Beginner stereo setup(for Movies) under 30k

[dazzwilliams]

Yes. Just added to cart and checked. It feels so tempting. It’s just that there is no decent review of this product that makes me hesitant.

Order this and see if it fulfills your requirements. 5k is a good deal. If not suitable, you can always return it

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

I think the best bet would be to get the Tannoy Eclipse 2 from Hifimart and a decent Amp like Norge 2060 or 2000 (depending on the budget, both priced around 12k+ new)
You can connect them with the Line out from your TV for the time being and later when budget permits you could get a used DAC like the Schiit Modi 2 with optical input (around 5-6k)

Actually you can get Samsung Q60R for 25-26k, and it'll give you a center channel for clearer dialogs, decently balanced sonic performance with good bass till 40 Hz and a decently wide soundstage. Plus, virtual surround if needed. Samsung's Surround mode doesnt hurt vocals like DTS Virtual X dows. If you aren't getting an AVR and can't upgrade, a 3.1 channel soundbar gives more functionality and good center performance. Plus, you can add rear speakers later if you want. Option is open. With an amp, you lose a lot of what's importantly for movies. Plus, a lot of the speakers that are popular aren't inherently better than soundbars. If I remember correctly, Fyne Audio's speakers measure horribly. Like worse that soundbars. Lol

Fyne audio would have been fine if there existed, pioneer Andrew Jones and the JBL A 120s. But this all matter if we are targeting a flat freq response at the lowest budget. If you look at fyne audio f301, it has a dip in upper mids and elevated treble, which is a secret ingredient for a very good separation feel of the mids and treble. This is done on purpose on speakers like spendor, Rogers and many other bbc monitor based designs. Result would be smooth vocals but problem is the singer will always be “sleepy”. Once you heard it it’s hard to unhear! Also drums will have a “nice” metallic tone which is less harsh on ears. The bbc designs don’t have so much treble though. But all in all not every speaker at this price is targeted to achieve neutral. The problem with reading too much asrreview is though I personally like neutral sound, Amir’s reference point is always a colorless sound. Anything which doesn’t tick that mark is horrible to him. Some speakers which has some dips and ups would work well than a reference grade stuff in certain room. Ideally if you put a genelec 1031 you should be happy in an acoustic chamber but in a reflective room, it will be hard to withstand due to that metal tweeter which is brutal on bad recordings. The genelec guys know this, and they have eq Switches behind them. But a non flat passive speaker with neutral tuning still may need some sort of eq to get the neutral response in most rooms. Again neutral sound on every content we regularly watch is not a happy experience. ! But personally like I said, I appreciate the hard engineering existing on those cheap speakers with not many parts even to get them flat!

 

[Marakk]

Fyne audio would have been fine if there existed, pioneer Andrew Jones and the JBL A 120s. But this all matter if we are targeting a flat freq response at the lowest budget. If you look at fyne audio f301, it has a dip in upper mids and elevated treble, which is a secret ingredient for a very good separation feel of the mids and treble. This is done on purpose on speakers like spendor, Rogers and many other bbc monitor based designs. Result would be smooth vocals but problem is the singer will always be “sleepy”. Once you heard it it’s hard to unhear! Also drums will have a “nice” metallic tone which is less harsh on ears. The bbc designs don’t have so much treble though. But all in all not every speaker at this price is targeted to achieve neutral. The problem with reading too much asrreview is though I personally like neutral sound, Amir’s reference point is always a colorless sound. Anything which doesn’t tick that mark is horrible to him. Some speakers which has some dips and ups would work well than a reference grade stuff in certain room. Ideally if you put a genelec 1031 you should be happy in an acoustic chamber but in a reflective room, it will be hard to withstand due to that metal tweeter which is brutal on bad recordings. The genelec guys know this, and they have eq Switches behind them. But a non flat passive speaker with neutral tuning still may need some sort of eq to get the neutral response in most rooms. Again neutral sound on every content we regularly watch is not a happy experience. ! But personally like I said, I appreciate the hard engineering existing on those cheap speakers with not many parts even to get them flat!

Fyne 301 has a really uneven response throughout the range, and treble isn't elevated, some mids are dipped.

Google-Ergebnis für https://www.stereophile.com/images/420FY301fig3.jpg

images.app.goo.gl

And I'm sold more by research of Floyd Toole and Sean Olive. ASR and Amir just pointed out to those. With a response like the above, the circle of confusion is so big. There's no certain frequency that if you boost voices will sound better, as there's a wide variation in human voices. Some will sound better, some worse.

