

obobski said:

used equipment is hard to suggest, because mostly you never know what you're gonna get
take a look around, google is your friend for finding info about vintage gear, see what you can find and so on

as far as "will a larger sub be better", yes and no, big can mean slow, which can mean flabby, but big can also mean loud, which can mean authoritative, it really depends on the sub itself

honestly I really wouldn't go for the biggest possible sub in a small room, it'll just be overpowering (a 10" home audio sub is nothing like a 10" car or computer audio sub, it *will* bump)

Click to expand...

Would you suggest getting the MS40's or some other monitors and then just searching for a used sub in the next few months? I really want a sub at some point but I would definitely be happy just having quality speakers for now. Also, I'm assuming you mean that the home audio sub is louder?

J Macker said:

Definitely purchase passive speakers and a used receiver.

Are tower speakers an option?

I would definitely purchase a subwoofer, but your neighbors may not like it. The Energy C-200 bookshelf speakers should fit the bill nicely. I bought a speaker kit from Parts-express and am extremely happy. I also added a Dayton Elite (HSU) 10" sub to my computer since I love bass.

There are quite a few threads on good 2.1 setups. The BIC-100 is supposed to be a respectable sub, but I haven't heard it. I can vouch for the Epik Dynasty though.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't that sub absolutely destroy my small room? From my limited knowledge it appears to have an abundance of power.

BakedA|aska said:

I would go with the KRK monitors, myself. No need for a subwoofer, and the sound will be louder, cleaner, and fuller than virtually anything available in the hi-fi universe. One thing should be remembered about studio monitors, though. They cast an amazing stereo field (almost like wearing headphones), but they will sound bad if you are not sitting directly in that stereo field.

Click to expand...

When you say I won't need a subwoofer are you considering that I have a ghetto blaster personality on the weekends? Also, how bad will it sound? I plan on moving around the room while still listening to music. Otherwise I would just wear my headphones.

AnimusImmodicus said:

Wouldn't that sub absolutely destroy my small room? From my limited knowledge it appears to have an abundance of power.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it was a joke. I wasn't actually suggesting for you to purchase the $1300 Epik. From what you're saying though, I don't think you will be happy with the bass output from any bookshelf speakers or studio monitors. Take a look at the ESW10, it's supposed to be a good subwoofer and you should be able to find it for < $200.

Check out the Dayton Elite 10" as well. I'm very happy with it.

J Macker said:

I can hear below 48 Hz. Nothing compares to a proper sub that can go below 20 Hz at -3db. I would definitely buy the KRK Monitor 8's over the other KRK monitors though if you do go that route.

OP, also remember that using optical out to a receiver negates the need to purchase a soundcard. That saves you money now. If you buy any monitor speakers, they need an analog signal from the motherboard or soundcard and you will likely hear feedback with the integrated audio. Therefore, you will have to purchase a soundcard now if you purchase studio monitor speakers.

BakedAlaska, the specs on my BR-1 speakers state 43 Hz at -3dB (lower than the KRK monitors), but I don't notice a drop until ~35 Hz. My HSU VTF2-MK3 sub goes down to 18 Hz, and my Epik Dynasty goes down to 14 Hz. I know what real bass is: it's sitting in my family room.

Click to expand...

My motherboard has an S-PDIF output. Would that be sufficient to connect to the receiver with? I guess I really don't understand why having a receiver negates the need for a soundcard. I realize the receiver will take care of the amplification / eq. But isn't the receiver still limited by coming from a bad source (onboard audio)? I would honestly prefer a passive setup since the receiver can accept input from multiple devices without switching cables. However, it adds a whole new layer of complication to my purchase and I'm not sure if it's worth it.

J Macker said:

Yeah, it was a joke. I wasn't actually suggesting for you to purchase the $1300 Epik. From what you're saying though, I don't think you will be happy with the bass output from any bookshelf speakers or studio monitors. Take a look at the ESW10, it's supposed to be a good subwoofer and you should be able to find it for < $200.

Check out the Dayton Elite 10" as well. I'm very happy with it.

Click to expand...

