Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article
<jim.redelfs-7324FA.23481204012008@news.phx.highwinds-media,com >,
Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> In article <jollyroger-28B65E.00135704012008@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns,net >,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
>
> > Get over yourself...
>
> You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all
> he
> hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
>
> The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
In article
<jim.redelfs-7324FA.23481204012008@news.phx.highwinds-media,com >,
Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> In article <jollyroger-28B65E.00135704012008@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns,net >,
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
>
> > Get over yourself...
>
> You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all
> he
> hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
>
> The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Jolly Roger wrote:
> Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> >
> > > Get over yourself...
> >
> > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> > are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all
> > he hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
> >
> > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> > there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> > their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
>
> Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
> that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
Graham
Jolly Roger wrote:
> Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> >
> > > Get over yourself...
> >
> > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> > are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all
> > he hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
> >
> > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> > there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> > their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
>
> Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
> that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
Graham
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article <477F1CA5.945DEEAE@hotmail,com >,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
> > Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Get over yourself...
> > >
> > > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile).
> > > We
> > > are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because
> > > all
> > > he hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
> > >
> > > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music
> > > "out
> > > there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording,
> > > played-back on
> > > their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
> >
> > Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
> > that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
>
> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
at best.
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
In article <477F1CA5.945DEEAE@hotmail,com >,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
> > Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs,com > wrote:
> > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Get over yourself...
> > >
> > > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile).
> > > We
> > > are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because
> > > all
> > > he hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
> > >
> > > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music
> > > "out
> > > there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording,
> > > played-back on
> > > their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
> >
> > Exactly. I definitely didn't get the impression the OP was looking for
> > that kind of fidelity. Otherwise I wouldn't have made a peep!
>
> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
at best.
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Jolly Roger wrote:
> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> >
> > He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
>
> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
> at best.
LMFAO !
Sure, boom and tizz will do.
Graham
Jolly Roger wrote:
> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> >
> > He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
>
> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
> at best.
LMFAO !
Sure, boom and tizz will do.
Graham
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Eeyore wrote:
>
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
>>> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
>> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
>> at best.
>
> LMFAO !
>
> Sure, boom and tizz will do.
>
> Graham
>
Well, there's the fact that he's getting rid 'of his little silver
coasters'. Depending on what format he ripped to--being able to
actually hear what he's done to his music might be a disadvantage.
jak
Eeyore wrote:
>
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
>>> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
>> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
>> at best.
>
> LMFAO !
>
> Sure, boom and tizz will do.
>
> Graham
>
Well, there's the fact that he's getting rid 'of his little silver
coasters'. Depending on what format he ripped to--being able to
actually hear what he's done to his music might be a disadvantage.
jak
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
jakdedert wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Jolly Roger wrote:
> >
> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> >>> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
> >> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
> >> at best.
> >
> > LMFAO !
> >
> > Sure, boom and tizz will do.
>
> Well, there's the fact that he's getting rid 'of his little silver
> coasters'. Depending on what format he ripped to--being able to
> actually hear what he's done to his music might be a disadvantage.
Now there's a thought !
Graham
jakdedert wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Jolly Roger wrote:
> >
> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> >>> He said he required "decent quality". It's there in his original post.
> >> Yes, and the meaning of the word "decent" in this context is subjective
> >> at best.
> >
> > LMFAO !
> >
> > Sure, boom and tizz will do.
>
> Well, there's the fact that he's getting rid 'of his little silver
> coasters'. Depending on what format he ripped to--being able to
> actually hear what he's done to his music might be a disadvantage.
Now there's a thought !
Graham
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Jim Redelfs wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
>
> > Get over yourself...
>
> You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all he
> hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
>
> The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
There is nothing snobbish or geeky about appreciating good quality sound
reproduction. I have *NEVER* heard good quality sound reprduction from 'computer
speakers'. If any attempt at all has been made to influence sound quality with
these it's usually to falsely flatter (typically with very uneven frequency
resposne) which the casual listener may like for a while (in the way Bose do).
Graham
Jim Redelfs wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
>
> > Get over yourself...
>
> You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an audiophile). We
> are still friends to this day. The poor man cannot enjoy music because all he
> hears - and continuously analyzes - is SOUND.
>
> The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good music "out
> there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog recording, played-back on
> their own vacuum tube-powered Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
There is nothing snobbish or geeky about appreciating good quality sound
reproduction. I have *NEVER* heard good quality sound reprduction from 'computer
speakers'. If any attempt at all has been made to influence sound quality with
these it's usually to falsely flatter (typically with very uneven frequency
resposne) which the casual listener may like for a while (in the way Bose do).
