How do you listern to your music on a 5.1 sound system?

Robbie G said:
What a load of absolute rubbish.
Click to expand...


Getting a subwoofer to blend in can be quite difficult, most people aren't too experienced with that sort of thing. I've used a few good subs and for music I don't like the sub...probably because of the sizes of the rooms and suspended floors. I use standmounts. For HT I use a subwoofer.

Visit "Audiophile" forums and I bet the majority will use full-range stereo speakers with no subwoofer, rather than standmounts + subwoofer or floorstanders + subwoofer.
 
2 Front speakers, 2 back speakers. Its a hi-fi seperates system with a/v receiver ect, 2 speakers doesnt sound good enough in a big room IMO specially if your quite close to the fronts.
 
Personally I don't use a sub with my MA B2s but that's mainly because I can't afford a good one, wouldn't have a clue how to set one up (crossover wise), don't have room for one, and the speakers are mainly for music so I can get away with them only going to 42 Hz. I think most of my music doesn't go too much below that. Then again I've never seen a full frequency graph for the B2s - they may register 42 Hz but start rolling off at 60 Hz.

They certainly don't go low enough for films though. Something like Jurassic Park it's obvious how much of the LFs are missing. I don't think the B2s are missing anything from most of my music though, based on having heard all the same music on headphones that go down to 20 Hz.
 
squiffy said:
Getting a subwoofer to blend in can be quite difficult, most people aren't too experienced with that sort of thing. I've used a few good subs and for music I don't like the sub...probably because of the sizes of the rooms and suspended floors. I use standmounts. For HT I use a subwoofer.

Visit "Audiophile" forums and I bet the majority will use full-range stereo speakers with no subwoofer, rather than standmounts + subwoofer or floorstanders + subwoofer.
Click to expand...


in an ideal situation, where you have concreate floors and concrete ceilings and enough space to really get a pair of full-range floor standers working to the best of their ability - you would be right.
 
The best quality sound I have had out of my PC was using my fathers old Akai AMP with the Optical input ( I know you hear the word akai and laugh, but it was absolutely stunning, full bass and crisp too, although to be honest, I used my own Richard Williams speakers, just his AMP cos I wanted to compare standard AUX with Optical Digital, and that was/is the only AMP I have with Optical inputs. )

Anyway, my main PC currently has an XFI linked to a set of Altec Lansing 955 Speakers and through these, I use WinAmp ( Nice and simple ) and they sound better set to 5.1, so I just leave them there.

I do prefer my JBL Dolby system, however, even though thats got the 6-inputs, it sounds absolutely dire with no bass and the speakers sound like cheap and nasty plastic, but if I just used the standard 2 inputs, and set Dolby on, I get thefull range from all the speakers and its gorgeous, however, I also love gaming so thats in my attic now connected to my Atari Falcon & Midi Gear.

A lot of people will argue for the 5.1 side of things including myself, however, stock stereo ( 2 speakers and no seperate bass speakers ) is a lot better for high quality sound.

Then again, its no good having a mega setup if you have a poor room that does not do it justice, so, sometimes a half decent setup might be just as good as a real mean bugger simply because of the room you use it in.
 
You can have good quality 5.1, it just means spending more. If your budget is £1000 you can buy a mid-end stereo integrated amplifier and speakers. But for HT that £1000 will get you a good subwoofer and a av amplifier, even then that's pushing it/over budget. (£700 and £500 respectively) You still need centre, rears and the extra cabling.
 
Anything over £250 is probably not worth arguing over in this forum (go to hi-fi at the bottom) as that is the price of the Logitech Z5500's and the equivalent Creative speakers. Most people don't want to spend much over that on their PC sound, and don't even consider hi-fi gear until they ask on this forum.

I totally agree that good surround sound is achieveable, however you will always be limited by the upmixing algorithms. Even a Tag av32r will probably not sound great when upmixing a stereo music signal to surround. You're always going to get strange sounds from the rear occasionally and funny artefacts just because of the nature of the algorithm if you're using PL2 or any other mode primarily designed for TV and speech separation. A 5 channel stereo surround (or whatever you want to call it where the rears mimic the front) is ok, but that spoils the stereo image somewhat and I only ever use that in our lounge for background music. Surround sound for movies and TV is damned great, but imo stereo is where it's at for music.
 
fish99 said:
Depends. If you're talking about cheap PC speakers then they often sound really tinny when you're just using 2 of the 5 satellites so you really need to upmix to 4 or 5. If you're talking about quality hi-fi speakers then just 2 speakers (+sub) should sound better for music.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with that, with 2 speakers (+sub) there no werid/unnatural effects, however you need good speakers and amp(s) to be able to do that. The music is as of the artist design. Subs can be 'hard' to add but when added correctly really help the roll-off.

Most PC's speakers/amp's arent big to cope. So reforcing with extra speakers helps get the power up, making it sound more fuller. - well what i think anyway
 
Interesting thread.
Stereo only for me. For the record, most of my friends with half decent systems don't use subs. Infact, I can't think of any of the systems I've heard in their homes, where they've been using a sub with music.
A potential thought on this is the difficulty in integrating a sub effectively. I tried it, failed miserably. A second point being simple economics. The comments I've seen about people using subs typically involves them using subs that are just as expensive as the stereo speakers they're paired with. The implications being that the £1000 budget for speakers is split between speakers and sub. My question is simple, "how much better would the stereo speakers be if you spent the whole budget on them". You'd probably be right in arguing that the "bass might not go as low", but then you'd almost certainly have cohession across the full range of music, linked with a better mid and top end. As the bass only makes up the lowest octaves or music, seems like an odd compromise to aim purely at that.
 
The comments I've seen about people using subs typically involves them using subs that are just as expensive as the stereo speakers they're paired with
Click to expand...

Usually the sub will cost more. ie a £200 pair of standmount speakers speakers are at a good level of sound quality/price. But a £200 subwoofer will certainly be a very low quality model.

But you're right when you move up a price bracket, then speakers/sub will be similar in price.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
Interesting thread.
Stereo only for me. For the record, most of my friends with half decent systems don't use subs. Infact, I can't think of any of the systems I've heard in their homes, where they've been using a sub with music.
Click to expand...
I must totally disagree with that, i wouldnt call my system useless and it uses a sub very well in both music and movies. The speakers I use are £800 worth (£400 amp - which can drive 2x170w subs @ 10hz) and can handle bass (8" woofer in each) however my sub (12" speaker) (£350) can handle lower notes better. I know even the most expesive full size speakers strugle with very low bass notes, a sub however is designed for that and can do a much better job (ie. 8k speakers and 2.4k subs). Remember to that a sub has its own power-source, so there is less drain on the main amp - specially over meters of cable at very low frequencys(10hz+). The cabient of a sub is also bigger to allow more air to move from it.

I would agree that getting the sub to 'sound' right is a major battle, however when done a sub can help get to them lower notes.

All im saying is dont rule every system which uses a sub to be 'bad' or not 'half decent', it depends on many factors (price, room, equiptment, personal likes, etc.)
 
Last edited:
Roguey said:
I must totally disagree with that
Click to expand...

I love the bit you're stated that you dissagree with, i.e. my comment that I've not met anyone in the last few years who's running a sub with an expensive stereo. Maybe it was you peeking from behind a bush as to the kit in question?

Sorry, shouldn't be so pedantic.
More to the point, I think you've missed where I'm coming from. I'm not trying to say that subs can't create low bass, or that a good stereo speaker can match the ability of a sub to move the same amount of air.
From what I've seen an heard, the use of subs can create a major issue with coherence across the frequency range, often bigger than the opportunities it's trying to solve. That's particularly true when you actually check to see what music really does make use of extremely low bass. Excluding electronica and church organs, not much gets down to 20hz or less.
Additionally is the argument about funds. Assuming you're like me, i.e. a fairly normal individual, chances are you have finite funds. My personal view is that it's better to spend the dosh on say a better front end (rem garbage in garbage out), than worrying about just low bass.
Put it another way, I've heard the effects of good supertweeters (checkout some reviews of Townsend units for info), and rather liked them. The problem is that they cost £800 a pair. Again, I'd rather spend that on my CD front end, that trying to improve a smallish element of the frequency range. Conceptually there's no significant difference between a sub and a supertweeter, both are playing around at frequency extremes.
 
