Speakers are by far the biggest factor and bang for your buck. I wrote this short pointer for a local email list recently, might be useful:
--
First thing you should do is decide your total budget, and what you need to buy. You can get a nice-sounding pair of bookshelf speakers for $200-400, and a serviceable receiver for similar amounts. Your best-value speaker choices are made by smaller companies you may be unfamiliar with, and aren't sold in big stores or crutchfield. Browse this list (sorted by price) for examples of some prominent names in the "high-end budget audio" speaker world:
This thread has made me think about how I listen to music at home. Generally it is through my computer equipment with 2.1 sound or through an OK ipod dock, but no better than OK. So this afternoon I've listened to Neil Young's Gretest Hits (DVD 5.1) and Phil Collins Big Band (CD), both chosen to represent high quality recordings through my DVD Surround Sound player, with quality speakers and amplification. This really has shown me that I too need to invest into better sound for digital muisc. It also reminds me that I actually could improve the quality of sound if all my own CDs were recorded as Apple Lossless files on itunes. I can see some expense coming... I might see how I can investigate connecting in my ipod into this system first.
Quite a while back, before I knew/could afford better, I was using an MP3 player with a pretty small storage capacity and cheap earbuds. After some experimentation I discovered that for most things I could not really tell a big difference between 64kbps wmp files and 96 or even 124 kbps mp3 files, so I did a bunch of converting (keeping the originals of course) so as to squeeze the maximum amount of music onto the player. Then a bit later I bought some more expensive earbuds. Everything now sounded terrible, and I started over.
An increasingly large percentage of my music is in high-kbps (220+) VBR MP3 files. Should I fear that if I upgrade my system my music might actually sound worse?
With some quality headphones I bought a couple of yearsa go i can tell the difference betwen tracks I originally put on my compuuer using WMP. Space on my old computer was at a premium/ When I bought my ipod I just converted to AAC as space was still/even more an issue. Since buying a new computer I've upgraded some CDs to 256 KPS andalso lossless. The lossless tends to go onto my ipad, as space there is not an issue yet.I can certainly tell there that it is better quality, but not when playing though the computer
Quite a while back, before I knew/could afford better, I was using an MP3 player with a pretty small storage capacity and cheap earbuds. After some experimentation I discovered that for most things I could not really tell a big difference between 64kbps wmp files and 96 or even 124 kbps mp3 files, so I did a bunch of converting (keeping the originals of course) so as to squeeze the maximum amount of music onto the player. Then a bit later I bought some more expensive earbuds. Everything now sounded terrible, and I started over.
An increasingly large percentage of my music is in high-kbps (220+) VBR MP3 files. Should I fear that if I upgrade my system my music might actually sound worse?
Unfortunately, it is a distinct possibility. For the past several years I've done most of my music listening with very good earbuds (Shure SE530) on an iPod. After doing some listening tests with familiar songs encoded at different bit rates, I found that MP3s encoded at 256 kbps (VBR) or higher sounded very good to me without taking up too much space on my iPod. At home, I still listened to CDs. Now that I've upgraded my receiver, on my home system I can clearly hear the difference between MP3s and lossless audio files, which is why I've spent the past several months re-ripping all my CDs to Apple lossless. Lossless is lossless, so the digital file should sound as good (or bad) as the CD it came from. It's been a pain, but I'm assuming (hoping) that this will be the last time I have to do it.
I still haven't gotten around to re-doing all my original XTC, Robyn Hitchcock, House of Love, Simple Minds, and Wire rips. I did recently re-rip the Chameleons, the Pixies, and Slowdive/Mojave 3, and The Auteurs. And of course I did the Cocteau Twins first, that was an obvious one.
It's a real drag, what with all the CDs involved, but I figure I'll reserve a couple of days and do it right this time - only with XTC, there are tons of segues in the albums that cause the starts/ends of various tracks to be cut off, and which make it very jarring to listen to the tracks in shuffle mode (not that Andy Partridge would ever approve of shuffle mode). I figure it could take several days to edit that stuff. But, y'know, it's XTC so you have to do it, right?
Anyway, I can definitely hear the difference through iPod docks on decent stereos, and since I now have about 5 iPod docks scattered throughout the house...