I didn't check the price. I just saw 18" 1500w and that it weighed 150lbs shipped and wondered how they made it cheap enough to fit in my budget lol. Also I google product searched the ESW10 and it has quite a ridiculous list of different prices. Some are below $100 (I'm assuming shipping is really high though). Should I avoid the lesser known vendors selling them for really cheap?

AnimusImmodicus said:

My motherboard has an S-PDIF output. Would that be sufficient to connect to the receiver with? I guess I really don't understand why having a receiver negates the need for a soundcard. I realize the receiver will take care of the amplification / eq. But isn't the receiver still limited by coming from a bad source (onboard audio)?

Click to expand...

If you are feeding an analog signal to the receiver, then a soundcard would improve the sound (the sound card converts the digital stream of audio to analog, then sends the analog signal to be amplified). S-PDIF is digital, however.

The "quality" of the sound you hear is determined (in your specific question) by the component that converts the digital signal to analog so you can hear it (called the DAC-> digital-analog converter). If you pass the receiver a digital signal, it will convert that signal into analog and pass it along, amplified of course, to your speakers. It is the DAC for that situation.

Very common misconception: If you use a sound card to pass a digital signal to the receiver, the "quality" will be better.

If the sound card passes a digital signal to the receiver, it is no longer acting as the DAC (which is why you buy a sound card ). The signal "quality" is in the DAC, not the digital audio source.

Whew!

Hope that helps

ToMMyGuN said:

If you are feeding an analog signal to the receiver, then a soundcard would improve the sound (the sound card converts the digital stream of audio to analog, then sends the analog signal to be amplified). S-PDIF is digital, however.

The "quality" of the sound you hear is determined (in your specific question) by the component that converts the digital signal to analog so you can hear it (called the DAC-> digital-analog converter). If you pass the receiver a digital signal, it will convert that signal into analog and pass it along, amplified of course, to your speakers. It is the DAC for that situation.

Very common misconception: If you use a sound card to pass a digital signal to the receiver, the "quality" will be better.

If the sound card passes a digital signal to the receiver, it is no longer acting as the DAC (which is why you buy a sound card ). The signal "quality" is in the DAC, not the digital audio source.

Whew!

Hope that helps

Click to expand...

Yes that helped. Now I have several other questions. The overall question is how do you determine the quality of a receiver?

When a receiver lists power output as 100w x 5, how do you interpret this? Will the receiver power a 400w sub? Or does the sub always amplify itself?

What do I need to know about impedance?

Can someone breakdown the specs for a certain receiver for me and explain what they mean and how to look for an appropriate receiver of my own?



For example, I found these on craigslist really cheap? Why are they good or bad choices?

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1456928897.html
http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1455164708.html
http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1451850907.html

Btw I live near pittsburgh if anyone wants to look at any of the other receivers / speakers and suggest any bargains. But more importantly explain why. I kind of want to learn in the process of purchasing.

AnimusImmodicus said:

I would honestly prefer a passive setup since the receiver can accept input from multiple devices without switching cables. However, it adds a whole new layer of complication to my purchase and I'm not sure if it's worth it.

Click to expand...

It is absolutely worth it. Watch Craigslist for a used Onkyo or Denon receiver. Many receivers without HDMI can be had for <$100. You'll get at least 80w per channel with a receiver as well. Think of it as your nice $100 sound card. If you have a pair of high quality earbuds, you'll know that integrated audio has horrible feedback.

AnimusImmodicus said:

Should I avoid the lesser known vendors selling them for really cheap?

Click to expand...

Always. Amazon sells the ESW-8 for $160 shipped.
The BIC Venturi V1020 is a better option $160 from from Parts-express or Provantage (Ritzcamera may be good, but I'd research them first).

As for passive speakers, I'd recommend the Energy C-200 from audioadvisor.

AnimusImmodicus said:

Yes that helped. Now I have several other questions. The overall question is how do you determine the quality of a receiver?

I am not qualified to recommend a receiver in terms of DAC quality, I use my Xfi for that, my receiver is just an amp

When a receiver lists power output as 100w x 5, how do you interpret this? Will the receiver power a 400w sub? Or does the sub always amplify itself?