For HT, a subwoofer is a must. But for music, a sub isn't required. As long as the left/right speakers go suitably low enough that will be fine. You'll get room bass gain as well. I've gone from floorstanders in the 35hz bass range to standmounts for my Hi-Fi setup, and it does sound better. Also tried subs on and off with both speakers, get it to match well, but problems with bass shaking the floor and causing a bit too much boom (even with gain and roll off right down) and ruining the soundfield. Rel subs as well. Without a subwoofer I can steel hear low bass compared to my HT system during music which does have a sub....of course I wouldn't ask the speakers to reproduce full-range film soundtracks, a sub is needed for that. Compare the average frequency graphs on films to music CD's. I guess in a good a room a subwoofer in a music system might work ok, but it'll be much harder to buy right model and setup than just plonking a pair of standmount speakers in front of you.

You can use floorstanders or standmounts for home theatre- because you have bass managment you can set a higher crossover than the speakers F3 point, so any room bass boom problems with the stereo speakers should be resolved.

In a large room (20'+ side walls) then I would go floorstanders.
 
I just switch Itunes on and select the track i want? :confused: ?

I have a recently purchased X-fi (after an audigy 2) and a set of Gigaworks 550 speakers.

I upmix it to 5.1 surround as it just isnt loud enough otherwise.
 
I also got an XFI, upgraded from an Audigy 4 that was upped from an Audigy 2 that was upped from an Audigy 1 that was from a Live etc etc etc.

When it comes to "Pro", I am sorry, but creative just dont do it.

For gaming etc, sure, nothign beats them, but for serious Pro, they dont quite get there.

Admittedly, this is a tad unfair.

For Music, I much prefer the SoundStorm on the NF7S to be honest... Perhaps more for Rock music than most. The Creatives do have a fairly adjustable EQ to wring the higher notes out better, but at a price of them sounding very harsh compared to a lot of other soundCards... When you need to force the soundcard's EQ to get a good sound, then thats only showing its weak side.

Admittedly, my main PC is using an XFI but the only reason behind that, is that I like the front gubbins, and that my speakers no longer have a HeadPhone connection, otherwise, I would be using my Philips or MAudio.

Hell, I got a couple of old Turtle beach cards that I feel produce a much warmer sound than the Creatives.... That said, its also down to the choice of Amp / Speakers too!

It annoys me when I see people with something like an X-Fi running through a pair of £1.99 Billy-lal bargain bucket speakers, similarly the other way roun, and running a £2.50 C-Media Soundcard through a £1000 AMP too!
 
All music should be played in stereo through analogue connections.

With my old z5500's i listened using the 6-channel analogue output in stereo mode ONLY.
 
if your using z5500's you dont need to be worrying about using analouge over digital;) that's the sort of thing you need to worry about when your using a 2 channel power amp and some half decent stand mounts.
 
Last edited:
Nah, I sitll say its down to the individual as to how they feel their system is as good as they need it to be, or want it to be.

I used to have a pair of Yamaha Monitors way back when I could hear properly, these were a simple 2 speaker setup.

Now, many scoffed at them because they didnt look the past, or because they were white or some other stupid reason, but one fact remained...

They are studio level monitors, and as such no standard home hifi came close as to the quality produced from them... ( Take the word Standard with a pinch of salt )

From about 5 years ago, until fairly recently ( about 2 maybe ) I had been using a standard 2.1 setup by KTX and I picked these up for a pathetic £10 and they were used primarily as a quick fix while I got some newer monitors, but to be honest, they did such a good job, I never bothered until only last month, when I finally got new ones. Yamaha again, this time, I got HS80M Monitors...Very nice. Not the best, but I dont want to overspend this time.

They are only a pair, no sub. They have a tiny tweeter, and a full range speaker, and I do mean full range, as the sounds produced from them, are crystal clear, and well below and above the wifes £1300 Denon HiFi.

I have to say though, that I would never use those on a PC... Its a waste of time for me.

I am currently using :-

Altec Lansing 955 - Main PC
Altec Lansing 251 - Game PC in the LAN Room
JBL ESC230 - Wifes PC in bedroom

And a few other misc piles of junk on the others.

The Monitors are connected to my Atari & Midi Gear as I use those for my real music.

That said, the PCs do have extremely lovely sound, especialy the 955 setup, and they are all better than a lot of supposed HiFi ( As in cheap stacking stereos rather than true HiFi )

Again, a lot of people simply dont really know or even care about true HiFi, so again, its really down to the individual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom