The Official PC building thread - 4th Edition

Are those old magneplanar speakers?

 

Damn I wish they were. What they actually are is two 50W speakers mounted onto a highly sound-conductive piece of waxed corrugated paper. The waxed paper board thing resonates and reflects the sound, giving the speakers pretty decent sound projection. Hence the term "sound reflector". They do sound quite good, but need to be re-covered at the least. Both are stained and torn, but internally pristine. Dumpster diving

The tell is that they're a LOT thicker in profile than Magneplanar speakers. I would love a set.

 

Although Reflectors, or one good say FOLDED which would be better, the wax/cardboard would also dampen some which may not be bad, not overly lively! Sweet...

I just got my new inkjet printer since my Epson 1400 started banding in magenta and cyan lines on everything I'd print. Since I didn't get my normal usaged from the Epson I thought I had better jump boat so I bought a brand new:

CANON PIXMA PRO-100
Professional Photo Inkjet Printer
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consu...fessional_photo_inkjet_printers/pixma_pro_100

I got this printer for $160 USD due to the $200 rebate on a printer that normally sells for $500. This wide format is larger and heavier than my Epson wide format and prints to optical discs as well.

Now here is the kicker, it comes with the front loading tray for discs but it didn't come with the software and I couldn't find it initially on the US site. I had to search for the software and found it on the Euro site, Sam would have been good in this regard as he would have got the CD Labeler with his software.

However their software is horrible, much worst then Epson's Print CD which is wonderful in comparison. So that led me in one of two directions, either buy a cheap Epson for CD printing only or find better software that is compatible with Canon printers.

I downloaded SureThing trial version and played with it before buying and I found it to be pretty darn good and it will work with all CD Print printers which makes it a gold mine for me. So I bought their best package (Gold version) and it was just $35 USD. It took 3 test discs to get the software aligned with my PIXMA Pro-100 but now I'm down town and I'm off and running.

Sweet printer,
Stevo

 

I've always struggled to keep a working printer for more than a year or so. Either monstrously expensive or very poorly made. Those are the only two choices in my experience.

As far as speakers go, I've found that mixing different ranges of mid to entry-level speakers in the right way can create amazing sound reproduction. My speakers are certainly greater as a whole than they are individually. Remember, I've got pretty decent ears and a wide taste in music. There's lots I can do to improve them further. Filling out the frequency range properly is much more important than the inherent quality of one set of speakers.

Yep, despite some of the technological limits and shortcomings of this AV Receiver, it's everything I've ever wanted. Was really just excited to learn more about it, because people usually aren't too pleased when you play with their audio equipment

I simply haven't gotten the chance to play with any newer units, so even this very dated receiver is all new ground to me. I love the heck out of my old Yamaha R-10 and it certainly has sentimental value, but the Yamaha RX-V595 is just a better and more capable receiver period, regardless of differences in era. The newer unit is also much heavier. I'd be curious to have both apart side-by-side and have a lookie-see. The original owner says he paid around $300+ for it new, so it's not a cheapo either.

Just for fun I watched the beach landing scene of Saving Private Ryan in Dolby Digital 5.1 because it's a Dolby encoded AC-3 file. I have to admit the clarity, quality, and power of the sound in that scene was INTENSE. If Dolby Digital Live does do compression like many claim, it's obviously a very good technology. It sounded as good to me as any Blu-Ray on my friend's much more expensive speaker system. The surround effects, bass, everything was fantastic. Crystal clear and quite powerful.

Dolby Digital Live makes everything but proper Dolby encoded movies sound like crap. I'm stuck with Pro Logic stereo for the large majority of media if I want decent quality. Switching to DDL for 5.1 movies is a real treat though.

BTW, using Optical I can only enable 2 channel with 24 bit and 48khz max. In DDL 5.1 I'm limited to 16 bit and 48khz. If I switch from Optical/Digital to analog or HDMI, I can use full 5.1 with 24 bit and 192khz. Yes, regardless of the actual capability of the Optical cable, you are limited in quality. The reason that DDL 5.1 sounds so good with proper Dolby encoding is because their compression technology is great. When you try to play a stereo audio file or other non-AC-3/Dolby sound source, it sounds much worse than if you left it in 2 channel. And it still only uses two channels.

