Can anyone here suggest me a good floorstanding speaker & amp/reciever setup? Trying to keep costs down where possible
budget, m8
Wharfedale speakers
>>51629638
PIONEER
I
O
N
E
E
R
>>51629820
Maybe £400 all inclusive, give or take
get the best kit you're willing to pay for from here http://www.iplacoustics.co.uk/ipl_acoustics_____transmission_l.htm and hook it up to that one class D amplifier everyone memes about
>>51631065
Are these all meme speakers
>>51631100
NO, the only meme speakers are autistic passive+amp combos like in the OP.
Computer speakers:
>Buy
>Plug in
>Play
Autism speakers:
>Spend hours looking for a good combination and deals
>Second guess yourself endlessly, look to /g/ for guidance
>Receive autistic advice from /g/
>Buy your speakers, amp and wire online
>Wait weeks for shipping (but hey, it's better than talking to people, right⸮)
>Strip wire and setup, being very careful not to cross the terminals
>Put on your Hatsune Miku FLAC rip
>Wires get crossed anyway and your entire setup fries
>Cry self to sleep
>Get mommy to buy you some Corsair™ SP2500s
http://m.richersounds.com/#!/products/floorstanding/1/
I allways get my shit from there even though i dont even live in the uk
Monitor audio and cambridge are both fine
Best is to listen to them in store
>>51631065
This is great, I'll email it to my stupid fucking friend, he asked me for advice, and I build speakers, I design and solder my own crossovers, build my cabinets and everything. He ignored every thing I said and I bought some Bose shit, now he asked me for a portable speaker.
>>51631116
Someone seems upset
And autistic tbqh senpaitachi
>>51631116
So what are meme speakers though? Also that autism setup is easy to do. You dumb?
holy lord
there's not even a shred of useful information in this thread so far
A pair of LSR305 (or behringer 2030A) and as many used subs as you can manage will get you 95% the state of the art.
Here's the exciting reality the past 10 years has brought us:
*Good amps are now trivial to produce. Unless something is outright defective, they're by far the least audible part of the audio chain.
*DSP crossovers have just about surpassed passive in all areas, including price.
*THD is confirmed to be outrageously uncorrelated with human hearing. Harmonic distortion is usually the least likely cause of perceived non-linear distortion.
*Psychoacoustics has shown that controlled dispersion in the 1000Hz-7000Hz range is critical for proper timbre perception. Designs without controlled dispersion in that range are broken for anyone listening outside of the single-seat "sweet spot", falling apart with audible linear distortion.
*Your room influences the quality of bass far more than the woofers. Rooms smaller than an auditorium *require* multiple bass sources, spread across the room, to reproduce accurate bass. Smooth frequency response is by far the most important aspect of bass quality, and smoothness can only happen with many bass sources, no matter how exotic your woofer is. (Floorstanders are disadvantaged by nature for bass repro. since you can't move them around the room.)
>>51631018
You got nice stuff with Monitor Audio, pair it with a decent stereo amp and you're done
>>51631886
How to hook up my LSR 305s to my SP2500 sub?
>>51631924
Like, Monitor Audio MR4 + Tangent Exeo amp
Not OP, but I'm looking for some good floorstanding speakers with good bass response.
Is the Klipsch Synergy F-30 any good?
>>51631886
>A pair of LSR305 (or behringer 2030A) and as many used subs as you can manage will get you 95% the state of the art.
No.
>Here's the exciting reality the past 10 years has brought us:
>*Good amps are now trivial to produce. Unless something is outright defective, they're by far the least audible part of the audio chain.
>*THD is confirmed to be outrageously uncorrelated with human hearing. Harmonic distortion is usually the least likely cause of perceived non-linear distortion.
>*Psychoacoustics has shown that controlled dispersion in the 1000Hz-7000Hz range is critical for proper timbre perception. Designs without controlled dispersion in that range are broken for anyone listening outside of the single-seat "sweet spot", falling apart with audible linear distortion.
>*Your room influences the quality of bass far more than the woofers. Rooms smaller than an auditorium *require* multiple bass sources, spread across the room, to reproduce accurate bass. Smooth frequency response is by far the most important aspect of bass quality, and smoothness can only happen with many bass sources, no matter how exotic your woofer is. (Floorstanders are disadvantaged by nature for bass repro. since you can't move them around the room.)
Real bad case of slowpoke. All this stuff has been shown or done decades age. The only new thing was DSP.
>>51629638
Good floor-standing (tower) speakers start at $600 dollars new, and on up to about $2000, for a pair, for midrange quality.
But you can find some really good used ones, in good condition, worth $1500 to $4000 new, sold at around $300 to $400 by looking on craigslist (over several months). Some people just want to get rid of their speakers and can afford a steep cut in resale value. Expect most things on eBay to cost up to 5x more than what you'd find on craigslist, but you have some guarantee of being able to return bad products.
An amplifier to drive the speakers, if you get it used, can be as low as $100 used, or as high as $600 new/slightly used.
I recommend something like Bowers and Wilkins, Quad (dynamic versions), Martin Logan, Focal, Paradigm, for speakers. And something like Cambridge Audio (not Cambridge Soundworks), Rotel, Music Hall/Creek.
I've never bought audio systems new or at MSRP new, and have always had excellent results.
>>51631886
Can you post a photo of your home set-up please?
>>51631935
Use a wye cable on one of the channels to split it, run one end to the sub, the other to the LSR305.
If you want both channels combined into a mono sub signal, you need to get hold of a summing box, which you can make yourself if you're savvy with soldering.
(Whatever you do, DO NOT reverse the wye cable and use to combine two signals into one, you will blow shit up.)
>>51631953
dear lord, no. awful, harsh horn with rising on-axis response due to a disaster of a crossover. the only reason to use ancient, straight-walled horns like that anymore is for marketing purposes.
think long about why exactly you need floorstanders.
>>51632165
>think long about why exactly you need floorstanders
I would like speakers that can go loud, and submerge me in grand sounds, while remaining crisp and clean, and preferably not costing more than $1000 dollars.
>>51632241
none of that is specific to floorstanders
>>51632260
I'm completely open to suggestions, then.
What should I be looking at?
>>51631886
This is wrong
>>51631116
Computer speakers:
>Buy
>Plug in
>Play tinny sounds thru blastig boxxes :D
What's recommended for $150 or less on just speakers?
>>51632305
cardboard box
>>51632305
http://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-SP-BS22-LR-Designed-Bookshelf-Loudspeakers/dp/B008NCD2LG
Very good budget bookshelf.
>>51632272
Not him. How big is your listening area?
>>51632272
youre talking with someone (>>51632260) who probably owns little dinky table-top speakers made out of plastic and who imagines that everything else is just about as good because he can't afford anything else; poorly made speakers two or three times the height of a bookshelf speaker may not be better than a good bookshelf speaker, but, in general, a larger speaker that is well made, and which has additional woofers, will tend to produce more volume and bass without struggling to produce fine detail than a compatible bookshelf speaker - example of a mediocre floor-stander: any budget range klipsch, jbl, sony, yamaha, etc - example of an okay floor-stander that's not too expensive: anything used for $400 with good reviews - you have to do your research if you are on a limited budget and want quality
>>51631116
This has to be a troll. No one take him seriously.
Playing anything louder than 75db on shitty plastic garbage like that is going to sound atrocious.
is Andrew Jones's new ELAC line good?
>>51632506
I agree best sound/price.....
Have these in bedroom and sound great for what they are..
>>51632527
A 13 x 12 ft box
>>51632543
for example: good quality/price used:
https://maine.craigslist.org/ele/5327281486.html
instead of: meh:
https://maine.craigslist.org/ele/5335380405.html
you won't need an amp for the former set either
ideally you have to listen to them first to see if you like them -- true for any audio item
>>51632506
How would these compare to Klipsch R-15Ms? I bought those for 125 on kind of an impulse buy and I'm trying to figure out if there's something better for the price or if I should just stick with them
>>51632506
https://maine.craigslist.org/ele/5321441284.html
>>51631057
this - tx lines and class D but add an ODAC ftw
>>51631065
Haha. Funny.
>>51632588
It's Andrew Jones, so it cannot be bad. And they are competent options, but not necessarily better than the cheap monitor speakers.
>>51632543
This. A lot of bias on this site toward computer/bookshelf speakers is obviously out of the core age group here being college students/kids who are forced to listen to music in a dorm, bedroom or at their desk.
If you plan on only listening 2-3 away in a room that is <1000cu feet, a bookshelf is the better choice since 5 foot tall floorstanders are overkill in that situation.
But if you want any kind of engaging decibel levels at 6-10 feet away, you're going to have to go floorstander. Bookshelf speakers just run out of gas. Can't move enough air.
why do these people exist?
>>51632733
That's a good point, since putting bookshelf speakers in a larger living room setting can make the sound quite subdued and muffled.
>>51632669
>How would these compare to Klipsch R-15Ms?
I can't really say. Listening for enjoyment (where "flat frequency responses" are less important than they are for mixing/editing purposes. So you can't just look at a speaker/headphone response graph and call it day. Many people find flat boring and unengaging) is a highly subject practice. What you find "harsh," another person might find "clear." One person's "nice laid back treble" is another's "muddy."
That's why audio, in both the speaker/headphone space, is kind of a never ending rabbit hole.
That said, the Klipsches will have a bigger, wider sound and reach higher db with less power due to their efficient horn design. If you like rock or plan to watch movies/play games, the Klipsches are probably the better choice. They'll be a bit less accurate than the Pioneers, but they'll fill the room more.
![delta_pro[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/UyMBUFg.jpg "delta_pro[1].jpg")
>>51632272
>>51632543
if you want to hit movie theater levels in a not-small room, large woofers with large voicecoils are a necessity. like 10" minimum. unfortunately these speakers aren't popular atm.
right now it's very trendy to have skinny tower-style speakers with little baby 6-inch-or-smaller woofers. it's very important to note that this switch in woofer size did not happen because of any design advances, it happened because Marketing.
if you're willing to DIY a kit, $1000 can get you damn close to perfection above 40Hz.
look into the Fusion 10 or 12 from diysoundgroup. the waveguide is massively more advanced than nearly any other waveguide commercially available.
they have 96dB/1w sensitivity, so you can run them at ear-splitting levels off a used entry-level receiver. they use very nice compression drivers instead of dome tweeters, giving them an order of magnitude more thermal capacity and aversion to distortion.
best of all, that waveguide keeps dispersion to a 90deg pattern, boosting intelligibility, detail, spaciousness, and with a sweet spot wider than a couch.
if you CAN'T DIY, then, uh, get LSR305s and spend the rest on subs.
>>51632733
>5 foot tall floorstanders are overkill in that situation.
It would likely sound worse.
Bass volume is main limiting factor with max SPL, which can be softened by sub reinforcement.
Don't like the floorstanding/bookshelf speaker generalization. There are many stand speakers that are gigantic but still better placed on a desk.
>>51632850
>Listening for enjoyment (where "flat frequency responses" are less important than they are for mixing/editing purposes. So you can't just look at a speaker/headphone response graph and call it day
No real listening room will have a totally flat bass response at position before room EQ.
>>51632880
>it happened because Marketing.
WAF :^)
Yeah, I want to feel those soundwaves rolling at me like a tsunami. You don't get that with 6 inch woofers in tiny boxes.
How do those speakers handle "bad rooms?"
>>51632850
I see, thanks anon.
I'll probably just stick with these then. If my budget were bigger I'd go the extra mile like with my other speakers but these will probably be good for my TV.
>>51632543
what? he listed shit that wasn't specific to floorstanders and i told him. very weird projection going on there
>>51632905
I am in agreement over the overemphasis on flat FR graphs that's been popping up on this board. Most speakers sound different with different kinds of music, and the size of the room, and the carpeting and drapes, and where the furniture is, etc., change things. Some speakers with not so great FR on measure sound awesome. Some speakers with flat FR sound like what tepid dishwater feels. People need to leave their homes and try out a range of devices and then get an idea of what they like versus what looks good on one chart at one moment in time. ses it is.
>>51633054
Yeah, and it's the same thing with headphones. Some of those over on headfi got like 50 pairs.
It's the frustrating, yet fun thing, about the hobby. That eternal search for "your" perfect sound.