That means it is a 5.1 channel receiver, and it will deliver 100watts to each full channel (100w to left, right, surround right, surround left, and center.) the ".1" is the low freqs sent to the sub, and for this receiver it is not amplified, only relayed. I have sort of a unique situation as my receiver includes a built in sub amp (See pic)

Note the 6 x 100W - it is delivering the above power to 5 channels plus 100W to my connected passive sub. I would recommend a powered(active) sub though, it is the industry standard for stand alone receivers now adays to provide an un-amplifed signal to subs (my receiver is from the early to mid 90's i believe; Craigslist find)

What do I need to know about impedance?

Again, I can't answer that from a practical stand point, I don't want to run my mouth what i can say is that impedance, in speaker circuits, is treated like resistance (both are measured in ohms). I believe a lower impedance means potential higher volumes, but don't quote me (the extent of my electrical knowledge is limited by physics 202 here at UW madison. Will rectify that next semester )

Click to expand...

Whew x2!

For receivers, THD is total harmonic distortion. Lower is better. Look for it in the manufacturer specs.
The sound processor also matters, but I don't know enough about them. Stick with Denon or Onkyo and you should be okay. Some of the older Yamaha receivers should be okay, but they're not common.

Subwoofers are usually self-powered. You just connect the sub with an RCA cable to your receiver for a low voltage signal. A receiver with 100w x 5 is 100 watts per channel, and 5 channels for a typical 5.1 setup.

ToMMyGuN said:

If you are feeding an analog signal to the receiver, then a soundcard would improve the sound (the sound card converts the digital stream of audio to analog, then sends the analog signal to be amplified). S-PDIF is digital, however.

The "quality" of the sound you hear is determined (in your specific question) by the component that converts the digital signal to analog so you can hear it (called the DAC-> digital-analog converter). If you pass the receiver a digital signal, it will convert that signal into analog and pass it along, amplified of course, to your speakers. It is the DAC for that situation.

Very common misconception: If you use a sound card to pass a digital signal to the receiver, the "quality" will be better.

If the sound card passes a digital signal to the receiver, it is no longer acting as the DAC (which is why you buy a sound card ). The signal "quality" is in the DAC, not the digital audio source.

Whew!

Hope that helps

Click to expand...

not this rumor again

the receiver does not negate the soundcard, and a soundcard is not purchased JUST for its D/A
the soundcard is simply not using its D/A, but theres still hefty D/D processing taking place

you can still have improvements with a soundcard and a receiver, simply in terms of extra effects/processing features available with a soundcard
however the quality gains may or may not be noticed, if the onboard solution has a lot of noise, yes, a soundcard will improve things, however this is EXTREMELY rare via S/PDIF on modern solutions

regarding receiver specs:
J Macker got THD covered
SNR, IMD, and anything else from alphabet soup is a similar measure of quality, basically it all explains how much signal you get vs how much noise, how loud/obnoxious that noise is, and what "ideal" is for minimizing that noise

impedance (measured in ohms) relates to the kind of load the unit can handle, 8 ohms is very common, 4 ohms is probably next most common, ideally you want a receiver that can drive 4 ohms stable, as its usually a sign of a better amplifier, but this isn't to say its a requirement, just don't connect 4ohm speakers to a model that says 8 ohm minimum across the board, it doesn't really have anything to do with "loudness", that hinges more on the speaker (look at SPL efficiency, will tell you right on the box), but it can influence power output (which can indirectly influence "loudness"), for example on a proper amplifier, you will probably get somewhat more power into a 4ohm load, vs an 8ohm or 16ohm load, however you generally should never be running your speakers/amps at 100%

basically don't worry too much about impedance, you can get pretty technical with these kinds of things, but it isn't all that important for every-day use, just try to get it to "match" (so if the receiver you want/get says 4ohm minimum, 16 ohm maximum, get speakers that are somwhere in that range, like 6ohm or 8ohm (it'll say "nominal", don't worry about that (I can explain if you want, but its just "fluff"))

as far as sound processor for the receiver, this is likely the DSP inside, anything between ~1990 and ~2003 is going to have some fairly basic hardware to accomplish this, in terms of how much heavy lifting the chip can do (stuff available today is approaching/exceeding what a P4 could do ~6-8 years ago ), and fairly old stuff probably doesn't even have a dedicated DSP to do anything, I wouldn't worry too much, it doesn't do a whole lot for SQ (in terms of "I have more processing power, my sound is better", not really), I like the suggestion for Onkyo and Denon, but I'd like to add a few other brands into that:

