I did not look into the THX certification for home equipment/PC gear etc.
This is a great youtube video of the mm-1, I hope the quality comes through: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXIWUYq6Ns4It did for me. The review that mentions they can hear a difference between bit rates is here:http://www.tonepublications.com/review/bws...table-speakers/
I'd like to add though that the Logitech z-5500 is THX certified.Which does mean they are (or at least should be) approved per some certification process, and Logitech need to ensure they remain so (in mass production) ... But I can assume the THX specs either matches the industry standard or slightly surpass it.......THX certification exist for cinema/special setups, home cinema/studios, living room/hifi, computer gear/consoles.There are differences in the certification for these areas, but do guarantee that a certain minimum standard has been met.
Mach-x do you have any articles to check out about how sound is not directional below 100hz? That is fascinating, i'd like to learn more.
If so and if I return the logitech, my budget is between 300-600 dollars and i'm looking for a good recommendation on speakers I can hook up to my PC to listen to FLAC; 2.1 is preferred because the room I have isn't best for surround sound. Anyone have any good recommendations? I'd really appreciate any input here.
I will point to various MPEG tests that show while MP3 and AAC have very, very good results, they do not in fact manage, in the MPEG tests, to be indistinguishable from PCM.
Quote from: Woodinville on 27 December, 2012, 04:42:29 AMI will point to various MPEG tests that show while MP3 and AAC have very, very good results, they do not in fact manage, in the MPEG tests, to be indistinguishable from PCM.Please do point to these tests, or at least clarify their conclusions and implications for lossy codecs. I’m not questioning your experience and knowledge, but this statement, out of context, seems too general and risks misleading people into thinking they will always be able to hear a difference in lossy audio (perhaps assuming they spend a load of money on snake oil first).
Are yous suggesting that lossy audio at high enough bitrates *cannot ever* be distinguished from its PCM counterpart?
Quote from: krabapple on 17 January, 2013, 10:43:13 AMAre yous suggesting that lossy audio at high enough bitrates *cannot ever* be distinguished from its PCM counterpart?Of course not. All I said was that the specific way in which Woodinville referred to the tests might be misleading. I assume they were highly thorough tests designed to catch out even the best codec. But other readers might read that, not think about its actual implications, and just take it to mean that MPEG-based codecs are never going to be transparent. I had to do a double-take, so I don’t think it’s impossible that somebody with (even) less technical knowledge and/or a latent bias against lossy codecs might misinterpret Woodinville’s intended meaning.
I always recommend that people go to a hi-fi or home theater store and LISTEN to some speakers.
Quote from: DVDdoug on 26 December, 2012, 08:59:50 PMI always recommend that people go to a hi-fi or home theater store and LISTEN to some speakers.The problem with that is they won't necessarily sound like they did in the store as they'll sound in someones apartment or house. I've been there and done that back in the early 1990s when getting a new speaker system and won't fall for some store sound ever again since the rooms they have them in may have acoustic advantages which my house will never have.
I assume the speakers I prefer in the store would be the same I prefer at home.
Quote from: 2tec on 02 February, 2013, 02:36:13 PMI assume the speakers I prefer in the store would be the same I prefer at home.I don't imagine that many here will think that's a good assumption to make.
So you agree with me then.