>>51633054
I meant something a little different. Even if you are specifically looking for flat, you won't get it.
Genre doesn't doesn't have too much effect, but the individual track production style and instrument choice is huge.
>>51633162
>Some of those over on headfi got like 50 pairs.
I know some of those people. They are not in it for music or sound, but because they wanted to collect something, which happened to be headphones. They usually stick to a handful of headphones for normal use.
>>51632850
>What you find "harsh," another person might find "clear." One person's "nice laid back treble" is another's "muddy."
No, none of this is accurate, though i'm sure it seems that way.
Look into harman's blind testing preference studies. Pretty much everyone---no matter age, gender, culture, or genre preference---wants the same thing when they can't see the speakers.
Everyday frequency response graphs are mostly useless because they're missing a staggering amount of critical info. That doesn't mean the info can't be measured; it can, but nobody bothers. The bizarre, historical way of presenting data has been going for so long that there's too much inertia to stop it.
There are no mastering standards in music, and certainly no standards for particular genres, making it impossible to "tune" for anything in particular without worsening it for everything else.
The only way stop the so-called "Circle of Confusion" is to make the speaker accurate according to psychoacoustic principals (and not platitudes and catch-alls like "flat frequency response").
>>51633351
>Pretty much everyone---no matter age, gender, culture, or genre preference---wants the same thing
Loosely speaking, to within a few dB.
>mastering standards in music
There are some acoustic guidelines, room proportions; they aren't tight enough.
>bizarre, historical way of presenting data has been going for so long that there's too much inertia to stop it.
It is not bizarre, nor useless. Anechoic speaker on-axis is one point of many that grows to dominate at high frequencies. Directivity measurements are conducted by many of the more judicious testers.
>The only way stop the so-called "Circle of Confusion" is to make the speaker accurate according to psychoacoustic principals (and not platitudes and catch-alls like "flat frequency response").
It's like you tried to read a condensed version of Floyd Toole's book (Sound Reproduction - Loudspeakers And Rooms) summary, and managed to miss his points anyway.
>>51632965
better than nearly anything else, since they're one of the few speakers directly designed to combat room interaction instead of pretending the room is invisible.
"controlled directivity" is the only practical way to diminish timbre-altering, image-smearing Early Reflections in rooms without also killing spaciousness. (spaciousness being that full, enveloped feel to the sound. what the audiophile mags call "holography" or whatever.)
big waveguides and big pro-sound woofers is ideal, physics-wise. but yeah, not so much aesthetically.
>>51633351
I am the poster you're responding to, and I totally agree. The psychoacoustic side of the equation is more important in making a good sounding piece of audio equipment than the frequency response side.
Haven't read about the preference studies. Sounds interesting. My only caveat would be is that the more you "listen," you start to develop specific tastes of what you like (as you experiment with different setups, eq's, etc) and you grow out of what initially sounds "good" from a casual listening standpoint (I don't have time to read the study, but I assume preference leaned toward "smiley face" EQ?). I was a smiley eq'er when I was a teenager because of its clear (as a result of the turned up treble) and big sound. Now, I want those midrange details to pop. Point is, if Harman's subjects were just casual listeners (I don't say this out of elitism, since smiley eq always grabs your ear when you're not really paying attention), the study could be a little flawed.
>>51633686
>Haven't read about the preference studies
I have them, the ones in the AES journal. just ask away. Here's a free version, done with headphone testing. More of it can be summarized in Sean Olive's research blog and Floyd Toole's book.
>https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16343460/AES%20139%20Presentation%202015%20Olive%20and%20Welti%20Preferred%20Bass%20and%20Treble%20Levels.pdf
Most of the "trained" listeners are trained by Harman's listening tutorial (to get to know what to listen for and identify) and they tend to a downward sloping in-room response. This loosely generalizes to the rest of the listening population, with greater variation.
>>51633646
Sounds good to me. I am a soundstage whore.
Aesthetically, the builds are pretty cool. I like speakers big and obnoxious.
Know of any people/sites who build these to order? I'm for all DIY, but I also like appreciating (and paying for) the craftsmanship of others.
>>51633792
Thanks!
>>51633686
harman uses trained listeners. everything is double blind. they have a silent air-powered speaker shuttle system that swaps speakers in and out of position. all meant to counteract listener bias and association.
>>51633616
FR graphs are "useless" because of what the don't contain, not what they do. There's precious little information---in the graph itself, in reviews, in the industry---to cue a reader to the fact that measurements are missing, hell, that alternate measurements exist. it's not the data that's bizarre, it's the lack of context the data is used in.
Directivity and power response are measured only by the hardcore, sure, but that has no bearing on the relevancy of the data.
>It's like you tried to read ... and managed to miss his points anyway.
enlighten me.
>>51633799
I don't directly, no. I imagine you might inquire on their forum and see if anyone local to you does that.
Since the kit is glue-n-screw anyway, you could take the assembled cabinets to a local woodworker for veneering/staining or a paint shop.
If you do get someone to design a bespoke cabinet for you, make sure they don't design a nasty lip around the waveguide like in your pic ;)
>>51634070
What on axis does is give you LF extension and behavior in the top octave or a few notes more. Otherwise the rest is defined by speaker directivity and the room itself.
I am unclear with your statement intent, but the directivity is the relevant data that you want, and off axis response measurements are commonly done by those who would even bother to make any measurements of the speaker, even if they do not have all data contained in a contour map.
>enlighten me.
The book.
>https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_l73GVBBlIUYjIwZGI3ZWItYmJlZC00NmM0LWFiMGUtNTcyMWY4MTUxYmM4/edit?pli=1
>>51633162
I usually go to some audio salons when I visit larger cities and try their speakers with CDs I am accustomed to. That or the Magnolia substores, if the sales dudes aren't too pushy or dense.
>>51633351
um, no -- lower cost Klipschs' are harsh, mostly in the very loud midrange -- and this is easily heard in comparison to speakers with great midrange, like the dynamic Quad speakers or B&W
>+-10db
Guys, is there any point in upgrading from my 90's technics amp? What are the criteria for audibly transparent amps?
built them yourself. T-Line if you are into maths.
>>51634334
man, okay.
I understand the import and limitations of an anechoic on-axis measurement. My point is, most people do not. I am not questioning the usefulness of on-axis measurements, I'm questioning the *culture* that allows---either through inaction or malintent---those measurements to act as full representations of a speaker's performance.
there are entire wars on /o/ because the vast majority do not understand that horsepower is a curve, not a single point. The context is that "500HP" actually means "500 (peak)HP. The missing (peak) allows comparison between cars that are unalike in real life performance. Though Peak Horsepower is a real and useful data, it becomes mostly useless when stripped of context.
yeah?
yeah?
>>51635529
1. get some really good speakers, or borrow some, if you don't already have
2. order an amp with good reviews
3. run your amp and then the new amp
4. return the new amp if it doesn't sound much different (less restocking fee)
5. more than likely keep the new amp because the music doesn't sound weak and faint when driven by a real amp
and it really depends on what model technics you're using
like I have a $178 onkyo that sounds okay but if I run it against my cambridge audio amp, the onkyo sounds like muffled crud
>mainstream 5.1/7.1 reciever power rank
Onkyo > Yamaha = Denon = Marantz > Pioneer >>> Sony = Harman Kardon > Kenwood
![topaz-am5_front[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/d96xp6Y.jpg "topaz-am5_front[1].jpg")
>>51636644
Which cambridge audio amp are you running now ?
I got got the lowest end model (well after the am1)
Topaz am5,Its fucking fine to and Ill only upgrade if I made the step to floorstanders since I dont think 25watt rms is enough to power those.
>>51633799
Get a pair of jbl everests.
Got a pair of these and was thinking about buying a new pair of passive floor speakers. Maybe for 500-600 dollars.
Any suggestions?
>>51637855
forgot pic
>people actually buying amps and thinking they sound different
Fucking kek
Unless you get a not very good 20 dollar amp there's not going to be any difference in sound between amps.
Hell unless you're trying to make bookshelf speakers fill up an auditorium size most of the weaker ones are going to be able to drive inefficient speakers without distortion to deafening levels.
>>51637678
>>Topaz am5
that's an awesome device
i bought a used azur 540R off ebay -- "music rendering is "hard" and forward sounding, tends to lose a lot of warmth" -- said a reviewer, but it blends well with my speakers, meaning, it sounds great with speakers that tend to be somewhat flat or recessed at moderate amplitude
cambridge audio, and rotel, are two of the lesser known manufacturers that make great products
>>51638751
what kind of amp + speakers are you running
>>51638751
How many watts do I need?
For quite some time, I've had a simple sound system for my PC. In the beginning, I purchased an Asus Xonar DX sound card, a Logitech z323 speaker system, and an Astro A40 headset. Now, it's the holiday season, and about time I upgraded. My budget currently lies in the ~$100 - $200 range per component, so for speakers, an amp, and a receiver, I'd hope to spend ~$500. Now, I've done some looking prior to making this post, and I've currently got my eye on the following:
Subwoofer:
Dayton Audio SUB-1000 10" 100 Watt Powered Subwoofer
Speakers:
Fluance SX6
OR Micca MB42X
AMP/Receiver?
Given that currently own the Xonar DX sound card (as an aside, will this actually do any good? Is it of any use?) and a headset, of which I will likely upgrade, what amp would you recommend for a nice 2.1 system (that may be upgraded to, say, a 5.1 system in the future) given my budget? I would be willing to spend a bit more on the Amp/Receiver as I plan on using it for quite some time, as it will likely be on my desk longer than the speakers or sub will (i'll likely upgrade them eventually). Thanks in advance.
I just ordered a pair of JBL 530s which are on sale right now. How did I do? They should be a step up from the lsr305s which /g/ already approves of. You guys also seem to like large waveguides.
>>51642036
Same person here. Would it be better to just get JBL LSR305's, or no? Realistically, which setup would be best?
>>51642349
Get the JBLs + the sub.
>>51637855
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_108P363BK/Infinity-Primus-P363.html
Haven't heard them, but I found a double blind listening test that Harman conducted against speakers costing 2x-8x more (which is attempting to prove many of Olive/Toole's psychoacoustic theories), and the Infinities bested the Polk, Klipsch, and 4K Martin Logans, which finished last in preference (Electrostats can be finicky with placement, though).
I know Infinity is owned by Harman, but reading about these tests, they seem legit. If a competitor's speaker beats a Harman product in a test, they could back to the drawing board with it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsVO2PAp8M8
Skip to 2:25, but the whole video is worth watching. It challenges the claim that the modern generation prefers shitty sound quality.
>>51642402
Could you elaborate on this? Why do you think this would be a better option?
>>51644078
The JBLs are better speakers than fluance/mica, but you would still benefit from the low frequency extension subwoofers provide in pretty much any system.
>>51642130
They aren't really 'better' than the LSR305. They're for sure louder and more suited to a larger room but the traditional style horns exhibit the typical horn flare you see while the LSR305 keep it a bit above 10khz so it's not as much a problem.
>>51642913
>is owned by Harman, but
Why but? Harman have the biggest R&D budget on the planet with audio, with a huge chunk of it going into JBL and Crown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01V_7WamALM
>>51644835
>Why but?
I love what Harman is doing for audio, but I could see a cynical greentext of:
>Infinity won the test
>Infinity is a Harman brand
>Dropped
So I qualified a bit.
>>51642130
I've got them, and love them.
>>51645047
To be fair, AKG is a Harman brand yet they can't make a decent headphone.
>>51645344
isn't that odd?
From what I gather there's a bit of internal struggle inside Harman because of this.
Olive and his team seem free to pursue pure science (which is great), but the division heads are not necessarily beholden to use the new research (which is bizarre).
The divisions that take advantage of it seem to flaunt serious benefits in their own marketplaces. The ones that don't survive on branding.
>>51645972
Have you heard any of the Revels?
mackie mr4 or jbl lsr305?
guys, what's the cheapest way to treat a room for a poorfag? space restraints require that I place my speakers too close to the wall/corners. so I should shove some stuff in the corners to minimize bass reflections right?
what about the whole "phase" thing? and corrections with eq? I'm no pro, just trying to get a good-sounding near-field setup for my desk.
>>51631065
