Entertainment For Lively Minds
Advice
I've owned my current CD system for about five years now, and I think it's time for a better one. My main problem is that the music comes from one particular spot in my bedroom, and whereas there are those who choose to have their music as background noise; I'd much rather have it enveloped around me. At the moment, it sounds slightly muffled. If you imagine me sitting about ten feet from the speakers, directly facing them.
Now, I see two solutions to this. One involves a slightly awkward furniture move around which then allows both speakers to be placed either side of the room with the bed inbetween (seeing as that's usually my 'seat' of choice). Not entirely sure if that will work though.
The other solution is to purchase a system with four standing speakers and place them in the corners of the room. This, sounds more conceivable but is it worth it for the budget I have in mind; and will it not suit certain albums?
I must admit, I'm a bit clueless when it comes to knowing about this kind of thing. I kind of know what I want, but not how to get it:
1. A speaker system that allows the music to surround the room, without taking complete control of it.
2. Less muffle, more space and clarity.
- More from Tom.
- Login or register to post comments
-
Any ideas of a budget?
Let's say £500
For a start. Though I'm willing to go up, if I think it's worth it.
I bought my Spendor 5s last summer
for £400 second-hand (they are 4 years old now, and retailed at about a grand new) and they have TRANSFORMED my set up.
I did buy a new pre-amp & amp at the same time, I must admit, but the speakers really stood out as the obvious improvement over my much-loved but very-long-in-the-tooth Mission 700s.
The Spendors are about three feet high, with all the cones up in the top half, so they'll fire over the top of a bed quite happily, unless you have huge Regency furniture. They sit atop humungous spikes like something from HellBoy.
So my recommendation is to look for some decent second-hand speakers of their ilk, and blow your entire budget on them.
Just this afternoon I've dug out my Reprise vinyl copy of Sailin' Shoes for a quick Lowell fix, and boy, do they shine on stuff like that. Close your eyes and you're in the studio, probably skinnin' one up for the boys to smoke after the next take, while admiring, out of the corner of your eye, the hot Georgia peach who's just dropped by to hang out a while. Now that's what I call hi-fi.
Second-Hand.
Considering my budget, it probably is better if I go for some quality second-hand speakers, rather than some new speakers that aren't as good in the first place.
hi-fi blurb alert
have sought the advice of OH who is bit of an expert on such matters and he has come back with this for you ~ hope it helps!
Hi Tom,
You can a buy at lot of equipment for £500 including 4/5 speakers, but the question I would ask is what about overall sound quality? It would seem to me that to achieve a sound stage that offers emotional insight into the music, whilst giving you a feeling of being surrounded and involved in the music without any distortion, would be better achieved by buying 2 higher quality speakers, adding more speakers if you need later. Do you have a PC or MAC? Do you rip any music? iTunes etc.
Source: -
You could buy a new CD player, NAD or something, but I’d suggest a Digital Analogue Converter (DAC) something like the Beresford TC-7520 for £100+, and then you can use not only your current CD player as transport, but also a PC/MAC, DVD Player, and pretty much any device that has a digital out (Optical/Coaxial) or indeed USB with PC/MAC.
That’s your source sorted and for peanuts. Long-term flexibility in there too!
Poweramp: -
Choosing an amp is really not that important, since most are well designed, but a simple 2 channel amp like the NAD C315BEE is superb, and equals many very expensive amps given kind loving speakers that are sensitive, smooth and rounded sounding.
Speakers: -
Now, this really is the key for success. You ideally want sensitive speaker’s 88-90db whose impedance curve doesn’t vary much between 60 Hz to 20 kHz etc (frequency range). So if their nominal impedance is 8/6ohms, make sure their minimum impedance is no low less than 4ohms. This ultimately means that they are easy for the amp to drive, therefore better sound and value for money. Q Acoustics are ideal given their price point, but you may need to shop around to fit them within your budget. See www.qacoustics.co.uk bookshelves and floorstanding, very good match for NAD.
To be honest a 2-channel system will obliterate any 5-channel system until a movie is playing. So avoid corners of rooms, try to give them space to breath and they’ll reward you with amazing insight and scale into the recording that’ll have you playing through every memorable album of yester years until your fingers have worn out.
Have fun and enjoy your music. Best of luck!
Thanks.
You see, as I hinted in my original post, I get the feeling having two speakers either side of the room would be sufficient, and cheaper; but due to the layout I wasn't sure if that was concievable.
That's the trouble with listening to most of your music in your bedroom though, space is often at a premium.
Most of my music is listened via my ipod connected to the CD player with a thingummy cable- which, may be the source of the mufflement I guess? But I know I could do with some better quality speakers anyway.
