laurencekarl

I will add one thing to what I said. The computer displays are as good as you are going to get and that is why they are more expensive. So if you want ultimate quality you are much better off paying for a computer LCD or TV equivalent even though you will sacrifice size. The size of the pixels, color, response time, etc. of the LCD make a difference. To get equal performance from a large LCD you would have to spend probably over $20K and need several processors to run it. What I would suggest is have a store hook a laptop or something to the TV that you are considering and see what you think. Pay special attention to text, try several sizes and types of fonts, also view images that you have seen on your pc monitor to see if you can stand the difference.

I have never tried this but I have thought about it. All you will need is a minimum of 1280x1024 resolution. Obviously the higher the resolution the better. Also you will need the VGA or DVI input on the LCD monitor (whichever your video card supports although you can get an adapter from one to the other).

Heh. Shocking I know. I can't wait for my amp. I think that I am going to buy the RB-25s off ebay or brandnamez for ~300 with shipping. I realize the hifi shops have to make a living and that they do provide a valuable service by allowing people to listen to stuff but I cannot stand to pay MSRP. Mine doesn't budge from the MSRP and I just hate going in there (maybe not fair but that is my feeling). Now once I get tuition and books paid I will start building my next home theater setup. Depending on how I like the bookshelves it may be klipsch again. I have tried two different DVD-Audio players and neither one of them gave me the quality that I wanted. I just switch back to cd through the optical outs which, although lacking some of the power of DVD-A, sounds much more detailed and not muffled. Also I get to tweak it to my hearts content. Now I assume that you could do this with one of the very expensive DVD-Audio players and receiver pairs with firewire out or something but is there a receiver out there that will allow you to adjust the tonal, DSP, and surround settings for DVD-A/SACD at a reasonable price say less than $500? I have thought about getting one of the used denon DVD-2200 units but I don't want to if it is going to give me the same muddled sound. It would be better anyway if you just had to pay for one set of DACs in the receiver instead of in the player too. The best way to do this is to make the software easily upgradeable and so the player just outputs a digital stream which then is converted using software and finally output via the DACs in the receiver. You could have many more formats e.g. MP3, OGG, etc. and when there is a new one you can simply upgrade the software in the receiver. Imagine that this is being done currently to a certain extent. The only time that you would need to replace the receiver is when the DACs could not longer handle the output from the software.

I understood what you said but I replied incorrectly. I meant that I was glad that I could hook up an amp with a higher power rating than what the speakers where rated for. I have actually heard of people running much higher rated amps because they thought that it was clearer but I wasn't 100% sure that it was a good idea. I.e. 200W speaker would get an amp rated at 500W but they wouldn't turn it up very loud.

I think that you are right about the RF-15 vs. RF-25. I listened to the synergy line at Best Buy and I have decided on the RB-25s based on this. The 5" book shelves that they had sounded about right. The 4" sounded a little too thin even for me. The larger woofers affect the midrange too much for my taste which would be perfect if I was building a system for accurate musical reproduction which I am not. I am building this system primarily for electronica and computer games. I feel like a 5" or 6" woofer will be about right paired with a good sub. Hopefully they will be able to go down to 70hz - 80hz reliably as that is what I like to set the sub for to avoid boominess. The larger speakers i.e. 8" woofers were much more natural sounding but I think the combination of the lighter sounding small woofer with the force and prescense of the NAD will balance that out to a degree. I am glad that I can run extra power to these without damaging them. I am just going to have to keep the volume at a reasonable level.) heh not likely. So unless something major changes my mind my 2 channel computer rig is: Computer + NAD 2600A + RB-25 (sub to be determined

I think you meant "astrologer" not astronomer.

Actually audio does sound better with the lights off. It has to do with sensory deprivation not your audio system though. Radiation does affect electronics too. If a high enough energy photon impacts an electron it can transfer enough momentum to affect its location or cause it to move to a higher energy level in an atom. Very important when designing electronics in space but cosmic radiation is not an issue for earth based systems due to atmospheric shielding. Speaker cable doesn't matter as long as it meets basic standards. Also shielding from earth based radiation/electromagnetic forces is important for some audio and video connections. All of this was handled by engineers a loooooong time ago and is not a subjective matter. Wires that color the sound of the music are called "equalizers." Science does not accept, nor should a reasonable person, unrepeatable anecdotes and untestable assertions as fact. Psychologists have developed tests based on the best practices of science and there is no reason that we cannot apply these here. A simple experiment as has just been conducted is a good start. I have no problem with jdk providing the best system that he can find with the best speaker wire etc. that he can find (provided that it meets engineering specs and doesn't function as an equalizer) and testing it against speaker wire that is made to the same standard. The testing procedure would of course be up to reputable physiologists and psychologists.

I posted this at the ecoustics forum but I have been looking at Klipsch more so I am going to post it here as well. I have noted that many suggest one of the larger book shelf speakers vs. the smaller floor standing. Just having a larger woofer is not really my goal as I am going to get a sub and it seems to me that a smaller woofer can handle midrange better. However you never can tell until you hear the speaker and I unfortunately don't have that opportunity. I wouldn't expect the RF-15 to handle bass but I was thinking that the midrange might be better than the RB-25 or RB-35. Would I be better off springing for the RF-25? I actually think that I might prefer book shelf because I can put them on my computer desk whereas if I got the others I would have to put them behind me. One thing that I notice about the RTi70 vs. RTi38 is that the towers sound much better both in midrange and high than the RTi38 even though the only difference is the larger space and an extra midrange driver i.e. a good high and midrange is not really noticeable until paired with appropriate bass. I picked up an old 2 channel NAD 2600A amp on Ebay for not too much. It runs 150 wpc at 8 ohm. I think that it is comparable to the 2200 and 2400. Is this going to completely overpower the speakers? Many of them are rated max of around 100W and the RB-25 is like 85W. Should I just be careful about the volume? It gets very good consumer reviews here. http://www.audioreview.com/Amplifiers/NAD/PRD_116006_1583crx.aspx First I will say that I am not an audio snob but do listen to sound very closely and in fact most of my preferences would probably horrify the audiophiles. I am throwing out personal preferences and anecdotes in the hope that someone who understands what I am looking for has travelled this path already. E.g. On many systems I like to turn turn bass and treble up instead of leaving at the center mark (granted this depends greatly on the system and on a lot of systems it is variable). I also tend to fiddle a lot with the EQ settings and DSP modes depending on the type of music or even the song that I am listening to. I am going to assume that the 2600A sounds like other NAD amps from the late 80s and early 90s which would probably be similar to today. I plan on using it for stereo at the moment. I like trance, techno, rock, classical and sountracks. I do not like pronounced, muddy, midrange. I have a pair of Polk Rti38s/70s that exemplify exactly what I do not like in the midrange area. I like bass to be really deep and tight not boomy. On a scale ranging from highs that make your ears bleed to highs that get lost in the music I would lean toward the ear bleeding end because I love electronic music. I also find that my violin does produce higher hissing sounds that many systems that have bloated midrange and scaled back high have no hope of emulating. I think that I would probably prefer a metal tweeter because of this fact. I listened to the Polk LSi series and I am pretty happy with them. I do like the detail from those speakers and the orchestral sound track that I was listening to on them sounded almost there. The highs are very good but I would like to remove just a little bit more midrange. Just to give an example I have heard some Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 computer speakers that produced the artificial sound of an electronic ambient orchestra that I would like the speakers to be able to produce if required. This is just an example and I don't like the horn based home audio Klipsch speakers nearly as much because they sound sort of thin to me. My RTi70s and RTi38s do an excellent job with certain types of music but they cannot produce electronic music and rock at all. They sound very dead at times and I do not want this problem with this system as I am hooking it up to my computer and a DVD-Audio player. I want the system to sound spectacular with the sound from Battle Field 1942 (computer game), Aqua, A*Teens, Diana Fox, Dj Tiesto, BT, ATB, Amber, Alice Deejay, Ian Van Dahl, Fragma, Milk Inc. etc. in addition to the standard Mozart-Requiem, Bach-Air.., Vivaldi-4 Seasons, Dave Matthews Band, BackStreet Boys, Britney Spears, Diana Krall, Alison Krauss, Sarah McLachlan, movie sountracks, Maroon 5, Muse, Ozzie, Metallica, Rammstein, Our Lady Peace, Papa Roach etc. Also I found that cd through a digital out to the receiver where I could use the DSP/Tonal sounds much better than DVD-Audio. The analog output from the DVD-Audio sucks and is sort of dead to listen to. I think that much of this is due to the characteristics of my receiver and speakers but cd's sound awesome in comparison. I am thinking metal tweeter and small midrange driver to cure this problem. If anyone can sort of understand where I am coming from and can offer advice on speakers it would be much appreciated. I am thinking something hopefully $600 or less. I will also be getting a sub in a little while so the speakers don't have to produce great bass. I am thinking about one of the ~$400 - $600 SVS probably the 20-39CS. Please note that the amp will probably put out 250-300 wpc at 4ohm. I am looking for book shelf due to price but floor standing is fine. I think that I can get the LSi9s for around that and unfortunately that is all that I have the opportunity to listen to. Obviously if I can get something for less that would be good. I am open to anything and have always been tempted to try the Magnepan MMGs based on reviews but it sounds like they are better for acoustic/classical and I really want something that can do trance/techno/pop as well. I have also read about the PSB brand and Paradigm Mini Monitor, Monitor 5 but I have never heard them. Should I maybe try to find some better Klipsch speakers? I will go listen to the Synergy again at Best Buy. The larger ones sound the best to me but I don't want to put $1000+ into them.