I did a very unscientific listening test. Inevitably the CD on a decent system was best, followed by headphones on my ipad. I could tell the difference between that (lossless) and my ipod (AAC) with Apple buds - I was trying to play both more or less simultaneously. What it did show was that the way I listen to music most often - through my computer isn't that good enough.
decide your total budget, and what you need to buy
OK, it doesn't take long to get overwhelmed in all this audio component stuff. I am pretty sure that I don't want this to even potentially turn into a home theater (I'm a low-volume movie watcher and the main floor of the house does not even have a TV) - just want the music to sound great (and ideally for all of my high-kbps MP3s not to suddenly sound unlistenable - it's nice that one can get FLAC and all these days, but I have way too much stuff that was bought as MP3 to abandon it overnight). I am looking for a good primer on what I should be wanting to buy - a lot of the articles that I am finding simply assume that I want a home theater system. Anyone have any good links to primers on possible configurations that don't use much technical jargon?
If I don't want to use it for DVDs, just music, do I need a center speaker as well as the pair of bookshelf speakers? i.e. is that option more about surround or about sound?
You've actually hit on a significant part of the problem right there, GP - home theater systems are "hot" now and have been for some time, but if you play a stereo signal through a home theater system, it's going to get re-processed, through a digital crossover and probably through an digital effects processor of some sort too, into a 5.1 surround signal. And that usually ends up sounding terrible, to my ears at least, for nearly all musical genres, with the possible exception of trance/disco and hip-hop (which benefit from the use of powered subwoofers).
Still, there are high-end home theater receivers that do a better job of it than others, and (I think) some you can also set up to route stereo inputs to a separate pair of regular ol' passive "2.0" stereo speakers automatically, with both your 5.1 and 2.0 speakers hooked up to the same unit. But you end up paying more for that, and you shouldn't have to.
Lastly, you wouldn't want to add a center speaker to a 2.0 stereo output unless you're using it to amplify the output of a TV set, in which case that might let you turn up the dialog volume (which is usually more in the center of the stereo image) while the music/background stays relatively low. But nearly all home-theater systems these days have dialog-boost features for that, as well as "Midnight" features that limit the bass output to a certain level for when you're watching in an apartment late at night. None of that stuff is desirable for music though, IMO, except maybe the last thing if you're listening to trance/disco or hip-hop.
OK, that's helpful. I definitely don't want a system that's trying to process my CD as a movie and my trance/hip hop consumption is about as low as my movie viewing. And I don't want to watch TV on it. So I probably just want two shelf speakers and maybe a subwoofer?
Does that also mean that a "receiver" is doing things radically different from what my old-fashioned brain thinks should be an "amp"? I notice that some receivers have MP3-enhancing-something in them.
(Boy, you can think you're up to date in some areas and as soon as you look at buying something you haven't bought in a while it's another language)
I don't have any pointers to articles, but I am a proponent of simple and good. I like two channels, maybe a subwoofer, and easy access to a big volume knob, say...
@ Trunkler,that's really interesting, thanks...add a CD player and I might not want for much more. I can see I'm going to have to spend a while just figuring out all the genres of object I could be interested in here.
Well, I am thinking I might need a volume remote in there somewhere. We lost the remote to our current stereo years ago and are forever getting up and down to change the volume...
I think the Surround Sound and the way it is used with CDs depends upon the system. With some you can still get quality stereo sound equivalent to quality stereo amps.
I think the Surround Sound and the way it is used with CDs depends upon the system. With some you can still get quality stereo sound equivalent to quality stereo amps.
This is correct. Most any decent home theater receiver will use surround sound processing for movies and stereo processing for CDs. You can typically choose your source and the process that is used to decode it, so you can certainly inflict surround sound processing on a plain old stereo CD, but as ScissorMan points out, that might not sound very good. Some recent CDs have been remixed for surround sound with excellent results -- I've heard good things about the Aqualung reissue, but haven't heard it yet -- but you should still be able to play a stereo CD through two front speakers, with or without a subwoofer, even if you have a full-blown home theater setup.
Yes, when The Beatles Love album came out you could buy a deluxe edition, one on CD mixed for normal stereo play, with a DVD mixed for 5.1, which I find brilliant.
