I am willing to bet my bottom dollar that THIS^ is what people have told YOU.
Have fun with your Crapsch Crap Media. I'm out of here. Anyone retarded enough to believe in what you're saying needs more help than what speakers to buy.
I see you’ve bowed out, and that’s your prerogative. However, your earlier post warrants a response. This will likely be my last as well. It's a mile long, so put your feet up & relax. Maybe order a pizza too.
I’m going to start here by disavowing any further personal remarks. I should’ve resisted the temptation last night, like I normally do, but I’ve had a rough week and I was really tired and so annoyed by your comments that I responded with emotion, which is rarely a good thing. For that, I apologize. Tired or not, I should know better. I propose we stick to the subject of audio in this debate.
Quote: “Those instruments may have some of their sound extend down to those frequencies, but that is only a portion of their whole sound.”
Well, of course. I submit that
that “portion” of the sound they produce should, ideally, be accurately reproduced just as the majority of their sound is. Do you disagree, and if so, why?
Quote: “The majority of music and majority of instruments in that music all share ~100Hz to 15kHz.”
When you say, “that music,” what music? What genre are you referring to?
And regardless of your answer, since when does a speaker that’s only able to accurately reproduce the “majority” of instruments' frequencies constitute adequate reproduction? Maybe you don’t mind a pale, vague facsimile of musical content spanning an octave or two, but most serious listeners (and any educated music listener) would. Seriously, if you really believe that, go to any credible online forum and post a statement that speakers only need to go down to “~100Hz” in the bass department and that constitutes high fidelity music reproduction. Wait a day or two for the responses to come in and see what you get.
Then, call anyone wanting reproduction below 100Hz a “bass head” like you called me, and see what response you get. Seriously, it's time to give it up. You know you’ve lost this point, so to paraphrase Captain Jack Sparrow, “Stop blowing holes in your boat!” Why can’t you just say, “You know what? I blew it on this. I thought I had a good understanding of frequency response vis-à-vis musical reproduction and human hearing, but upon further analysis, I realize I was mistaken before. My bad.” People (and I) would think more of you for doing that than they would of you digging your heels in on this absurd notion that music reproduction only needs to go down to 100Hz. Tell that to any classical musician – or any rock drummer with a bass drum, for that matter – and see what kind of response you get. I don’t know what else to say here except that you’re profoundly mistaken.
Quote: “You missed the point by a long shot - for a $100 budget you can't get quantity or quality, and buying 3 or more speakers will just make the quality diminish to a point where I couldn't even stand listening to the system.”
I agree with the first part – to some extent – but it depends on how you define “quality.” If it’s a flat FR curve from 20Hz-20kHz, and inaudible THD and intermodulation & transient distortion, and high signal-to-noise ratio, and an open soundstage, no coloration, no phase anomalies, etc., then of course you’re right. But I would define “quality” in far less stringent terms and reserve the criteria in my previous sentence to a characterization of “near perfection,” which is not required for still-enjoyable music listening.
Quote: “My car stereo sounds better than those M-Audio AV40s.”
That’s perfectly plausible. So does mine, I’m sure. The M-Audio AV40s & 30s may (or may not) have wonderful mid-range and treble response, with low THD and nice imaging, but that’s not enough – by a long shot. Bass response is not only for kettle drums or bomb blasts in movies – it is critical to accurate music reproduction (particularly in rock music with a bass drum). For anyone doubting that, try this simple test: If you have speakers with a subwoofer, turn on some music and then unplug the subwoofer half way thru a song and see how things sound to you. Case closed.
Quote: “Most people don't even own large enough speakers to hear below 120 Hz.”
I can't fathom why you would say that. Maybe teenagers & adolescents don’t, but I’ve owned speakers that went down to 45Hz since I was 18 years old (Yamaha two-way bookshelf speakers). And everyone that owns a subwoofer owns speakers that go below 120Hz (unless the speakers are utter junk). Any serious music listener with the money to own high fidelity speakers has speakers that go below 120Hz. Any 3" woofer cone should easily be able to go below 120Hz, provided the rest of the speaker is OK. I should know, I’ve been an audiophile since I was about 14 or 15 and I’ve done enough component shopping & looked at enough specs to know. Plus there are a
lot of home theater speaker sets out there with subwoofers. (Granted, most HTIB sets are junk in the overall scheme of things, but nevertheless, pretty much any subwoofer is gonna go below 120Hz unless it came from the previously mentioned Vinny Boom Botz’s Audio and Fried Chicken Emporium ... and out of a white van parked out back ... with inventory procured by a crack dealer, politician or a lawyer.