Graham
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article <477F1C59.499FA58C@hotmail,com >,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Jim Redelfs wrote:
>
> > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an
> > audiophile). We are still friends to this day. The poor man
> > cannot enjoy music because all he hears - and continuously analyzes
> > - is SOUND.
> >
> > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good
> > music "out there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog
> > recording, played-back on their own vacuum tube-powered
> > Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
>
> There is nothing snobbish or geeky about appreciating good quality
> sound reproduction. I have *NEVER* heard good quality sound
> reprduction from 'computer speakers'. If any attempt at all has been
> made to influence sound quality with these it's usually to falsely
> flatter (typically with very uneven frequency resposne) which the
> casual listener may like for a while (in the way Bose do).
I have no doubt that among us are "super-hearers" (just as there are
super-tasters) and that the younger one is, the better is the frequency
range of one's hearing. But I suspect that the real number of
super-hearers is considerably fewer than those who profess to hear
things the rest of us may not. I used to take my Naks in for regular
calibration so I had the opportunity to be around people who thought of
themselves as special... as audiophiles, and listen to their (often
tedious) audio bloviations.
And here's the thing that has almost always stuck out like Dick Cheney
at a Freedom rally: At the same time audiophile elitists criticize
others for their subjective (poor ear) choice of speakers (or whatever),
they themselves rarely use objective terms or criteria, including
meaningful variables like environment properties, to describe their own
sound experiences or their criticisms of various equipment. To wit, the
Klipsch speakers were criticized as a "truly rubbish choice" but you
never said what, objectively, was wrong with them.
So naturally some people wonder if it was your purpose to be helpful or
to just flaunt your perceived audiophilic superiority.
In article <477F1C59.499FA58C@hotmail,com >,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Jim Redelfs wrote:
>
> > You said it. I grew up with an audiomaniac (not merely an
> > audiophile). We are still friends to this day. The poor man
> > cannot enjoy music because all he hears - and continuously analyzes
> > - is SOUND.
> >
> > The elitist/snob audiophile is to be pitied. There's SO much good
> > music "out there" but, unless it is an elitist-labeled, analog
> > recording, played-back on their own vacuum tube-powered
> > Magneplanars, it's trash. Sad...
>
> There is nothing snobbish or geeky about appreciating good quality
> sound reproduction. I have *NEVER* heard good quality sound
> reprduction from 'computer speakers'. If any attempt at all has been
> made to influence sound quality with these it's usually to falsely
> flatter (typically with very uneven frequency resposne) which the
> casual listener may like for a while (in the way Bose do).
I have no doubt that among us are "super-hearers" (just as there are
super-tasters) and that the younger one is, the better is the frequency
range of one's hearing. But I suspect that the real number of
super-hearers is considerably fewer than those who profess to hear
things the rest of us may not. I used to take my Naks in for regular
calibration so I had the opportunity to be around people who thought of
themselves as special... as audiophiles, and listen to their (often
tedious) audio bloviations.
And here's the thing that has almost always stuck out like Dick Cheney
at a Freedom rally: At the same time audiophile elitists criticize
others for their subjective (poor ear) choice of speakers (or whatever),
they themselves rarely use objective terms or criteria, including
meaningful variables like environment properties, to describe their own
sound experiences or their criticisms of various equipment. To wit, the
Klipsch speakers were criticized as a "truly rubbish choice" but you
never said what, objectively, was wrong with them.
So naturally some people wonder if it was your purpose to be helpful or
to just flaunt your perceived audiophilic superiority.
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article
<wyvern-5E243F.11321805012008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews,net >,
Madwen <wyvern@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> To wit, the
> Klipsch speakers were criticized as a "truly rubbish choice" but you
> never said what, objectively, was wrong with them.
There was a reference to Klipsch's own specs in there somewhere.
"Boomy" and "tizzy" are onomatopoeia.
Stephen
In article
<wyvern-5E243F.11321805012008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews,net >,
Madwen <wyvern@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> To wit, the
> Klipsch speakers were criticized as a "truly rubbish choice" but you
> never said what, objectively, was wrong with them.
There was a reference to Klipsch's own specs in there somewhere.
"Boomy" and "tizzy" are onomatopoeia.
Stephen
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
i agree the klipsch are a horrible choice
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:477D1A5B.35DAD6AB@hotmail,com ...
>
>
> Curmudgeon wrote:
>
>> Curmudgeon wrote:
>>
>> > I've done a lot of surfing this morning and find myself attracted to an
>> > "audio" solution, the M-Audio Studiophile AV-40 Monitors, as well as to
>> > three "computer" solutions, the Altec Lansing FX-4021, the Klipsch Pro-
>> > Media, and the Logitech Z-2300 2.1 systems. All are within my budget.
>> >
>> > My workspace is probably better served by a 2.1 system since I've got a
>> > lot of room for a sub but much less for satellites, but the audiophile
>> > in me prefers the elegant simplicity of M-Audio's monitors despite size
>> > concerns.
>> >
>> > What to do, what to do . . .
>>
>> Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
>> I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
>> was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
>> the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
>> I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
>>
>> Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
>> to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
>
> I'm sorry to have to say it looks like a truly rubbish choice. I dare say
> it'll boom and tizz a bit.
>
> Graham
>
i agree the klipsch are a horrible choice
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:477D1A5B.35DAD6AB@hotmail,com ...
>
>
> Curmudgeon wrote:
>
>> Curmudgeon wrote:
>>
>> > I've done a lot of surfing this morning and find myself attracted to an
>> > "audio" solution, the M-Audio Studiophile AV-40 Monitors, as well as to
>> > three "computer" solutions, the Altec Lansing FX-4021, the Klipsch Pro-
>> > Media, and the Logitech Z-2300 2.1 systems. All are within my budget.
>> >
>> > My workspace is probably better served by a 2.1 system since I've got a
>> > lot of room for a sub but much less for satellites, but the audiophile
>> > in me prefers the elegant simplicity of M-Audio's monitors despite size
>> > concerns.
>> >
>> > What to do, what to do . . .
>>
>> Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
>> I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
>> was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
>> the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
>> I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
>>
>> Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
>> to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
>
> I'm sorry to have to say it looks like a truly rubbish choice. I dare say
> it'll boom and tizz a bit.
>
> Graham
>
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article <030120081044221227%leave@me.alone>,
Curmudgeon <leave@me.alone> wrote:
> Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
> I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
> was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
> the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
> I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
I think you'll like it, if it's anything like my ProMedia 4.1 system. Do
let us know, though. : )
> Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
> to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
Welcome!
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
In article <030120081044221227%leave@me.alone>,
Curmudgeon <leave@me.alone> wrote:
> Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
> I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
> was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
> the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
> I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
I think you'll like it, if it's anything like my ProMedia 4.1 system. Do
let us know, though. : )
> Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
> to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
Welcome!
--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.
JR
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
In article
<jollyroger-F9CA66.13584103012008@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns,net >,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> In article <030120081044221227%leave@me.alone>,
> Curmudgeon <leave@me.alone> wrote:
>
> > Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
> > I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
> > was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
> > the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
> > I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
>
> I think you'll like it, if it's anything like my ProMedia 4.1 system. Do
> let us know, though. : )
>
> > Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
> > to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
>
> Welcome!
Thanks, JR! You're probably the best-natured guy I've heard from while
I was searching for the right solution. I'm really hoping that the 2.1
system I have on order will meet my needs. After an analysis of what's
available, I am convinced that the Klipsch system is the best answer.
Thank you for steering me in the right direction.
Cheers!
Mudge
In article
<jollyroger-F9CA66.13584103012008@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns,net >,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox,com > wrote:
> In article <030120081044221227%leave@me.alone>,
> Curmudgeon <leave@me.alone> wrote:
>
> > Well, after giving it some serious thought and doing a lot of research,
> > I decided that the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 system best fit the bill, and I
> > was able to get it for a terrific price from Amazon so I've just pushed
> > the "Place My Order" button. It should be here in a week or so. Once
> > I've had a chance to audition it, I'll let you know how it sounds.
>
> I think you'll like it, if it's anything like my ProMedia 4.1 system. Do
> let us know, though. : )
>
> > Many thanks to all the folks who took the time to reply and especially
> > to those who pushed me to do my own research and reach my own decision.
>
> Welcome!
Thanks, JR! You're probably the best-natured guy I've heard from while
I was searching for the right solution. I'm really hoping that the 2.1
system I have on order will meet my needs. After an analysis of what's
available, I am convinced that the Klipsch system is the best answer.
Thank you for steering me in the right direction.
Cheers!
Mudge
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
Curmudgeon wrote:
> Thank you for steering me in the right direction.