What Optical/Digital is not capable of is uncompressed multi-channel PCM audio from PC games. It simply cannot do it whatsoever, no matter what setting I use. It plays PC games in 2 channel stereo ONLY, even in DDL 5.1. This is where Pro Logic works its upmixing magic though. With Pro Logic turned off, it's quite obvious that there is simply no surround at all. With PL turned on, even a true audiophile would have to do a double-take before realizing it's only a stereo source being upmixed.

Again, when using analog or HDMI instead of optical, most of these limitations disappear.There simply isn't a better way for me to plug-in to this receiver currently so I am experimenting. I will admit that HDMI still depends on the receiver for all its decoding just like Optical/Digital, which analog does not. Where it's more like analog though is that it can transport an uncompressed 5 channel PCM audio signal, which SPDIF(Digital Coax and Optical) cannot do, only 2 channel. I think where some of our disagreement may be is that I am speaking strictly from PC to receiver here. Most other sources simply have Dolby encoding by default. So yes, you are absolutely correct Optical is fully capable of wonderful quality 5.1 surround, just not the kind I want.

I eventually plan to run analog RCA Y cables directly from my Creative X-Fi sound card to the multi-channel inputs on back of the receiver. I currently do not have the cables, but I have a feeling that will end up being my final solution. Then the receiver simply switches to external decoder mode, and plays any type of signal I give it, period. None of these limitations need to even be addressed. I can do real 5 channel stereo, get all my surround, everything. I just wanted to see if the simplicity of optical was worth the trouble. In a dedicated home theater, it most certainly is. Nothing seems to even get close. For a gaming PC though, there are better solutions.

I'm still learning as I go. What I've figured so far is a mix of reference and personal experience. This is what the audio techies on other forums seem to think, and AFAIK what the manual is trying to tell me

 

Just another update. Made myself some 3.5mm to RCA cables and hooked it up to the multi-channel inputs. Problem-free. Issues gone. Conversation over. LOL

Now everything is on the X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro sound card, which supports all the Dolby technologies PLUS multi-channel PCM. It also does proper 5 channel stereo, which the receiver itself simply cannot do. All the receiver is now is an amp to equalize the volume of my speakers and power them. This is probably the best solution to avoid any sort of processing between source and speaker

 

Now I get your problem which is totally your PC's fault! As to cheap speakers, in no way do I agree with your cheap speakers sounding great and if you think that is true you need to get yourself into a set of BOSE speakers. Now some arrays can sound better and handle more wattage if they are tuned in a given cabinet well with a expensive crossover then they would alone, but even then they will not blow away a tuned set of better sonic speakers, much more expensive speaker sets.

But don't take my criticism to hard we all can only do what we can afford, however I would never tell another audiophile that my cheaper speakers sound better than their much more expensive speakers unless they are truly crap like a good set of BOSE speakers are. There are better speakers than what I use for sure but I can guarantee you if you demo'd my speakers in comparison to yours you couldn't couldn't honestly say yours are better and this would be my counter to your thought that your speakers are great, I'm sure they are OK but....

As to Printer I normally get a decade plus out of my printers but I also like a quality printer as I print a lot of art and photos with high buck papers and discs so like my audio I like something a bit better than average. My last professional Epson didn't last long before I needed to replace it so I'm spent on Epson now which is why I switched to Canon for the time being.

 

Never claimed they were better. Only that creating proper reproduction through variety can emulate a more expensive solution given the right tuning.

Intend to keep the receiver indefinitely unless a better one falls in my lap, but probably won't keep these speakers in the long run. My plan is to get a matched set of much better quality eventually. As far as getting BOSE products, I'm not so sure. BOSE seem to have good quality, but almost always overpriced.

http://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-b652-6-1-2-2-way-bookshelf-speaker-pair--300-652

I was told that I could get 4 of these, then modify them a bit, and that would probably be my best bet at a cheap speaker system that doesn't suck.