*shudder*
Quote: “… and they have ridiculously high THD percentages, JUST LIKE YOUR KLIPSCH Pro Media crap. Read the specs on Klipsh's site:
http://www.klipsch.com/na-en/product...pecifications/
There, you can see (underneath where they claim the low frequency response limit is 31Hz but fail to specify anything regarding a -3dB point) that they hit 5% THD!!!! That is doG damned terrible!! Hahaha. 5% THD is F'ing TERRIBLE. With that much distortion you can't hear the nuances that you would hear from the instrument if you were in the room where they were recorded.”
Sigh … I hardly even know where to begin here. You simply don’t understand how distortion manifests itself in the listening experience and what the specs mean. I invite you to set your confident arrogance aside for a moment and read:
First of all, the distortion specs you see on Klipsch’s site aren’t for the speakers -- they’re for the subwoofer’s BASH Digital Linear Hybrid amplifier driving the speakers. The specs are measurements of THD using test tones at the specified frequencies and power output in RMS wattage. Such specs are common in the audio industry.
The distortion specs of 35 watts/channel @ 5% THD, 1KHz, two channels driven (satellites) and 130 watts peak (50 watts @ 5% THD, 50 Hz continuous) are
inaudible to the average human and all but the most highly trained, golden-eared audio professional
in a controlled listening test. I couldn’t hear them and neither could you nor anyone reading this thread. Contrary to what you allege, they are not “ridiculously high” nor “doG damned terrible!” nor “F’ing TERRIBLE.”
Here's why: How humans hear/detect distortion depends on the frequency of the signal. It’s common knowledge among audiophiles that distortion in low frequencies can be quite ‘high’ – far in excess of 10% -- before a human can hear it in a controlled study (never mind the far less critical listening environment of a home or car or iPod). I’m quite sure you weren’t aware of that. As frequencies increase, the threshold at which people can detect distortion becomes lower as a percentage. In other words, humans can hear distortion more readily at high frequencies than they can at low frequencies.
So, let’s start with the low bass THD spec you quoted from Klipsch’s Website:
5% THD at 50Hz driven at 50 watts. For starters, 50 watts would be deafening – most music listening in the home and car is typically at less than 10 watts and is usually 5 watts or less. I was given a demonstration a long time ago, at a high end audio store, of how volume related to RMS wattage output. At 15 watts, I was covering my ears and so were the other people in the room. The reason extra wattage is provided by audio equipment is to handle transient peaks, which require momentary power many times higher than the continuous wattage for average listening volume.
Since distortion increases in proportion to power, Klipsch was extraordinarily self-critical in using a 50-watt output to measure the distortion. They could've used a 10-watt output and got a much lower number. As I stated above, humans are far less able to detect distortion at low frequencies, which 50Hz obviously is. If you do nothing else as a result of our debate, I strongly suggest you spend 10 minutes of your life and read the results of the excellent experiment Axiom Audio did awhile back on the audibility of distortion. It’s called “How Much Distortion Can We Hear with Music,” and you can find it here:
http://www.axiomaudio.com/distortion.html
You’re welcome to read the entire article, but you can actually skip all the way down to the sections called “The Results” and “Conclusion” to cut to the chase.
What you will find vis-à-vis the Klipsch distortion spec of 5% for the amp at 50Hz is that
it is totally inaudible, with gobs of room to spare. Take particular notice of the sentence that reads
“Even in the mid-bass at 280 Hz and lower, the “noise” can be around -14 dB (20% distortion), about half as loud as the music itself, before we hear it.” So, do you still want to claim 5% THD at 50Hz is “ridiculously high,” “doG damned terrible!” and “F’ing TERRIBLE”? You said earlier you were man enough to apologize if you were wrong. Let’s see if you are.
Accordingly, let’s move to the satellite spec of “35 watts/channel @ 5% THD, 1KHz, two channels driven.” Again, Klipsch went beyond any reasonable expectation by quoting distortion measured at 35 watts, which would be deafening to anyone not already deaf. So, as with the subwoofer section distortion spec, the number would be dramatically lower at normal listening volumes of ~ 3-10 watts. Nevertheless, the spec at even 35 watts is hardly “F’ing TERRIBLE” anyway. As you will also see in the Axiom Audio experiment, the frequency had to reach up to 8 KHz before 1% distortion could be audible. (This is in keeping with listening tests I’ve read for the last 25 years or more. Human hearing hasn’t changed.) Therefore, since (as we established earlier) humans become much less sensitive to distortion as frequency drops, and since 1 KHz is far below 8 KHZ, the listener can be subjected to distortion far higher than 1% at the 1 KHz frequency that Klipsch quotes in their spec. As for what exact percentage that would be, I can’t say and neither can you. But since at 280 Hz the distortion has to rise to 20% to be audible, it would stand to reason (and then some) that distortion could easily be 5% at 1 KHz and still be completely inaudible.
