注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

翼之帆的博客

一只小帆,笑看茫茫大海,哪怕被波浪淹没......

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我

The past you can remember, the current you can touch, the future you can conceive. What do you need?

网易考拉推荐

2.0 vs 2.1 Speakers (Sycraft of hardforum)  

2011-07-24 10:54:15|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |
There is no "better" between 2.0 or 2.1. It is just different. The question really comes down to bass extension. At a given price point, and at a given speaker size, you'll get lower bass, and more bass, with a 2.1 system. Having a dedicated subwoofer allows for that. However, since a subwoofer is a separate speakers, and it needs an amp and all that, not as much money can go to the left and right speakers.
What is right for you really depends on what you want and how much you are willing to spend. Personally, I'm a big fan of subwoofers. I like low bass that goes down to 16Hz. So despite having tower speakers from my front left and right speakers, I also have a subwoofer.
In terms of active monitors, if those are your thing, you can find many of them that have a subwoofer option, so if you desire more bass you can add a sub that is matched to the speakers. In the case of M-Audio, their SBX10 is a sub that matches well with their Studiophile speakers.
Now in terms of measuring speaker response, well the method listed there won't cut it for good measurements. At the low end, things are completely screwed. That room is not nearly large enough for low frequency measurements. Sound waves are much longer than most people think. For example a 30Hz wave is about 37 feet long. As such anything but a massive room (or outdoors) will have some problems with regards to standing waves. In the case of a 25'x15' room, assuming a normal height of 8' you are going to have some large eigenmodes at 22Hz, 37Hz, 43-45Hz and 59Hz. Also there will be more minor ones from about 65Hz to 176Hz.
Because of that, low frequency measurements have to be carried out in special circumstances if you want the true measurement of the speakers. For example the tower speakers I bought come with individual measurements for the actual speakers themselves, not the characteristics of the line. However they only go down to 200Hz because the small room they use to test speakers before shipping can only accurately measure down that low. For the complete response that they have for the line of speakers, they had to be taken to a much larger facility to measure.
Even then with the higher frequency measurements, you need a well treated room. You get all kinds of reflation at different frequencies off the walls. You need to have anechoic material on as much of the walls, floor and ceiling as possible if you want a true response of just the speaker.
Finally, that measurement microphone is not very accurate. It uses the same cheap measurement capsule most inexpensive measurement mics do. Not a problem, but you need to correct for it. It does not appear they had their microphone calibrated and thus they didn't use a correction file. This introduces additional error.
You really don't get much useful out of that. Also, if objective measurements are going to be taken frequency response is only one to consider and perhaps the least useful. As I noted, rooms mess with frequency response a whole lot. Getting the general range of a speaker's FR is about the only useful thing. If you really care about a reasonably. Flat in-room FR, you either have to have a high quality treated room or equalize your speakers.
A more useful stat would be harmonic distortion vs SPL. The greater the harmonic distortion the less "clean" of a sound you'll have. One of the things that separates high end speakers form lower end speakers is the ability to get loud without much distortion.
At any rate as for 2.0 vs 2.1 (or 4.0 or 5.1 or 7.1) it really all comes down to personal preference and budget. What is it you want and how much can you spend? The more speakers you need, the less money that can go to each speaker at a given price point and thus the lesser quality of the speakers. However that low frequency extension can be rather desirable to many. Also, 2.1 speakers can deal with space constraints in some cases. If you've room on the floor but little on your desk, a 2.1 system can potentially offer smaller speakers but still have the range you want.
2.0 can be a very good choice for music though as the usually offer better sound at a given price point. Depending on the kind of music there may not be that much lower bass to worry about and thus it may not be a real big deal to lose it.
When I had to choose, I did choose 2.0 with less bass. For a number of years I just had B&W 601s2 speakers because I couldn't afford anything more. They didn't have the bass that a system with a sub would have, but it would have required trading down quality quite a bit and I didn't want to do that. I could deal with lacking some low bass.
However if the money is there, I think a sub is a great idea, even if you have tower speakers. It not only extends their bass, but it cleans up the bass too. When the woofers in the speakers don't have to work on those low frequencies, and the large amount of excursion they entail, their distortion goes down.
  评论这张
 
阅读(236)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017