Yamaha (the older stuff can be godlike, just know what you're looking for)
h/k (Harman/Kardon)
Technics (the really old stuff usually *is* godlike)
Sony (they actually made inexpensive quality gear at a time)


as far as what you found:
the first Sony looks like it was part of a HTIB kit (I'm gonna make a mega wide sweeping generalization: usually silver means HTIB kit with Sony, that one I'm saying HTIB because the guy included speaker specs with the unit's specs)
the Optimus is an Optimus, meh (its Radio Shack's in-house brand, and its stereo)
the next Sony, no idea honestly

I'd honestly be weary of a lot of the all digital/all computer receivers you can purchase used, most people don't get rid of the super fancy stuff, at least not if it can do digital, because its still relevant today
whereas high end analog units flow like a river, because people see them and go "this isn't digital, its obviously crap"

the second issue is that even a cheapie receiver/amp from the 1970's or early to mid 1980's is probably still going to be fairly high quality end to end, when digital equipment came onto the scene in the late 1980's they could reduce costs HEAVILY by switching to do-it-all type chips, sometimes this actually works out better, sometimes it just creates a cheapie low-end unit, just be aware of that (and most modern stuff has "bridged" the gap between high end pure analog and high end analog/digital equipment, and inexpensive stuff today isn't all that bad as a result, its just some of that early/mid 1990's "IM DIGITAL" stuff you wanna watch out for)

Wow. Thanks for the long explanation obobski.

Are you saying that the HTIB (Home Theater In A Box?) receiver will not work with other speakers? Or that they are generally crap. My uncle actually gave a yamaha HTIB to me that was $1400 or whatever in 1998 when he bought it. It didn't seem like anything amazing to me though. It was 5.1 and the subwoofer had to be used with the system or it would not work. Maybe this is what you mean?


I looked around and here are a few things I found on the craig according to your suggestions.

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1453337254.html

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1427518892.html

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1437432200.html

first yamaha has the most features, but its an HTR (Yamaha's cheaper line, doesn't mean its bad, just keep in mind)

last onkyo is good looking, as long as nothing is wrong, will be stereo only though

as far as HTIBs, they aren't always junk, but generally they're proprietary or otherwise don't work out with equipment beyond what came in the box, which is why I'd honestly avoid that route if you can, mostly because you want to be able to expand things in the future, right?

honestly if the goal is to turn this into a surround sound system or similar, and you've got the cash, that yamaha looks nice

Sounds like you need a set of AudioEngine A5's [$350. Less if you use coupons (retailmenot.com)] + a 12" Sub. Maybe BIC or Premier Acoustic [I think like $200ish]. A 10" might suffice depending how "ghetto" you're looking for. Each person's level of acceptability is different.

Get a soundcard!

My desires are basically the same as yours. The A5's are great for me. Haven't had the dough for a subwoofer yet but The A5's are not bad if you crank them up a little bit. They WILL require a sub though for "ghetto-ness."

first yamaha has the most features, but its an HTR (Yamaha's cheaper line, doesn't mean its bad, just keep in mind)

last onkyo is good looking, as long as nothing is wrong, will be stereo only though

as far as HTIBs, they aren't always junk, but generally they're proprietary or otherwise don't work out with equipment beyond what came in the box, which is why I'd honestly avoid that route if you can, mostly because you want to be able to expand things in the future, right?

honestly if the goal is to turn this into a surround sound system or similar, and you've got the cash, that yamaha looks nice

Click to expand...

I will not go straight to surround sound. However, if I can mix speakers I still have the speakers from the Yamaha HTIB system I mentioned in my last post. I'm assuming they would work with this receiver to fill out the back if I wanted?

If you think it's the best deal I'll probably go with it since I may expand in the future and am wary of buying older parts (Being born in the digital age doesn't help this either). Are there any problem areas that you can see? What exactly is meant by cheaper? Will it break faster? Will it buzz? Does it handle less power? etc. You said the receiver looks nice. Do you mean it looks nice for the price? Or it just looks nice? Besides HDMI what will I not be able to do with this receiver?

I don't know how much of a BS selling point it is... But what is this night listening feature? Does it just normalize loud sounds to a medium level volume?

Also what do you mean by stereo only? 2.0?

Thanks again for the help obobski I really appreciate it.


EDIT:
Also I noticed this...

"Selectable 9-Band Subwoofer Crossover
Subwoofer Phase Select"

I have no clue what is meant by the phase select. However, does the selectable 9-band sub crossover mean I will only have 9 choices for a crossover point? Is this acceptable? Or will it be a PITA in when trying to pair my speakers and a sub?

obobski said:

not this rumor again

the receiver does not negate the soundcard, and a soundcard is not purchased JUST for its D/A
the soundcard is simply not using its D/A, but theres still hefty D/D processing taking place

you can still have improvements with a soundcard and a receiver, simply in terms of extra effects/processing features available with a soundcard
however the quality gains may or may not be noticed, if the onboard solution has a lot of noise, yes, a soundcard will improve things, however this is EXTREMELY rare via S/PDIF on modern solutions

Click to expand...

Haha yes this old rumor - Thanks for *almost* backing me up there obobski I guess if your S/PDIF is bad on you mobo, then if you upgrade to a better S/PDIF connector on a sound card it only makes sense the "quality" will be better

I love the term "quality" in the audio world. The word "quality" is relative here - If it sounds good to me, its a "quality" setup!

Unless I find another deal before this weekend I will probably buy the yamaha receiver.

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1453337254.html

It seems to get the job done and is within a reasonable price range as far as I'm concerned. If anyone can advise for or against this I'd appreciate it.

Also if anyone can give tips on validating the quality of a used product (other than simply hooking it up to speakers) I'd appreciate that as well.


EDIT:

I also found this receiver posted today for $100 cheaper.

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1459819601.html

Is it a better deal? Thanks.

I had a (and currently have a different) Kenwood receiver / Large speaker setup that was awesome. I have had great luck with kenwood. That being said, I definetly would NOTpay 200 dollars for that setup. I think you should go with the Onkyo for $50 (offer $40?) and get some quality fronts for about $200 (Energy C-200's?) then spend some cash on a good sub.

I do think craigslist is the way to go for the receiver, but rarely do i ever find decent speakers on craigs. I would buy them out right (or go garage saleing like i did )

Ooops, I pasted the wrong link. This is the link I meant to post. (I have edited the post too).

http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/ele/1453337254.html

J Macker said:

I can hear below 48 Hz. Nothing compares to a proper sub that can go below 20 Hz at -3db. I would definitely buy the KRK Monitor 8's over the other KRK monitors though if you do go that route.

OP, also remember that using optical out to a receiver negates the need to purchase a soundcard. That saves you money now. If you buy any monitor speakers, they need an analog signal from the motherboard or soundcard and you will likely hear feedback with the integrated audio. Therefore, you will have to purchase a soundcard now if you purchase studio monitor speakers.

BakedAlaska, the specs on my BR-1 speakers state 43 Hz at -3dB (lower than the KRK monitors), but I don't notice a drop until ~35 Hz. My HSU VTF2-MK3 sub goes down to 18 Hz, and my Epik Dynasty goes down to 14 Hz. I know what real bass is: it's sitting in my family room.

Click to expand...

Hmm, where to start?