Yet you haven't even heard then yet !
Graham
Curmudgeon wrote:
> Thank you for steering me in the right direction.
Yet you haven't even heard then yet !
Graham
Re: Recommendations for Computer Speakers?
you need a set of "powered" monitors
look on ebay
look for review of swan divas
--
LD Pierce
PO 86
Gage OK 73843
800 570-1861
"jakdedert" <jakdedert@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:Mhzej.59977$K27.20330@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Curmudgeon wrote:
>> In article <I2yej.59932$K27.26621@bignews6.bellsouth,net >, jakdedert
>> <jakdedert@bellsouth,net > wrote:
>>
>>> Curmudgeon wrote:
>>>> All -
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the extensive crossposting, but I wasn't sure which group was
>>>> best targeted by this request for information and opinions.
>>>>
>>> 'nuff said. Do some research and get back to us.
>>
>> Thanks for all your "help" but that's exactly what I'm trying to do. I
>> don't trust commercial reviews and am looking for the opinions of plain
>> old users. You want to be contrary? OK, but I'm sure that others will
>> be more helpful.
>>
>> Jeers!
>>
>> Mudge
>
> Thanks for all your crossposting.
>
> If you can't even do enough research to avoid broadcasting to every group
> even remotely connected to the subject, why do you expect someone to do it
> for you? 'Computer' speakers generally suck. You're not going to find
> any that sound even remotely as good as a decent pair of hifi speakers and
> an amp...or decent powered hifi speakers.
>
> Your first line is sufficient to tell that you know xposting to be
> undesirable. You could have just stopped there.....
>
> In any case, speakers are extremely subjective, once you get past the
> junk. There are dozens of review sites on the web. Google is your
> friend. I'm not....
>
> jak
you need a set of "powered" monitors
look on ebay
look for review of swan divas
--
LD Pierce
PO 86
Gage OK 73843
800 570-1861
"jakdedert" <jakdedert@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:Mhzej.59977$K27.20330@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Curmudgeon wrote:
>> In article <I2yej.59932$K27.26621@bignews6.bellsouth,net >, jakdedert
>> <jakdedert@bellsouth,net > wrote:
>>
>>> Curmudgeon wrote:
>>>> All -
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the extensive crossposting, but I wasn't sure which group was
>>>> best targeted by this request for information and opinions.
>>>>
>>> 'nuff said. Do some research and get back to us.
>>
>> Thanks for all your "help" but that's exactly what I'm trying to do. I
>> don't trust commercial reviews and am looking for the opinions of plain
>> old users. You want to be contrary? OK, but I'm sure that others will
>> be more helpful.
>>
>> Jeers!
>>
>> Mudge
>
> Thanks for all your crossposting.
>
> If you can't even do enough research to avoid broadcasting to every group
> even remotely connected to the subject, why do you expect someone to do it
> for you? 'Computer' speakers generally suck. You're not going to find
> any that sound even remotely as good as a decent pair of hifi speakers and
> an amp...or decent powered hifi speakers.
>
> Your first line is sufficient to tell that you know xposting to be
> undesirable. You could have just stopped there.....
>
> In any case, speakers are extremely subjective, once you get past the
> junk. There are dozens of review sites on the web. Google is your
> friend. I'm not....
>
> jak
Moving my old computer speakers to my iMac
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:19:35 -0700, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee,net >
wrote:
>I just got a 24" iMac and noticed it had one speaker plug. The
>speakers I have available are a pair of Acoustic Research Powered
>Partner 570s, and a Logitech Z640 5.1 system that's plugged into a
>Phillips PCS805 Aruilium sound card that's USB'd to one of the two
>Windows machines I'm giving away.
>
>What options do I have without spending more money?
Note: Obviously, since the Logitech has front and back input plugs,
I can't plug them all into the iMac directly.
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:19:35 -0700, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee,net >
wrote:
>I just got a 24" iMac and noticed it had one speaker plug. The
>speakers I have available are a pair of Acoustic Research Powered
>Partner 570s, and a Logitech Z640 5.1 system that's plugged into a
>Phillips PCS805 Aruilium sound card that's USB'd to one of the two
>Windows machines I'm giving away.
>
>What options do I have without spending more money?
Note: Obviously, since the Logitech has front and back input plugs,
I can't plug them all into the iMac directly.
Next: Take 2: Recording at different bit depths/sample rates
Previous: Recording at different bit depths/sample rates