Earlier you also mentioned, parenthetically, “underneath where they claim the low frequency response limit is 31Hz but fail to specify anything regarding a -3dB point …..” I agree, and it annoys the hell out of me when companies don’t specify a dB deviation range (typically 3dB or in some cases 5dB). Without it, the spec is meaningless. Klipsch used to give it, but they’ve obviously changed that since. However, we’re in luck in this case because I dug through an old binder and found one stray page that I printed out back in August 2004 from the 3DsoundSurge review I mentioned yesterday. I’ll type what it says:
“In actual testing the Pro Media 2.1 delivers on the 106dB peak output using a 1kHz test tone. It also reaches down to 31Hz but not at a usable level with the subwoofer set to neutral levels. The –5dB point is about 42Hz. The other area of note with the subwoofer is that the subwoofer high frequency rolloff is unusually sharp (in a good way) for a multimedia system, making it highly unlikely that you will ever localize sound emanating from it.”
So if it’s down –5dB at 42Hz, we can reasonably extrapolate that the more useful –3dB mark probably occurs a bit higher – let’s say somewhere between 45 and 50Hz. Do you concur? And if so, isn’t that pretty bloody good for a computer speaker system with a 6.5” sub producing inaudible THD? I think you know the answer to that. Contrasted with the M-Audio AV-30s or 40s, the difference is staggering (to say the least).
Note that I may have said, yesterday, that the PMs extended down to 38Hz at -3dB. If I did, I was mistaken. My bad.
You said, “They also say they reach 20kHz. I doubt that very much.”
Actually, they
do according to the 3DsoundSurge review. Again from that page:
“What is particularly noteworthy is the satellites’ strong low frequency extension well beyond the crossover point. Specifically, in near field testing the satellites are getting down to 140 Hz before the –3dB point and about 120 Hz to the –5dB point, making the transition between the satellites and subwoofer unusually smooth. In the near future we will be publishing hard numbers on high frequency performance, but for now I will just say that performance is better than what you will get from a single driver system for high-end clarity, and with relatively smooth on-axis performance right through to 20kHz!”
So either you’re mistaken or the reviewer was lying. I guess you can decide.
You said, “My speakers have the potential to reach 40kHz (2 tweeters on each) and I can hear the 20kHz if I have a recording playing in foobar2000 that has any 20kHz content in it and I use the built-in equalizer to boost 20kHz over 10 dB.”
Well then you’re either a young child (doubtful) or a human anomaly, because it’s common knowledge that only small children (and the family dog) can hear above 15 or 16 kHz. But you did say you have to boost the 20kHz by over 10dB with the EQ, so perhaps that explains it. I don’t know and can only take your word for it.
You said, “Some people believe that above about 20kHz humans can sense the psychoacoustics, which is the idea that these speakers were designed upon.”
Sort of. It’s not so much “psychoacoustics” AFAIK (at least I wouldn’t use that phrase) – what I think you're referring to is the effect that harmonics have on the music because harmonics do effect the frequencies that generated them. Hence the measurement for total
harmonic distortion.
Quote: “… and MP3's and other compressed audio formats can't even really handle the information in those frequencies. It's a waste because most people don't own stereos that are capable of reproducing them.”
I agree. I might just clarify by saying that there are still a
lot of audiophiles out there who do own high-end equipment. Just look at all the store ads in the back of any audio/stereo magazine – they’re selling gear to
someone. I’m fortunate to own some, but I’d sure like a lot more. But as far as the typical teenage or adolescent MP3 enthusiast, you’re of course right – they don’t own stereos capable of reproducing truly high fidelity music.
Quote: “The lowest note on a guitar is 82 Hz for a standard tuned guitar's low E string played open. Some music has guitars set up in drop D or 7-string guitars, or Baritone guitars, etc., BUT each note has harmonics that are manipulated by every piece of electronic gear that it passes through. That is why you can kind of hear the bass guitar on a little boombox, and the kick drum or timpani.”
Correct, but you left out the fact that harmonics are not just ‘manipulated’ by electronics that the signal passes through. Harmonics are also generated by the played-notes themselves, irrespective of electronics (as you know, a non-amplified acoustic guitar still produces harmonics). The field of
sub-harmonics is actually really interesting, and it even has some relevance to this conversation. But since this debate is already miles long, I’ll skip it for now.
Quote: “Why do you consider yourself a professional? Because you work at an audio shop selling hundreds of poor saps a shitty set of exaggerated spec'd and 5% THD Klipsch branded overseas BS for a living? Good for you, I guess.”
I don’t work for an audio shop, nor have I ever worked for one (or worked in the audio field in any capacity). I don’t know why you would make such a strange accusation. Moreover, one doesn’t have to work in the audio industry to be a credible audiophile, any more than a person would need to work in the movie industry to be knowledgeable about movies/films.
Quote: “Heh. Reviews don't mean much if they are all written by people who don't know enough to buy a high-end system.”
This is the second time you’ve equated buying a high-end system with “knowing enough” to do so. (You earlier chastised the OP for the same thing.) I find that kinda odd. Not everyone can afford to buy what they want. Maybe you don’t have a mortgage or a family or a lot of medical bills, but I do and so do a lot of people. Just ‘cuz a person doesn’t own high-end equipment doesn’t mean they don’t “know enough to.”
Quote: “Don't feel bad because you think Klipsch Pro Media are good, just save up and buy something really high-end. Some people will never be able to see or recognize things that other people are born able to. That's why there are people in history like Leonardo da Vinci and Beethoven. There may never be others like them.”
Whatever you were smoking there, can the rest of us have some?
Quote: “I can't believe you bought a set of upgrade wires for Klipsch Crap Media.. LOL such a tool... hahahaha! Did you buy a Wagner 12v super charger for your Toyota Corolla CE, too?”
First, I don’t own a Toyota Corolla CE (thank God). Second, believe it. Contrary to your mistaken assumption, there was a good reason for the upgrade kit. Although the Pro Media 2.1s became the de facto standard bearers for
computer speakers from the time they were introduced, the biggest criticism people had was that Klipsch used 18-gauge wire. Since these were supposed to be ‘enthusiast’ speakers, enthusiasts started re-wiring them with thicker 16-gauge wire and word got around that it made a subtle but noticeable difference. Some people were offering to create replacement wire sets with 16-gauge wire and were selling them on the Web. After awhile, Klipsch took notice and decided to hire Monster Cable to create a specific Pro Media upgrade wire kit. That’s it. If your false assumption that the Pro Medias are “crap” were true, obviously there would never have been a market for the upgrade kit. There
was such a good market, in fact, that they were hard to find for awhile because they kept selling out. Was it worth $50? Iffy, but at the time I had a little disposable income so I went for it. No regrets – the speakers sound terrific for what they're designed for.
Quote: “Look, just to clarify one of the original points I made above, I don't even like or use the M-Audio AV30's (bought for a gift & AV40's for the party) but they are at the budget point for the OP.
Well, that’s a bit odd since you said yesterday, of the AV-40s, “No other I have heard in that price range have come close to sounding as good, including the Klipsch 2.1” and then extrapolated that the AV-30s were almost as good because their bass response extension was only 10dB less than the AV-40s.
That kinda sounds like you “like” the AV-30s then, doesn’t it? Unless “come close to sounding as good” means something else? No worries ... it's a trivial point.
Quote: “You are just doing the pathetic internet sad-guy-fanboy-loser thing where you fight the guy who comes in and recommends something different than what YOU recommended.
No, not at all. There was no “you” in this equation for me whatsoever -- I would’ve responded exactly the same way if someone else had posted what you did about the Pro Medias. The fact that I own them is 100% irrelevant to me. I was doing the respond-to-provocation thing where I challenge the guy who comes in and recommends something and does so with either faulty logic, faulty conclusions or faulty reasoning. It’s that simple. And I'm not a fanboy for any company. (Well, maybe Nakamichi
).
Quote: My Uncle back East had a set of REAL Klipsch speakers as part of his elitist system with a tube CD player (WTF? right?) that cost about $5,000 each (he was a doctor) and I witnessed and heard them, and what you have is certainly not that.
Of course Pro Medias aren’t “that.” I never
said they were, nor did I ever imply they are even high-end speakers in the home audio arena. I said they are the best
computer speakers I know of and that no other set that I know of even comes close in their price range. And I stand by that 100%. I fail to see how it’s even debatable, given the documented performance of the Pro Medias vs. their competition. But people buy on emotion, then use logic to try to justify the emotion. So people who bought something else will often try (quite hard) to justify their emotional purchase by bashing a competing product or exaggerating the capabilities of the one they bought. Happens all the time.
Quote: “If you're a retarded bass head and can stand all that THD (poor clarity), then go buy yourself some Klipsch branded crap.”
Assuming you've read the Axiom Audio article I linked to earlier, do you still wanna stand by that remark about the THD and “poor clarity”?
Quote: “ … and shows what a bad place you are at in life. You may never see how troubled you are, but I hope that you do.”
Thanks for the free psychoanalysis, but rest assured I’m not the least bit “troubled.” I appreciate your, um, concern though. :sneaky:
If anything, the dark and negative music that you listen to might warrant concern for
your mental health. Are you into Roger Waters and Nine Inch Nails too? Maybe Slipknot? Nirvana? Jeez, no wonder you have such hair-trigger hostility. IMHO there are enough problems in the world without wallowing in them by listening to negative swill. Lighten up a little – you’ll be happier and live longer.
Lastly, you might want to read Anandtech’s own review of the Pro Medias here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/774
If you still want to call them “crap,” I guess we'll simply have to agree to disagree. Peace.
Facebook
Twitter