True on audiophile grade equipment. I can't afford it, will probably never be able to, and don't intend to compare less than $500 in equipment to over $2K. If I could invest less than a hundred bucks in those speakers, put some better caps in them, and a better woofer, I could have a respectable system for pennies on the dollar. Making something great out of something mediocre has always been a hobby of mine

I have some very expensive Realistic Optimus cabinets with rotten guts, and best estimate is some ~$400+ to repair them, and maybe much more to replace the speakers in them entirely. Shoestring budget my friend. If I knew anything of any actual value about speaker construction, I would've fixed them myself long ago.

In the end, if I can make a bunch of average joes say "Wow thats awesome", it'll be enough to feed my ego, no matter what I end up with

 

Standard Realtek philistine reporting in. I never really found a proper PC sound card I liked, and frankly the sound quality through the SPDIF on the chipset on my P55-UD4 is really good

For what its worth, I'm really fond of my Pioneer VSX-922. I don't use analog outputs on my PC at all, I plug my headphones straight into the 1/4" headphone socket on the front, which means I can carry on using optical audio to my headphones - it also provides the added boost of amplifying them, there is a marked improvement in low-end output via the receiver than when plugged into an analog output of the sound card.

Although it's not 4K upscaling, it has several HDMI ports with an HDMI out, enough to connect all my games consoles with composite, component etc. outputs - and still connect to an HDMI-only display like my UP3214Q - the analog connectors on my 3008WFP are now redundant, so I had no issue moving it to my office desk. The thing seems perfectly capable of driving my Z-5500 satellites loud enough when needed (as it should be!) and I use the subwoofer out to run the sub of the Z-5500 via its original control unit. Works great!

 

There is a gigantic difference in power and volume between my Realtek HD and my Creative X-Fi when comparing them both using analog. I imagine similar to the difference you notice between analog from the PC and optical through the receiver. When using optical from the Realtek HD, it's a raw signal so is actually very similar to my X-Fi in overall quality. Optical is definitely the best solution by far when using the Realtek integrated. In analog it can't even hold a candle to the X-Fi.

I also have to agree that, for what it is, Optical has effing awesome quality. Though for my particular setup and tastes, I've found analog to have the same/better quality and to be much more PC gaming friendly. Particularly, Optical CANNOT do multi channel PCM, and it CANNOT do anything above 48khz(though it does do 24 bit). This isn't a particularly huge limitation given the right equipment, but is a deal breaker for me with my older receiver. You'll find the same on your Realtek control panel, Sam, that you are limited to 2 channel PCM 24 bit or Dolby Digital Live 16 bit which sucks for everything but Dolby movies. I would imagine your receiver uses Pro Logic IIx or some other recent upmixing tech to produce surround effects when you are in 2 channel. If I had a newer receiver with more modern decoding like yours, I would certainly still be using optical. Original Pro Logic sucks. Pro Logic II is a totally new technology and is drastically better. Particularly, Pro Logic I treats your surrounds as a single channel. Pro Logic II treats them as separate channels. This is the fundamental reason why I am not satisfied with the Optical on this receiver.

If this were strictly a home theater setup playing nothing but stereo music, Blu-Rays and DVDs, I would consider nothing else but optical. 99% of video media discs and ripped files have Dolby Digital encoding by default, so it's a really ideal setup and is basically a tailor-made combination. For PC-specific output though, unless you mostly play music and movies and aren't really a gamer, it's going to have some limitations. That being said, it certainly doesn't detract from games when set up correctly, and is absolutely IDEAL for music. Again, if I had a better receiver, optical would be the choice for me. Optical is currently the undisputed king of stereo audio and home theater, but is becoming more and more dated for gaming. I know for sure this is where Movies and I had totally different experiences. He's playing stereo music and movies with Dolby surround. I'm playing uncompressed 5 channel PCM. They are a whole different beast as far as outputting them goes. Ideally, I want to be looking for a Pro Logic II receiver. The 2 channel upmixing is so good that I simply wouldn't care if it was true surround or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=S/PDIF

THIS is why I chose not to use Optical in the end. Limited to 2 channels for everything but Dolby media. My receiver also lacks true 5 channel stereo output, so that was another reason to stick with analog. The X-Fi can do everything my dated receiver can't. But even with the newest receiver with the best decoding technology, you are still fundamentally limited to 2 channels through Optical. It's certainly a trade-off that depends on the quality of your digital decoding to match a true analog setup. Both of you guys have straight up more capable receivers.


As far as video goes, my receiver is limited to S-Video and Yellow Component. This means I'm limited strictly to the TV's optical out when console gaming. A Pro Logic II receiver with composite and HDMI would shut me up in that regard.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOSLINK

 

Yep. Says the exact same thing. 2 channel PCM or 5.1 Dolby only. Cannot do uncompressed 5 channel PCM. I'm not making this up. That's what it says...

 

No it can't but I haven't seen PCM in any format 5.1?? So I don't get the point I guess?? The fact is you can have surround sound with Toslink....

 

Ummm, I'm currently using PCM 5.1... That's the point.

 

Hummm... and that's why you can't do it....

 

I just got done explaining that I decided to use analog which DOES give me PCM surround... What exactly are you missing here dude? Forget your coffee this morning?

The fact is that PC video games use PCM 5.1 surround. You can only do PCM surround with analog or HDMI. I don't know where you heard that PCM 5.1 doesn't exist or that I wasn't able to do it.

I've explained in excruciating detail what I've done with my setup. Please go back and read my last few posts.

Got some new speakers too. Kenwood JL-507s. $50 at Goodwill. Going anywhere from $100-200-ish used. Not bad if I do say so myself They were part of a home stereo package, so I'm not sure of retail price but I'd imagine somewhere in the range of ~$300 for the pair if they were sold separately. Not particularly high-end, but the deal I got has a quality of its own

EDIT:
Aaaaaaaand they're not amazing, but they do sound pretty damn good. By and FAR an upgrade over the pathetic Panasonic Thrusters. Very similar quality to my Teacs, maybe a little better, though with better bass and a little warmer tone. Swapped both the Fishers and the Panasonics with the single pair of Kenwoods, and they are more than enough to replace them and then some. WAY better and WAY sooner than I expected. The Teacs are my new rears. I do have to say, I think I've made something out of nothing Receiver and Teacs were free, and now the smokin' deal on the Kenwoods.

BTW Movies, for reference, they have a 12" sub and 4 or 5" mids with 2 or 3" tweeters and a bass reflex hole on the bottom of the cabinet. Back of the cabinet says 100W. Only a single minor tear in the cloth grill on one speaker at the edge, and a few nicks in the veneer that were easily hidden with a black Sharpie. The speakers themselves are pristine. Also, I knocked around on the cabinets quite a bit and no echoes, so they seem sonically sound. The cabinet material is black particle board, but not the cheap crumbly BS. Halfway decent quality all around. Very heavy and solid cabinets.

 

They are not even middle of the road but for free and for computer use they are just fine. Kenwood has never been great in the speaker industry but they have built some decent speakers, only the ones they consider their high-end. They were much better with their receivers but still never high-end. The JL-775's would be a bit better, none of your drivers woofer/mid/tweeter are worth a crap in the 507's. As to the cabinets and grill cloth that won't affect your sonic quality so no big deal and your room isn't pristine showroom quality either so if they sound good for you, you just got a great deal.

As to your analog/digital connection from your PC to your amp? With nothing playing, turn up your amp with the PC input selected and input driving, if you hear hum you have a high noise floor and may want to use an isolation transformer to eliminate the DC insertion which is so common when using that type of connection. IF you run into to this I found a decent quality full range IT which will eliminate most noise situations with these types of connections and will lower the noise floor, they also call this Dynamic Range in consumer products.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260741338139?_trksid=p2059210.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

He's in China but you can rely on him, it just may take +/-20 days or so to get to you. I may bust your chops from time-to-time but it's nice to see that you have the bug and seem to be heading in the right direction. So many kids are not only fine but think their compressed iTunes with their poor player and headphones are the bomb. A suggestion though, if there is a true high-end stereo shop near by you, like Ultimate/AudioKing but are hard to find these days, demo their best system as it will give you a better base for what a true high-end system is. As I've stated my system would blow you away but as good as it is it is truly not a high-end system, it's top on the middle in reality. This isn't a hack it is more for you and to give you the proper base in talking about systems properly.

Also the amp/receiver isn't as important as you speakers, they are what is going to make or break your system and it is always a good measure that your speakers cost 4x++ more then your amp does.

 

Yes, there is a lot of static noise with the volume up(will note that it's FAR above my comfortable listening level before it's audible). It even reacts to my hard drives running. Thanks for the tip on that. Will be picking up a trio of those at soonest possible convenience. Bookmarked. Cleaning up the signal sure as heck can't hurt anything

As far as overall quality of the parts, I'm not too interested in getting into truly high-end audiophile-grade equipment. Just too expensive for my tastes. Several audio forumers have pointed me in the direction of speaker pairs running in the $200-400 range that they seem to think are good quality. Particularly interested in PolkAudio, Klipsch(depending on the model) and a few other brands. If a true audiophile could tell me that my audio setup doesn't outright suck in a year or two, that would put a smile on my face

As far as these Kenwood speakers go, no they aren't high-end at all. They are cheap by home audio standards. What they are though, are still very decent quality speakers with some real thought given to their design, and a major upgrade from what I was using. They actually project a sound stage. Not tinny or echoing, and fairly good imaging. They also have okay bass response, pretty punchy and not too muddy at all. I wouldn't say they sound bad, that's for sure. They are not bargain basement junk, and would probably end up as my rear channels if I were to get better speakers. I fully understand that they are in no way proper Hi-Fi speakers.

My biggest impact for least price(and the first thing I should do before anything else) would probably be to buy some all-new thick gauge speaker wire and re-wire my system. As of currently I'm using quite thin solid core wire with lots of twisted splices for length, which is astoundingly horrific and I'm absolutely sure adds to the background noise and interference. Not to mention it probably affects my sound quality directly. Likewise, I fabricated my own analog to RCA splitters with twisted connections as well. At the very least those splitters will need to be soldered or replaced with some retail cables of better quality. though they are drastically less problematic than the speaker wires given the way I constructed them.

Right at this moment though, I'm pretty satisfied. What I've gained is a very solid core for a higher end setup down the road. The reason I'm interested now, and wasn't previously, is that I was waiting for a halfway quality receiver/amp to come my way. Well, that finally happened, so I have something to start with. The new speakers were just an impulse purchase from Goodwill yesterday. Saw they weren't cheap junk, all the speakers were in good shape, and they weren't beat up. Gotta say, even if my system is pretty mediocre, I'm still getting superior bang for my buck. I do make a hobby out of putting junk to good and reliable use

I have honestly heard a few systems much better than mine. Probably in the range of yours, maybe cheaper, maybe not. I'm stuck comparing what I have for now. The closest true Hi-Fi shop, Gilsons, is about 2 hours away so I'd really have to be heading in that direction. He carries lots of good quality used and retail equipment. Always refurbishes/repairs/refreshes anything that's worth the effort, so if I were determined to get better speakers, that's probably where I'd go.

I may get riled up, but it's probably because my buttons are so visible and easy to push. I don't hold any animosity towards you. Maybe a little "young person angst" lol

 

Would that my house had thick enough walls to warrant a high-end speaker system like those. As it stands my Z-5500s are frankly overkill, they hardly ever get turned up beyond -25dB on the receiver :/

 

My Dad is a cool cat, so I get free-run with my stereo as long as mom isn't home. The walls are also decently thick here. Last time I was in England, I stayed with some friends in a house in Enfield. They had ridiculously thin walls. Must be an England thing. Closing my door is usually enough to fend off complaints for a while.

Also, volume isn't everything. I hardly turn these louder than my X-530s. Quality though...

I will admit that Z-5500s are no joke as far as PC speakers go.

 

Depends on the house. Victorian houses like the one we had in York were great. 1970s semis like my parents' house, not so much

Agreed on volume, but even so - I'm sure audiophiles might find fault with these at the volumes I use them at, but I'm honestly not sure I'd see much difference. The biggest improvement I could make is being able to position the surround speakers where they belong!