Don't forget that, even with the best kit in the world,
if all you start with is an MP3 file, you've already lost most of the detail in the music before you've started.
Encoding things in MP3 form literally throws away a lot of the musical information in the original.
Listen with vinyl or CD as your source and there's a world more music in there to find and release into your room.
or lossless
computer doesn't *have* to imply low bit-rate MP3. I remain amazed by how good Apple lossless sounds-coming out of the DAC on my ipod into a good stereo, or over a Squeezebox with active speakers in FPO's conservatory, or via Onkyo's beautiful digital dock down an optical connection, or Naim's analogue lead into the Uniti [have heard all these].
I am sure if space permits and the player is good then vinyl and CD can be better-FPO defintely prefers her CD player to lossless-and I'm sure good speakers are nearly always a good investment, they certainly have been for us-I am just very aware of the space traditional hi fi tends to take up. I am not completely in sympathy with the pronouncements of e.g. AVI
http://www.avihifi.co.uk/adm9.html
but I think they can see a future that is still very musical.
[PS glad you enjoyed the Neil Finn yesterday, Vulpes, I would comment that both of us got a lot out of it on Youtube-so independently of anything else there is an argument for having best computer sound you can ?].
I download in FLAC or SHN format.
I don't bother with MP3s except to make a few at 320Kbps for my Zen Vision M if I'm going on a long flight or train journey.
The PC here plays back FLAC files straight from their compressed form via the open-source VLC player; the computer does the decompression on the fly, and the resulting sound is usually at CD quality levels.
I play back music via line-out to an external stereo amplifier into a pair of JPW mini monitors mounted on sand-filled stands at the back of the room, and if I want to surround myself with sound (for gaming etc.) I can also use a pair of active Yamaha desktop speakers on the er, desk. Top.
The Neil Finn clip was exquisite, and it's simple solo stuff like that which survives most compression regimes reasonably well; there's less complexity to lose in the first place.
I know *you* know
what you want and how to get it-I was (not very clearly) trying to suggest that if I've understood them the poster is trying to plan for the future in a single room, a future in which many different formats seem likely to coincide-so optimising computer audio seems a v worthwhile aim.
I can relate to this as my weekday flat has a great stereo under the TV which however takes up a lot of space due to the excellent Mission 770s which I am v reluctant to lose-and yet my head tells me something like this
http://www.avihifi.co.uk/neutron.html
would be much wiser, or at least use the space better.
But as ever all info like yours on how different people manage these challenges is appreciated.
The original question specifically mentioned "a CD system"
but, if it's being used to play mp3's as well then I'd certainly suggest that the OP looks at the bitrateof his mp3s before spending money on new kit.
If they're at anything less than 256kbps then the best gear in the world won't stop them sounding muffled and generally ropey.
If this is the case, then I'd be inclined to suggest spending the time (and money if required) to obtain better quality mp3s - otherwise he's likely to be sorely disappointed in any new gear.
For what it's worth, I can almost never tell the difference between an original source and a well-ripped 320kbps mp3. At 256kbps, I can often hear the difference. Anything less than that, I find unlistenable.
For what it's worth then,
is it possible to 'upgrade' my current itunes files to '320kbs' without having to transfer them all from disc again? Incidentally, iTunes appears to suggest- using the default AAC decoder- 128kbs is High Quality.
in a word
no, alas, if they are 128k aac, or lower bit rate mp3 than 320.
I'd try ripping a cd in lossless and/or 320 kbits mp3 and compare with your current version. See what you think.
[NB you can pay other people to rip CDs, e.g. these guys
http://www.ripcaster.co.uk/
which may be one of the possible costs stimpy was alluding to]
'fraid not. You can't put back the music that's been lost :-(
mp3 and AAC are 'lossy' formats, converting a CD to mp3/AAC loses a proportion of the music on the CD. Crudely, the lower the bitrate, the more music is lost when ripping.
To check if this really is the problem, rip a CD you know well at both 128kbps and 320kbps and see if you can hear a difference.
Edit: Someone has already suggested this - sorry!
Bit later on he said this as well
Hence my attempt to proselytise on behalf of higher bit rate files just in case he doesn't already use them, which you and Vulpes have greatly clarified in your postings.
The thingummy cable in question could possibly be improved on, I guess we'd need to know what the existing system is-and if CD player is standalone unit with a USB input, or a one piece cd receiver with an aux input. I'd be a bit surprised by the former as he said it was c. 5 years old.
