2.1 Vs 5.1 - Computer Speakers/Home Theater ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
desiibond said:
^^if you are asking me to take a demo, there is no need. I already own one and I recommend it to anyone who is ready to spend 6-7k for 2.1 speakers.
Click to expand...
No I meant Praks who will be having the demo.
 
@desiibond

Buddy, Ankit is in congested place in SP Road. Are you sure they will have MX5021 & X540 as open piece ?

Most shops in SP Road dont have open piece for demo.
 
MX 5021 any day .Do not go for any other crap.U can come over to my place to do ur auditions .Btb they are modded and i havent listened to them after modding.Raghu told me that they sound amazing after modding.PM me for details.
 
I took a demo of MX5021 at Ankit before buying. They were ready to give demo when I went with my friend for second time.
 
Praks

To have a realistic demo you would need a 8x10 feet open space for 5.1 effect to be really showing its effects, as I am writing this I am listening to so some mp3 selected specifically for 5.1 vs 2.1 demo & I am still not able to find how is 2.1 sounding better in terms of overall sound effect when the output channels are not available, if you want I can send some demo files to you which you must play to have a logical conclusion.

While having the demo the audio player should not have more than 70% of volume the speakers should be 8-10 feet apart from each other.

the sound quality of the playback will be much better from a 2.1 system than a 5.1 system. Simple mathematics
Click to expand...
Greenhorn I am actually trying to understand this simple maths here, if the input is 5.1 DTS & has to be played on 2.1 there are 3 channels of out put being compromised & forcefully being output from 2.1

When you guys say any day 2.1 is better I am still not able to understand as to what is better.

1. Is the sound louder & more fuller without being distorted?

2. are the lows /mids/ high sound with a far better clarity?

3. the sound appears more realistic in comparison to 5.1?

tirthankar

also when any high quality studio recording is made in stereo, seperating the channels out into three more channels is never going to improve the sound quality... at least they are not going to sound the way they are supposed to sound.
Click to expand...
tirthankar

Nice long writeup but some facts are missing

Two-channel recordings, in which sound is played on speakers on either side of the listener, are often referred to as stereo. This isn't entirely accurate, as stereo (or stereophonic) actual refers to a wider range of multi-channel recordings. Two-channel sound is the standard format for home stereo receivers, television and FM radio broadcasts. The simplest two-channel recordings, known as binaural recordings, are produced with two microphones set up at a live event (a concert for example) to take the place of a human's two ears. When you listen to these two channels on separate speakers, it recreates the experience of being present at the event. Surround recordings take this idea a step further, adding more audio channels so sound comes from three or more directions. While the term "surround sound" technically refers to specific multi-channel systems designed by Dolby Laboratories, it is more commonly used as a generic term for theater and home theater multi-channel sound systems. In this article, we'll use it in this generic sense.

There are special microphones that will record surround sound (by picking up sound in three or more directions), but this is not the standard way to produce a surround soundtrack. Almost all movie surround soundtracks are created in a mixing studio. Sound editors and mixers take a number of different audio recordings -- dialogue recorded on the movie set, sound effects recorded in a dubbing studio or created on a computer, a musical score -- and decide which audio channel or channels to put them on.

source HowStuffWorks "How Surround Sound Works"
Click to expand...
I have spent good amount of time in audio recording studio I have 2 audio engineers as my professional friends & when they work they minimum work in 5.1 setup on a 4 track music.

A mixing studio will normally record 16-32 track & the sound engineer will overlay these tracks from each channel in a specified output channel keeping in mind that the same sound will forcefully be played by many on 2.1 stereo so it still should sound good, but in no way the modern recording is done in 2 channel as you seem to suggest.

heck.. that means the professional sound engineers doing the recording don't know their job
Click to expand...
they jolly well know their job & wont even go to 2 channel stereo recording unless forced to do so on gun point, any professional will tell you that 2.1 is the minimum they have to target bcoz maximum sound will be played on 2.1 but they record for maximum quality of 5.1-7.1 channel separation on a 32 track-64 track depending how many different sound the file has to accommodate.

The creative speakers 4.1 which I still own are 10 years old now & 10 yrs ago I bought them for 15700/- along with sound card Live Value! These speakers were suggested by one of my sound engineer friend knowing well that I wanted to create the same effects which I was accustom in the sound studio.

With 2.1 you'll be hearing the music coming from in front of you (stereo)

With 5.1 you'll be hearing the music as if it was in your head (surround) which I think is much more enjoyable.

5.1 dedicated soundcards "upmix" the sound to filter out specific frequencies and push vocals to the front and rhythmic instruments to the back. It's much better quality. On a 5.1 along with dedicated sound card you will require some settings to be tweaked before you get that perfect balance else the sound will be crappy on default settings.

I am not posting this to dispute all but I am still not able to find reasons how is 2.1 is best ...............I am trying to learn via some logical reasoning & hope this discussion will lead to some better understanding How stuff works?
 
Greenhorn I am actually trying to understand this simple maths here, if the input is 5.1 DTS & has to be played on 2.1 there are 3 channels of out put being compromised & forcefully being output from 2.1

When you guys say any day 2.1 is better I am still not able to understand as to what is better.

1. Is the sound louder & more fuller without being distorted?

2. are the lows /mids/ high sound with a far better clarity?

3. the sound appears more realistic in comparison to 5.1?
Click to expand...

If , say you are a speaker manufacturer, who has to make a 5.1 speaker system and a 2.1 speaker system for 10k. Do you think you would use drivers and amplifiers of the same power and quality for both? I dont think so. You would use lesser amps and cheaper drivers since you will need 2~3x of the same stuff to make a 5.1.