Firstly, a lot of engineered sound bits (like CDs, for example) have the bass rolled off below 40hz. This is done because the vast majority of playback devices are incapable of reproducing frequencies below 40hz without unwanted harmonics in the more audible ranges (particularly between 40hz and 120hz) Sure, I guess you can "hear" those subfrequencies, but there is seldom any sound of appreciable value down there. Anything below roughly 20hz (for most people) you feel, not hear. Subwoofers are cool if you really want to shake your neighbor's walls, but honestly, you aren't losing much by going with a pair of 8" studio monitors, and you are gaining a hell of a lot. There'll still be plenty of bass in the mix, and you'll actually be able to hear other frequencies at the same time. On top of it, your speakers will be clearer than any hi-fi system costing less than $10k.

Bass response is extremely, EXTREMELY overrated. I guess they've gotta find a way to capitalize on the hip-hoppers somehow.

BakedA|aska said:

Hmm, where to start?

Firstly, a lot of engineered sound bits (like CDs, for example) have the bass rolled off below 40hz. This is done because the vast majority of playback devices are incapable of reproducing frequencies below 40hz without unwanted harmonics in the more audible ranges (particularly between 40hz and 120hz) Sure, I guess you can "hear" those subfrequencies, but there is seldom any sound of appreciable value down there. Anything below roughly 20hz (for most people) you feel, not hear. Subwoofers are cool if you really want to shake your neighbor's walls, but honestly, you aren't losing much by going with a pair of 8" studio monitors, and you are gaining a hell of a lot. There'll still be plenty of bass in the mix, and you'll actually be able to hear other frequencies at the same time. On top of it, your speakers will be clearer than any hi-fi system costing less than $10k.

Bass response is extremely, EXTREMELY overrated. I guess they've gotta find a way to capitalize on the hip-hoppers somehow.

Click to expand...

Ah, but the girlfriend likes the bass. I basically just want the option of toggling the bass on and off, or just turning the the gain down really low so it's not as noticeable. Sometimes though I just want the option of rocking my walls even if I have to throw earplugs in my ears.

AnimusImmodicus said:

Ah, but the girlfriend likes the bass. I basically just want the option of toggling the bass on and off, or just turning the the gain down really low so it's not as noticeable. Sometimes though I just want the option of rocking my walls even if I have to throw earplugs in my ears.

Click to expand...

If you really *MUST* have a subwoofer, KRK does sell one that is matched to their studio monitors. I am not kidding when I say that the best hi-fi system 10 grand could buy won't hold a candle to a pair of KRK monitors and a computer with a decent add-in soundcard, in terms of sound clarity. There just no comparison.

BakedA|aska said:

Sure, I guess you can "hear" those subfrequencies, but there is seldom any sound of appreciable value down there. Anything below roughly 20hz (for most people) you feel, not hear.
...Bass response is extremely, EXTREMELY overrated. I guess they've gotta find a way to capitalize on the hip-hoppers somehow.

Click to expand...

Perhaps it's not worth arguing with you. But, you obviously do not own any high end equipment that is capable of bass. Therefore, you also don't notice what you're missing since you don't have a sub. There are quite a few Blu-rays that make good use of my large sub. Oh, and I'm not a "hip-hopper", I'm a nuclear engineer with a small farm.

BakedA|aska said:

Bass response is extremely, EXTREMELY overrated. I guess they've gotta find a way to capitalize on the hip-hoppers somehow.

Click to expand...

I would say bass is underrated and I don't even listen to hip hop. My sub makes immense difference and it only costs $200...

J Macker said:

Perhaps it's not worth arguing with you. But, you obviously do not own any high end equipment that is capable of bass. Therefore, you also don't notice what you're missing since you don't have a sub. There are quite a few Blu-rays that make good use of my large sub. Oh, and I'm not a "hip-hopper", I'm a nuclear engineer with a small farm.

Click to expand...

Your statement is wholly laughable, and you should realize that you're telling a professional sound engineer that he doesn't own any high end equipment capable of bass. Really, your statement made my night. Thank you for that.

The human ear can pick up from 20hz to 20,000hz, and you're preoccupied with one octave of subaudible frequences?

Get real, glow-in-the-dark farm boy. Your Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings records probably don't make a peep beneath 40hz as it is.

You are all a bunch of idiots too stupid to understand people appreciate different things.