My own sympathy with the poster is based on fact that I have this lot
wedged into a small flat on weekdays/some weekends, and am aware that rationalisation is needed, but am reluctant to lose sound quality-being as fussy in my own way as you and V V. I should note the pic was taken just after we'd wedged the TV into the stand-not aided by Panasonic's rather non-VESA back to the telly, and before the wires had been tidied at all ...
It's a stand alone CD player
with an aux. input. Considering, I just took the system from my brother as he never listens to music except when he's in the car/out in town, I couldn't tell you how much it retailed for, but I'd be surprised if it was more than £100 at the time.
sorry my phrasing not clear
is it a cd player and amp combined in one unit, like system 6 in this pic http://www.richersounds.com/information/hifisystems but cheaper, or a cd player plus an amp, like system 2 in same pic ?
Number Six.
Sorry. I'm, unfortunately, a tad naive when it comes to things like this (i.e. technology). I'm even rubbish at bluffing when I'm at work.
no worries
just trying to be clear, as what you have now makes quite a lot of difference. Does it have a brand name/model # ? Also does it have any other kind of input on the back other than the aux inputs-seems unlikely from what you say ?
I have heard the benefits of attaching better speakers to even very cheap one piece systems e.g. my dad is using my old 1980 model Mordaunt Short Carnival bookshelf speakers on a tiny LG CD-based mini hi-fi and it was definitely worth it, but there will be a point of diminishing returns unless the source is reasonable as well. I agree with most of the above posters that improving the quality of the Ipod source i.e. better MP3 bit rates or Apple lossless would be v desirable.
I like the approach described by kbhr's other half, but I think they were assuming that the CD player was a separate unit, and that you could upgrade the amp and keep the CD player.
It's a Phillips MC-110 Sound System (according to the front)
No other inputs on the back.
Speakers seem to be a bit iffy at the moment.
Have uploaded a couple of songs 'If I Fell' (2009 stereo remaster) and 'I Am Not a Robot' into both 320kbs and Lossless formats.
Thanks
Looked it up:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-MC110-Micro-System/dp/B000068NQG
It's a similar product to my Dad's LG in general terms. My guess is better speakers *would* indeed be an option, but at the level of the Q acoustics ones like kbhr mentions rather than more expensive ones which would tend to highlight the limitations of the unit--I think the active dock coupled with a budget CD player as per my posting below will get you a much better solution though all round, especially as you use the iPod a lot.
[edit: one final thought that may not be clear-I am not saying *all* docks are a good idea compared to more traditional hi-fi if the latter is an option, all I am saying the Epoz is no ordinary dock, and offers efficient space-using potential in the sort of room you describe, as well as expandability with CD players, computers, DACs, TVs etc. I was quite tempted by it myself and remain interested in some pricier and similar designs like AVI's ADM9s. I only had a brief audition but it was with music I knew well-Stan Getz in lossless iirc.]
Hi Tom
browsing the Massive's Sound Advice (sorry but someone had to say it) I haven't noticed any mention of stands and cables,these quite cheap upgrades can often breathe new life into older kit.Don't laugh,well not much anyway,but the best and cheapest upgrade I have ever had was getting my ears syringed,so good in fact I'm considering getting it done on a yearly basis,well it's a day out innit.If you are forking out serious dosh always audition kit and make sure it's fully burnt in,but you already know that I'm sure.
Actually, here's one concrete suggestion
rip a favourite CD that you know well in MP3 as lossless (and label track names manually to make it clear which is which) and take iPod to a branch of Sevenoaks to hear these active (i.e. powered) speakers:
http://www.aktimate.com/Features%20AktiMate%20Mini.htm
http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Epoz-AktiMate-Mini/
I was most impressed with my brief trial of a pair, they are about £350, and at least one other Massive-ite has posted on them. How you'd deal with CDs is a separate issue, but I think a pair of these at a fair distance apart would really be worth looking at.
[edit: See the "Your Opinion" section in the second link, a dealer is noting that good CD replay can be added by plugging a standard CD player (not CD plus amp) into the Aux input-e.g. a good model from eBay if you can get advice or maybe a cheaper new unit something like this
http://www.richersounds.com/product/cd-players-recorders-dacs/cambridge-...
Anywhere that can dem you the Epoz units can dem you a decent budget CD player as well, I am sure this combo would be about 500 quid.]
Update
First group test I've seen of active speakers from a few hundred up to a couple of K in this month's (June) What Hi-Fi. The model I was talking about above is here.
http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Epoz-AktiMate-Mini/
I've also had some first hand experience of a DAC plus conventional amp combo now as I have a DAC Magic and Arcam A18. This suggests to me that kbhr's other half quoted above was also on the right lines for a good option.