HIFI music equipment

[cobito]

Hello. I've been using Creative T7900 speakers for quite a few years now, which are 7.1 self-amplified speakers. In my opinion, the sound quality they offer is terrible: distorted bass, almost non-existent treble, and background noise.

I've been wanting to change them for a while and have started to research the topic a bit. I want something I can enjoy for quite some time and I don't need it to be surround sound. I want sound quality; balance in all frequency ranges and the least distortion possible.

The option I think best fits what I want is a stereo amplifier with a pair of speakers. That way I can connect the sound card through the optical output to the amplifier and let it do all the work. This way the quality would be independent of the sound card and I would avoid having to make an extra decision.

I understand that the choice of speakers is quite subjective since each brand offers certain nuances. But I'm not sure what price range is appropriate; from what amount of money below is it unlikely to get good quality and from what amount above is it absurd to keep going up.

I also have doubts about the power. I see in the specifications of the amplifiers that the price is approximately linear with the power. But what I don't want is to spend 500€ on an amp that offers me the same quality as one of 250€ only with more power.

Finally, I've seen that many speakers say "monitor". As far as I know, a monitor offers a flat frequency response and they are not the best option for listening to music since they don't boost certain frequencies. But I don't know if in reality some monitors would be a good option to then adjust the amp's equalizer to my liking.

I'm not really sure how much to spend, the maximum limit would be around 600 or 700€ for amp+speakers. For a typical room of 20 or 30m². And to use them with the computer.

Thank you.

[Yorus]

Lately I've been looking into the subject quite a bit but with lower ambitions, so I haven't looked beyond entry-level studio monitors, but I'm interested in the subject.

Let's see if Obione shows up, he knows a lot about this.

R Tape loading error, 0:1

[cobito]

My budget limit is the more or less maximum limit. If there are good options for less, they can be chosen. It's also not a matter of squandering.

The only thing I don't want is to start thinking within 3 or 4 years about buying something better, which is what has been happening to me forever with the self-amplified surround systems I've had (in the range of 100-150€).

Since Hifi audio has reached its technological ceiling, take advantage of that to have something very durable.

[Sylver]

If you're going to make that move and with that budget, it's impossible for me not to recommend some powered studio monitors to you, because there are precisely some brands and specific models that "sin" (for those of us who use them in music production) of over-amplifying some ranges, such as KRK and Behringer in the case of the bass, since you were talking about the need to highlight some frequencies and that at the same time you wanted balance, clarity and durability.

First and foremost, you must measure the room well, because everything that exceeds 15m2 implies a woofer larger than 8 inches (even in less space it sometimes becomes desirable).

And although it's not a music studio, it's interesting to keep in mind the acoustic treatment, because you can spend 3000€, either on monitors or on a piece of HiFi equipment, and it doesn't sound good at all because of the arrangement, the acoustics of the room, etc.

What a large number of mortals have done with pretty good results is to use an amplifier that they already had (or get one of about 150W approx, which is what is indicated) and put this pair of passive monitors that highlight the bass quite a lot and are not as "flat" as monitors are supposed to be.

If on the contrary your room is much larger and you're going to turn it into a kind of cinema, you can look at the option of a home cinema or a 7.1 of the expensive ones, but the most appropriate thing would be for the room to be absolutely square, even cubic if you will, so that the distribution of the speakers is as balanced as possible and the sound doesn't bounce too much in any part, creating those pesky reverberations that make it "not sound great but almost" (what courage).

If you want to hear quality music and with quality, studio monitors are the key, there's no comparison with HiFi... But you must know for sure what you're listening to. Sometimes you even discover new sounds in songs that you thought you knew down to the millimeter

Greetings!

[cobito]

Thanks for the reply, Sylver.

I didn't know that the size of the room and its shape were so important. The thing is that I will probably move a few times in the next few years, so I can't know the exact size of the room.

As for self-amplified monitors, is the scheme similar to the speakers they sell for PC? In my case, what I would like is for them to have a digital input and to have support for 96/24 audio.

I find the passive monitors you put interesting. What I do see as problematic (in terms of budget) is the fact of the 150W. I don't have an amplifier with DAC, so that's something I would have to buy for sure.

About self-amplified monitors and amplifiers can you put some reference model? I've read that Onkyo offers one of the best value for money on the market.

And another question. In the case that I end up getting some speakers with a woofer smaller than 8" or that I see that the bass is missing a little, would it be possible to add a subwoofer later? or do you have to have specific speakers to use with a subwoofer? or maybe with some studio monitors the subwoofer becomes unnecessary? I prefer a 2.0 system, but if a subwoofer is going to offer me a better result, it can be considered for the future.

As for knowing what I'm going to listen to, do you mean the type of music? I know what you're talking about when you say that in tracks that I know by heart I'm going to discover sounds that I hadn't heard before. It happens to me when I put something on the B&W that are at my parents' house.

[Sylver]

Self-amplified speakers can bring many inputs, but the most frequent are XLR and 6.3 mm jack. The most suitable thing is to connect them directly to an external sound card, and it in turn to the playback device. There is no problem with connections, with an external sound card you can connect practically anything, there are multiple paths.

I am not entirely up to date on amplifiers, Onkyo is not bad at all, but I can tell you that looking in the power range you would need there are good models at Yamaha, Pioneer or Denon. It is all about finding power adjusted to your budget.

I can give you a few about self-amplified monitors; Focal, Behringer, KRK, Presonus… The main differences are the range of frequencies they cover, some go higher or lower, that already depends on your case on the type of music you listen to, and as I already told you, some "color" a little more than others the bass. By the way, for a better presence of the bass and to subtract some distortion, it is often important the presence of the bass reflex on the front of the monitor. When it is behind it makes the bass lose a lot of presence or feel worse for being "drowned" against the wall, if that is its arrangement.

Regarding the subwoofer, it is perfectly compatible with self-amplified monitors. Although if you look for good monitors with a good bass cone, you probably won't miss it, because it is usual to find greater power in the woofer amp, but even so there are those who need a little more and add a good sub to the set to finish giving body to the lower frequencies. There is some info on the net about it.

Regarding knowing what you are going to listen to, yes, it is a bit about knowing the type of music but also the quality it has, because there is music that even the best sound equipment in the world can't make it sound better than it sounds.

Greetings!

[cobito]

@Sylver:

About knowing what you're going to listen to, yes, it's a bit about knowing the type of music but also the quality it has, because there is music that even the best sound systems in the world can't make it sound better than it sounds.

To name a couple of things:
· Muse
· Arcade Fire
· Queen
· Pink Floyd
· Some other soundtracks and instrumental music, especially by Hans Zimmer or Mike Oldfield.
· Some classical music

As long as it's available on SACD at a reasonable price, I buy it. In the case of Muse I have CDs but I've found "around here" DTS recordings of some special editions that are no longer in print. For example, Queen have remastered a good number of albums on SACD (DSD). And there is a large repertoire of classical music in DSD.

Probably in 96/24 audio in advance there is more placebo than anything else, but what is certain is that in "high resolution" productions there is no damn war of noise. That's why I prefer them to CDs or rips.

Vinyl doesn't interest me.

I'm going to keep researching because the topic is much more extensive than I thought. It might also be interesting to visit a store where they show me how some models sound.

[Sylver]

Correct. Where studios work the hardest to do good mixing and mastering (or remastering as you rightly point out), is where the quality will really be noticed.

And indeed, from 96/24 onwards it is practically impossible to perceive any improvement or variation in quality, because basically the human ear is not able to detect them accurately. You are doing well, on the other hand, by only acquiring music in "high resolution". That's when you can be most sure of the usefulness of the monitors.

Get to a quality audio store so they can show you the sound of some monitors, and above all, try to bring your own high quality music, so you can compare with other equipment that you have already listened to before and thus analyze more deeply.

Greetings!

[Yorus]

And I ripping my CDs to FLAC and boasting about it like a sound snob for starting to run away from MP3s...

By the way Cobito, very good musical taste, I'm sure your experiences will be very useful to me

R Tape loading error, 0:1

[cobito]

Well, thank you very much Sylver. I've been reading about studio monitors and I see that the vast majority are active. In fact, it's almost impossible to find passive monitors.

Active monitors seem to be the option that offers the best value for money, by far, compared to HiFi equipment. But from my point of view, they have a big problem: connectivity. They only have one (or two) analog inputs (balanced, yes) and according to what I see in the specifications of the Xonar (the high-end sound cards I've found), they only have 6.3mm jack and RCA outputs that are not balanced.

My biggest fear is noise and I've read somewhere that there are people who have experienced noise problems when connecting monitors to the PC. For me, this point is fundamental and that's why I think the issue of digital input is important.

On the other hand, active monitors make it difficult to connect other gadgets like an external player of anything (SACD, Bluray, etc), a TV and so on.

So for now, the amplifier + speakers option is winning, although the possibility of active monitors is not yet ruled out.

[Sylver]

The best option for active monitors is an external sound card. The quality will be the highest you can afford and the connectivity is very high as I told you. From it you can get almost any type of connection, the higher the range, the more connections (usually).

For example, I have an M-Audio Fast Track Pro, which in quality is not the best, but it produces a sound that is much more decent than many others in its price range.

Another option is a mixer or controller with several channels, where you can connect all the home devices via RCA or similar.

Then, the noise in the PC is usually due to latency. For that, the best thing is to use low latency drivers like ASIO.

Greetings!

[Obione]

@cobito:

Por poner un par de cosas:
· Muse
· Arcade Fire
· Queen
· Pink Floyd
· Alguna que otra banda sonora y música instrumental, sobretodo de Hans Zimmer o Mike Oldfield.
· Algo de música clásica.

Siempre que esté disponible en SACD a un precio razonable, lo compro. En el caso de Muse tengo CDs pero he encontrado "por ahí" grabaciones en DTS de unas ediciones especiales que ya no se editan. Por ejemplo de Queen han remasterizado en SACD (DSD) una buena cantidad de discos. Y de música clásica hay un gran repertorio en DSD.

Probablemente en el audio 96/24 en adelantes haya más de placebo que otra cosa, pero lo que sí es seguro es que en las producciones de "alta resolución" no hay maldita guerra del ruido. Por eso las prefiero a los CDs o los ripeos.

El vinilo no me resulta interesante.

Voy a seguir investigando porque el tema es mucho más extenso de lo que pensaba. Quizás también sea interesante pasarme por alguna tienda que me enseñen cómo suenan algunos modelos.

Qué buen gusto con los grupetes, voy a echarle un vistazo al hilo que le he pegado una lectura rápida nah más.

A Muse les vi por la patilla en la colinita del FIB, de gorroneo ahí fuera del recinto :troll:

Lástima no haber nacido antes para ver a Queen

Editing:

Bueno, al lío.

En mi opinión la pela hay que dejársela en altavoces y la acústica es muy importante pero con eso es más difícil jugar y las estructuras cuadriculadas de nuestras casas son la mierda en este sentido, mucho mejor algo simétrico pero, irregular. Luego tendrás fuentes DPM como SACD o digital con mucho sample rating y profundidad de bits (sorry por los anglicismos, después de unas beers no me acuerdo del nombre en castellano :ugly: ) o tarjetas de puta madre pero, hay catas a ciegas donde un MP3 256 variable o una tarjeta de 30€ han rivalizado con otras opciones muy superiores sobre el papel.

En cuanto a ruidos, tu temor viene de bucles de masa que se solucionan con una caja de inyección Behringer de 30 euretes, puede pasar con monitores activos y no tiene mucho que ver con bafles de gama baja que tienen ruido de fondo.

En cuanto a frecuencias bajas, no creo que necesites un sub, creo que debes ir a por calidad y plantearte el tipo de bafle además del tamaño de woofer. En mi caso a partir de 50 Hz soy feliz y no le haría ascos a 60. A partir de 40 empiezas a vibrar pero, renuncias a algo de limpieza en una acústica estándar de casa. En monitores de estudio por lo general tienes los 60Hz con woofer de 5", los 50 con woofer de 6,5 y los 40 con woofer de 8". De potencia vas bien con los de 5" y hablando de Hi-Fi, que no lo descarto en absoluto, vas bien con unos 50W, con 100W tienes para liar una buena fiesta y no se te van de presupuesto. Me quedaría con Yamaha o Marantz y no le haría ascos a un Onkyo. Te paso enlace: Amplificadores · Componentes HiFi | redcoon.es

Por si quieres liarla un día podrías ir a este Yamaha de 95W: Yamaha A-S301 Black · Amplificador Integrado | redcoon.es

Antes de analizar el Hi-Fi VS monitores, te voy a decir que el digital no lo veo en absoluto. Y volviendo al tema, viendo que tienes presupuesto en tu caso me iría a Hi-Fi, que puede bajar menos en bafles de estantería pero veo una tendencia hacia el olvido de un woofer que rema hacia columna. Me temo que no estoy puesto en los nuevos bafles de este tipo, te podría comentar marcas que deberían ser apuesta más o menos segura pero buf. Siento decirte que si no has comprado nada vengo con más dudas. En primer lugar tienes que pensar como vas a montar el chiringuito, no es lo mismo colocar bafles de estantería que de columna y no es lo mismo tener espacio para tu ampli y tus bafles que estar en un entorno de escritorio donde en mi opinión los monitores de estudio se desenvuelven bien (te quitas un trasto y están pensados para un campo cercano).

En fin, no voy a marear más que no sé como … ha ido la historia, que tiene unos meses y no sé si has comprado o has dejado de comprar pero, si querría comentar que me cascó el ampli de un monitor KRK coloreador y me cabreé un poco con la marca (creo que ha sido culpa del vicio en verano que redcalienta el habitáculo y dejárselos encendidos), total que tras muy buenas experiencias con diferentes dispositivos (o debería decir cacharros porque estos tíos han diversificado de la hostia xD) Yamaha, me decidí a comprar los HS7 de mi firma. Pa que arreglar habiendo money :wall:

Sólo puedo decir que no me gustó el cambio. Suenan más claros pero, menos divertidos. Ya me ha acostumbrado y tengo un KRK RP6 G2 aparcado en el zulo funcionando y otro que no suena. Me arrepiento del derroche la verdad, y creo que hay que ir a por algo divertido y coloreado como un Hi-Fi si quieres acercarte a esos jugosos B&W y tienes unos 600 euretes. Si tuvieras poco más de 200 te recomendaría los Edifier semihi-fi, si tuvieras 400 te recomendaría unos KRK RP2 por ejemplo, pero teniendo 600, ese ampli Yamaha y lo mejor en Hi-Fi que te puedas permitir, preferiblemente de columna con varios woofers, no sabría decirte modelo, algún Polk, JBL o Wharfedale por decir algo.

PD: Sorry por el ladrillo. Todo esto acompañado de una Xonar DGX, lo dicho, en mi opinión, la pela en bafles. Te lo dice alguien con tarjeta de 150€ (en realidad devolví la STX a Amazon y pillé la ST de segunda a 60 pavetes :ugly: )

[cobito]

A very interesting post Obione. I have put the purchase of the equipment on hold until after the summer, so I will take note of your explanation for then.