So it logically follows that for any given budget, a 2.1 will be better than a 5.1

With 5.1 you'll be hearing the music as if it was in your head (stereo) which I think is much more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

then you would be upmixing them the wrong way. even if you had a 5.1 recording, most discs are mastered such that the artists , instruments - the entire soundstage.
 
So it logically follows that for any given budget, a 2.1 will be better than a 5.1
Click to expand...
So it actually means that 2.1 will be having a better amp quality but will not have better sound effects as good as 5.1 correct?

better amp will give louder sound & clarity on 2.1 then 5.1....right?
 
more output and more sound quality, since they will have better speakers as well.

the surround "effect" is IMO overrated, and again, IMO, not worth losing the sound quality for, unless the speaker setup is exclusively used for movies/games
 
So I would like to conclude that the speakers should not be compared based on the cost but rather they should be compared on per speaker/ per channel output wattage.

Its understood fact that if the total output is 100 watt divided by 2.1

then per channel output to each speaker is higher in 2.1 than the same 100 watt divided by 5.1.

Do you agree that 2.1/100 watt system should be compared with at least 5.1/250 watt system for a fair comparison of sound quality & surround effects?
 
It's all fine ... In theory ,and i quite agree with you.

But try telling that to the average buyer.His budget matters to him, a LOT.

WPC, he probably doesnt even know what it is , and could probably care less
 
probably We should have a disclaimer when we discuss

"THIS APPLIES TO AVERAGE BUYERS ONLY" for rest of you the facts are different. LOL
 
isn't that the way we usually discuss :ashamed:

I think budgets matter to everyone, not just the average buyer. Heck, if you think you should buy 25k 5.1 speakers should be compared with 10k stereo speakers, I ask, why not compare them with 25k stereo speakers :P

in the end , money is the ultimate benchmark. Not just speakers, for everything. When people discuss processors, and compare an AMD Quad processor with a C2D, nobody says no no no, this is all wrong. An amd Quad should be compared with only intel quads, or with a C2D of similar frequency. Or when discussing RAM, when you are considering 2x1GB vs 1x2GB, nobody says that the comparison isnt right.

Even the above average and even the extraordinary buyers have real world limitations on their budget
 
I have a similar query

So X540 is better for movies and games right?
I am not a big musci buff so I can compromise Mx 5021 for quality.

Is audigy value enough or should I go for Xonar Dx? Does Xonar Dx make hell lot of a difference------xonar users plz reply.
 
@ranjan2001 - Thank you for clarifications

I have most of songs in mp3 with max rate of 320 Kbps. I dont intend to play FLAC or dont have songs with 5.1 encoded sound, Player will be iPOD classic

Based on these conditions what do you say ? MX5021 or X540

5021 is THX certified.

X540 has Matrix which converts 2.1 to 5.1
 
Praks,

In your case there are 2 things u need to consider.

If u plan to play Ipod directly connected to speakers without using sound card+computer then the best would be 5021 speakers for your usage as you would need powerful Amp which 2.1 will give u, but you will have limit with the sound coming from front, no surround effect. The human hearing is 360° in sensitivity & only 5.1 & above will get that effect.

If your computer remains ON when ipod is playing then I would go for asus Xonar Dx card+X540 speakers bcoz your budget will allow that else you can even go for creative audigy value card. X540 can play Ipod directly too so u have best of the both, Connect ipod to asus card to have better sound separations.

The 2nd combination will give you many more options via software too & the best will be that if you don't want 5.1 then you can switch to 2.1 but you cant do that if u have just 2.1 only.

The bass & treble with 2.1 will surely be crisper when played even loudly over 70% of volume but ask your self do u play that loud always, will ur family members let u do that................& what about the neighbors.

Remember to enjoy the benefits of 5.1 you would need a room of 8x10 feet at least, bigger the room you will have far better channel separation happening. In my case the new speakers which i will buy will be kept in drawing room 18x28 feet.

I have experimented this with my 4.1 speakers in my computer room 10x12 feet vs in our drawing room, on party days I move the speakers there, take my word the bass is good enough & I don't need to go over 70% of volume.

don't have songs with 5.1 encoded sound
Click to expand...
well how do you know that, I bet many of the songs you have will sound better with surround effects, one such song is Hotel California, try its HD video & u can feel the difference. I am playing it right now on 4.1 as I am typing. If I play the same on 2.1 5021 I will loose its Live effect but surly will have higher quality sound due to the simple reason that the amp is much more powerful in 2.1 than in 5.1 as discussed earlier.

If you can tell me what all u typically listen to then I might change my answer.
 
the problem with most cheap 2.1's , and even worse with 4.1/5.1's is that their bass level is mostly fixed , and increases only slightly with increase in level. So they'll sound very full at low volumes, powerful till about the halfway mark, and start losing it unless you tone down the bass
 
@greenhorn

MX 5021 is THX certified & just heard them, its mind blowing.

Let me check out X540 somewhere for demo. No one is ready to give demo :(
 
One way to avoid that distorted bass is to use sound card synthesizer & not the audio player Equalizer. If used both together the sound suffers specially the bass.

In 5.1 you would need sound card bass boost management option to be checked in to take care of that problem.
 
Praks said:
@greenhorn

MX 5021 is THX certified & just heard them, its mind blowing.

Let me check out X540 somewhere for demo. No one is ready to give demo :(
Click to expand...

Did you have the demo with your Ipod?

Share your experience & tell us more than just saying mind blowing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom