OT: High End Computer Speakers

[jlwdm]

Originally Posted by Avincent52

With all due respect, I disagree with that statement. Sure, the digital format means a lot. And I'm a guy who listens to vinyl (on a high-end turntable) because it sounds better. And pays extra for hi-res digital.

And while those differences between high-and low-res digital sources are real, they're also subtle.
To make a bike analogy, I'd argue that they're akin to the difference between tires.

To stretch the analogy further, would you say to a newbie rider, "If you're not prepared to spend $100 a pop on Veloflex tubulars, it doesn't matter which bike you ride?"

The speakers make the biggest difference IMHO and getting the right pair is like finding a light, well-built frame that fits well and is appropriate to the kind of riding you're doing.

I disagree. I think there is a large difference between high and low res digital sources and that they are not subtle. More important differences than the speakers. Low quality sources are always low quality.

Jeff

[cmbicycles]

Originally Posted by Avincent52

With all due respect, I disagree with that statement. Sure, the digital format means a lot. And I'm a guy who listens to vinyl (on a high-end turntable) because it sounds better. And pays extra for hi-res digital.

And while those differences between high-and low-res digital sources are real, they're also subtle.
To make a bike analogy, I'd argue that they're akin to the difference between tires.

To stretch the analogy further, would you say to a newbie rider, "If you're not prepared to spend $100 a pop on Veloflex tubulars, it doesn't matter which bike you ride?"

The speakers make the biggest difference IMHO and getting the right pair is like finding a light, well-built frame that fits well and is appropriate to the kind of riding you're doing.

We can disagree, its all good, but that is a bit of a stretch, as there are any number of factors that affect ride quality not the least of which is tire pressure. So no I would say (and have said to many a newbie) to get a bike that fits the application and intended use, and you would need to learn something about the user and their awareness and sensitivity to certain quality factors.

Here the application and intended use is partly unknown. I find the differences to be glaringly obvious between audio sources on the same speakers, the overtones, certain frequencies and other sound factors are not as present... but that's just my ear's opinion. I've listened to the same song in different audio formats and can hear the difference. Yes speaker quality matters to an extent, but at what point do you get diminished returns if the input into the speakers is the limiting factor? For me, the speakers I referenced are a decent set for my application.

So do I "need" $100 veloflex tubulars, well no, there are other tubulars with a good blend of ride quality and good durability for my application, and I can adjust the pressure to improve the ride quality to my tastes. Were budget and durability not factors in my equation, I might have them on all my wheels... and i'd have a lot more wheels and bikes, just because

[benb]

Originally Posted by Avincent52

And while those differences between high-and low-res digital sources are real, they're also subtle.
To make a bike analogy, I'd argue that they're akin to the difference between tires.

There's software (and examples) that will actually let you listen to the "negative" of an MP3. In other words it only lets you hear what the MP3/AAC cuts out. You'd be really surprised in what you can hear in these tracks. Sometimes you can hear things like vocal performers taking a breath, you can sometimes hear the notes on one of the instruments, etc..

I was kind of shocked. I don't know if I could pick out many songs from the "negative" but if I know what the song is I can certainly tell from the negative what it is.

Personally I do kind of find it silly to spend big bucks on hardware for losslessly compressed audio. But that's just me, even the A/B Tests that websites put up, I can pick out the losslessly compressed version 90% of the time.

[fuzzalow]

I am truly amused by the disconnect between what was asked and the intent of what was thought to be really needed. Whatever I posted as reply - gotcha! Ha! OK Fuhgeddaboudit.

However, just to add one thing to the conversation, the studio monitors from the BBC days didn't represent what some might call "high end" gear. Those Harbeths and Spendors are descended from a lineage of sound truck/studio monitors built by various companies to the spec required by the BBC. Good, solid, accurate, well made speakers to do a job.

Speakers like these are now called high end using an invented term of consumerism. Back then they were just good speakers.

[tumbler]

Originally Posted by Avincent52

With all due respect, I disagree with that statement. Sure, the digital format means a lot. And I'm a guy who listens to vinyl (on a high-end turntable) because it sounds better. And pays extra for hi-res digital.

And while those differences between high-and low-res digital sources are real, they're also subtle.

I'm going to agree with Avincent. I think most people will notice a bigger difference going from crappy speakers to good speakers versus going from a standard mp3 to a high res source, or adding a DAC. If the OP already has high end speakers and wants to upgrade to top-shelf speakers, he should look at the whole pie and weigh the differences to be gained from the source, amp, DAC, speakers, etc. But if he is like 99% of the listening public and just wants his music to sound better, a simple speaker upgrade is fine and probably the best place to start.

[Likes2ridefar]

Originally Posted by jlwdm

I disagree. I think there is a large difference between high and low res digital sources and that they are not subtle. More important differences than the speakers. Low quality sources are always low quality.

Jeff

speakers are, by far, the most important part of a good sound system.

[Likes2ridefar]

I recently got a nuforce dda 120 that is digital all the way up to the speakers and think it's great.

It's tiny for one thing, about 6" wide and deep and maybe 2" tall. It can drive all but the most demanding speakers.

I have it attached to a mini computer via USB with Monitor Audio Silver Rx 2 speakers.

it's a relatively compact system and sounds excellent in my large "great room"

[Bob Ross]

Originally Posted by fuzzalow

Do not go near (!) anything that says computer speaker in the product description, it is like Bose anything or Beats headphones, all sound quality junk.

I used to think the same thing, until I heard the Focal/JM Lab XS Book
Much better sound than any "desktop multimedia speaker" deserves to produce.

But otherwise yeah, I'll second (third? fourth? What are we up to now?) the recommendation for a high quality USB DAC and either a good headphone amp or a pair of self-powered nearfield studio monitors.

[Likes2ridefar]

I tried to hide the baby paraphernalia but I missed a few...

the nuforce dda120 is on the right below the TV and the computer is on the left. the computer is an ASRock running Jriver.

for reference, the tv is 55".

[Avincent52]

I disagree. I think there is a large difference between high and low res digital sources and that they are not subtle. More important differences than the speakers. Low quality sources are always low quality.

I'm all in favor of quality source material.

That said, I'd invite any of you to come over and listen to the track of your choice in different formats: low-res MP3, higher-res CD, hi-res digital and analog.

If you've got good ears, you can tell the difference--I know that I can--but you'll have to pay attention.

Then I'll play the low-res MP3 and swap out three pair of headphones--an Audeze LCD-3, a Grado PS500, and a Sennheiser Momentum.

I guarantee that even with the lower-res source material you'll be able to easily identify the difference among these three very different (and all quite good) headphones.

[thp]

Getting active speakers with direct digital inputs... and I really like the Kef LS50. Personally using Proac 1SC.

[Likes2ridefar]

My friend and I tried very hard to believe in HD CDs and high res audio, especially him since he had about $10,000 into a system by Linn.

We set up a leveled blind test and were unable to distinguish HDCD from 320kbps. Below that we got a few right to make it appear not random luck, but it was still very close from 192kbps and above.

We also tried with high end headphones that are more revealing than the speakers we had at the time, and also failed.

[benb]

This is a good easy test anyone here can try.

http://www.npr.org/sections/therecor...-audio-quality

Even if you spend $10,000 a speaker system is unlikely to be the best way to tell these things apart.

Some of it depends on what kind of music you listen to, and it also depends on what kind of damage you have to your ears.

[jmoore]

http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/...a-B1-Bookshelf

[54ny77]