Apparently this is a line that Klipsch developed for sale at Best Buy. The model is now discontinued model, thus the price break. I saw this as a good opportunity to move up a notch on bookshelf speakers, at a lower price point. So far I think they sound great...they're simply plugged into my "vintage" (ie, 20-year-old) amp. On a very familiar 128 mp3, they're a substantial upgrade in sound, at least to my ears.
They're replacing an undistinguished set of old dinosaur speakers, of similar "vintage"...my wife's longstanding objection to their ugliness being the main impetus for downsizing.
These speakers would be wonderful for a small to medium-large room. For adequate bass, they really do require a subwoofer, but then they were designed to be used that way. Remember, Hsu was first a subwoofer company. While they do not give you the level of sophistication of some (but not all) more expensive bookshelves at say $2,000 and up, they are certainly better than anything you could buy at much higher prices (need we mention Bose?) from Best Buy or Circuit City. These would be great for an office or bedroom system or they would most certainly be the envy of dorm mates for the college student on a budget.
Prof, those look pretty spiffy. Meant to mention, these are the other ones I was considering: http://www.amazon.com/Polk-Audio-Monitor-Bookshelf-Speakers/dp/B0009YWCT4/...Also mid-entry level at the low-entry level price. I have a kid to put through college before I think about exiting the entry level!
Yeah, I've got two in college. Wouldn't even be looking at them if I hadn't just come by some money that is meant to be outside the regular budget and for something special. This is my one chance to upgrade for the foreseeable future so I want to see how far up I can get with what I can spend, even if it means buying better speakers for now with a cheap amp to power them with for the moment. Given that one of those speakers is more than my current system cost in its entirety I'm hopeful it should be a nice upgrade.
@Doofy I've got a pair of those Polk bookshelf speakers and I like them very much. Note that they are very deep (13"), so they may not fit on your typical bookshelf. Newegg has them for $150/pair, free shipping, and it looks like you can get them in Black for $120 if you use a promotion code.
Took a little initial look at CD players today. Again, I find that I don;t match the market. Apart from the imminent obsolescence of the CD player, almost everything on a quick first trawl was a 5- or 6-CD changer. I'm wary of those - my experience over the years is that the changing mechanism is ALWAYS the first thing that breaks/wears out/results in digging lost CDs out of the innards of the machine through the application of violence. I don't shuffle CDs and rarely bother to queue them (even though I do have a changer on the current unit). I'd rather have a player that plays one CD at a time really smoothly and reliably; I am still able bodied enough to get up and choose the next CD myself. Anybody had good experience with any particular models? (I can't afford this one)
ETA: or maybe I should just be buying a DVD player even though I only want to play CDs?
The Boulder looks really nice, but $24000 and then you have to buy a very high quality amp plus speakers too! Only Premier League footballers and City executives on thier £1m plus bonuses could buy it over here. I'd love to listen to it though just to hear what you can get when money really is no object...
Comments
--
First thing you should do is decide your total budget, and what you need to buy. You can get a nice-sounding pair of bookshelf speakers for $200-400, and a serviceable receiver for similar amounts. Your best-value speaker choices are made by smaller companies you may be unfamiliar with, and aren't sold in big stores or crutchfield. Browse this list (sorted by price) for examples of some prominent names in the "high-end budget audio" speaker world:
http://www.audioadvisor.com/products.asp?dept=49&pagenumber=1&sort_on=price&sort_by=ASC&view_all=false&sortby=price%2CASC
You may want to go ahead and buy an AV receiver in case you want to piggyback a home theater on it eventually. Some suggestions here, for example:
http://www.audioholics.com/buying-guides/system-buying-guides/the-1000-bare-bones-system/equipment-product-recommendations
I wouldn't be afraid to buy used in general, most audio equipment holds up well and doesn't suffer too much "use and abuse".
Marantz makes recommended budget cd players, e.g.
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlplay&1328824520&/Marantz-CD-5001-Opened---teste
Audiogon is a good source for good used audio components.
An increasingly large percentage of my music is in high-kbps (220+) VBR MP3 files. Should I fear that if I upgrade my system my music might actually sound worse?
Unfortunately, it is a distinct possibility. For the past several years I've done most of my music listening with very good earbuds (Shure SE530) on an iPod. After doing some listening tests with familiar songs encoded at different bit rates, I found that MP3s encoded at 256 kbps (VBR) or higher sounded very good to me without taking up too much space on my iPod. At home, I still listened to CDs. Now that I've upgraded my receiver, on my home system I can clearly hear the difference between MP3s and lossless audio files, which is why I've spent the past several months re-ripping all my CDs to Apple lossless. Lossless is lossless, so the digital file should sound as good (or bad) as the CD it came from. It's been a pain, but I'm assuming (hoping) that this will be the last time I have to do it.
It's a real drag, what with all the CDs involved, but I figure I'll reserve a couple of days and do it right this time - only with XTC, there are tons of segues in the albums that cause the starts/ends of various tracks to be cut off, and which make it very jarring to listen to the tracks in shuffle mode (not that Andy Partridge would ever approve of shuffle mode). I figure it could take several days to edit that stuff. But, y'know, it's XTC so you have to do it, right?
Anyway, I can definitely hear the difference through iPod docks on decent stereos, and since I now have about 5 iPod docks scattered throughout the house...
OK, it doesn't take long to get overwhelmed in all this audio component stuff. I am pretty sure that I don't want this to even potentially turn into a home theater (I'm a low-volume movie watcher and the main floor of the house does not even have a TV) - just want the music to sound great (and ideally for all of my high-kbps MP3s not to suddenly sound unlistenable - it's nice that one can get FLAC and all these days, but I have way too much stuff that was bought as MP3 to abandon it overnight). I am looking for a good primer on what I should be wanting to buy - a lot of the articles that I am finding simply assume that I want a home theater system. Anyone have any good links to primers on possible configurations that don't use much technical jargon?
If I don't want to use it for DVDs, just music, do I need a center speaker as well as the pair of bookshelf speakers? i.e. is that option more about surround or about sound?
Still, there are high-end home theater receivers that do a better job of it than others, and (I think) some you can also set up to route stereo inputs to a separate pair of regular ol' passive "2.0" stereo speakers automatically, with both your 5.1 and 2.0 speakers hooked up to the same unit. But you end up paying more for that, and you shouldn't have to.
Lastly, you wouldn't want to add a center speaker to a 2.0 stereo output unless you're using it to amplify the output of a TV set, in which case that might let you turn up the dialog volume (which is usually more in the center of the stereo image) while the music/background stays relatively low. But nearly all home-theater systems these days have dialog-boost features for that, as well as "Midnight" features that limit the bass output to a certain level for when you're watching in an apartment late at night. None of that stuff is desirable for music though, IMO, except maybe the last thing if you're listening to trance/disco or hip-hop.
Does that also mean that a "receiver" is doing things radically different from what my old-fashioned brain thinks should be an "amp"? I notice that some receivers have MP3-enhancing-something in them.
(Boy, you can think you're up to date in some areas and as soon as you look at buying something you haven't bought in a while it's another language)
Dayton DTA-100a
Pair that with an iPod and a dock, and you might be done. The tricky part, again, is choosing those bookshelf speakers. Everything else is dross.
Also on my radar is the soon to be released Raspberry Pi $35 credit card sized computer running XBMC.
Craig
This is correct. Most any decent home theater receiver will use surround sound processing for movies and stereo processing for CDs. You can typically choose your source and the process that is used to decode it, so you can certainly inflict surround sound processing on a plain old stereo CD, but as ScissorMan points out, that might not sound very good. Some recent CDs have been remixed for surround sound with excellent results -- I've heard good things about the Aqualung reissue, but haven't heard it yet -- but you should still be able to play a stereo CD through two front speakers, with or without a subwoofer, even if you have a full-blown home theater setup.
Apparently this is a line that Klipsch developed for sale at Best Buy. The model is now discontinued model, thus the price break. I saw this as a good opportunity to move up a notch on bookshelf speakers, at a lower price point. So far I think they sound great...they're simply plugged into my "vintage" (ie, 20-year-old) amp. On a very familiar 128 mp3, they're a substantial upgrade in sound, at least to my ears.
They're replacing an undistinguished set of old dinosaur speakers, of similar "vintage"...my wife's longstanding objection to their ugliness being the main impetus for downsizing.
ETA: or maybe I should just be buying a DVD player even though I only want to play CDs?