Again, I would refute you point by point, but instead, jsut read Floyd Toole's book first. It's available for free if you'll Google it. I can link if you want. Most of your points are covered by actual research done by industry pioneers.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Fyne 301 has a really uneven response throughout the range, and treble isn't elevated, some mids are dipped.

Google-Ergebnis für https://www.stereophile.com/images/420FY301fig3.jpg

images.app.goo.gl

And I'm sold more by research of Floyd Toole and Sean Olive. ASR and Amir just pointed out to those. With a response like the above, the circle of confusion is so big. There's no certain frequency that if you boost voices will sound better, as there's a wide variation in human voices. Some will sound better, some worse.

Again, I would refute you point by point, but instead, jsut read Floyd Toole's book first. It's available for free if you'll Google it. I can link if you want. Most of your points are covered by actual research done by industry pioneers.

I have gone through those books before

 

[Marakk]

Fyne audio would have been fine if there existed, pioneer Andrew Jones and the JBL A 120s. But this all matter if we are targeting a flat freq response at the lowest budget. If you look at fyne audio f301, it has a dip in upper mids and elevated treble, which is a secret ingredient for a very good separation feel of the mids and treble. This is done on purpose on speakers like spendor, Rogers and many other bbc monitor based designs. Result would be smooth vocals but problem is the singer will always be “sleepy”. Once you heard it it’s hard to unhear! Also drums will have a “nice” metallic tone which is less harsh on ears. The bbc designs don’t have so much treble though. But all in all not every speaker at this price is targeted to achieve neutral. The problem with reading too much asrreview is though I personally like neutral sound, Amir’s reference point is always a colorless sound. Anything which doesn’t tick that mark is horrible to him. Some speakers which has some dips and ups would work well than a reference grade stuff in certain room. Ideally if you put a genelec 1031 you should be happy in an acoustic chamber but in a reflective room, it will be hard to withstand due to that metal tweeter which is brutal on bad recordings. The genelec guys know this, and they have eq Switches behind them. But a non flat passive speaker with neutral tuning still may need some sort of eq to get the neutral response in most rooms. Again neutral sound on every content we regularly watch is not a happy experience. ! But personally like I said, I appreciate the hard engineering existing on those cheap speakers with not many parts even to get them flat!

Again, I point out to read the book, because ample subjective testing has been done, and on basis of that only flat anechoic response that follows Harman target curve of sloping downwards room response has been settled as the best subjectively and objectively.

So your assumption here that flat anechoic response would be harsh in room is wrong, because well controlled reflections and combined sum should give it a downward slope.

 

[Marakk]

I have gone through those books before

I don't get why you would write what you're writing then. If you can prove what you're writing, you can become the next pioneer of the audio industry, proving decades of research as being wrong.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

I don't get why you would write what you're writing then. If you can prove what you're writing, you can become the next pioneer of the audio industry, proving decades of research as being wrong.

I didn’t contradict anything what you said if you read carefully. I did not say magically by eqing you can make vocals better, but only said if you use some eq it may result in a sound which appeals “many” audiophiles who are quite used to certain type of sound as their reference point. I am not claiming they are right, I also don’t like it, but I know lot of people like the BBCdip. That’s the thing I referred to . Peace out, I am not your enemy

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Again, I point out to read the book, because ample subjective testing has been done, and on basis of that only flat anechoic response that follows Harman target curve of sloping downwards room response has been settled as the best subjectively and objectively.

So your assumption here that flat anechoic response would be harsh in room is wrong, because well controlled reflections and combined sum should give it a downward slope.

Measure a flat speaker in a anechoic chamber and an Indian room with lots of windows made of glass, and no curtains.. they won’t meaure the same at same listening distance.

 

[Marakk]

I didn’t contradict anything what you said if you read carefully. I did not say magically by eqing you can make vocals better, but only said if you use some eq it may result in a sound which appeals “many” audiophiles who are quite used to certain type of sound as their reference point. I am not claiming they are right, I also don’t like it, but I know lot of people like the BBCdip. That’s the thing I referred to . Peace out, I am not your enemy

Why would you assume I see you as your enemy just because we are disagreeing? Lol. Just talking, man.

What Floyd Toole concluded makes sense to me. We need matching standards for mastering and home audio, so that we can actually hear how the people behind the work wanted it to be. For that, they also need to use speakers with tightly controlled frequency response. With a speaker which has that, along with good directivity, you can EQ to your tastes.

A speaker like F301 can't really be EQed either, as the directivity is uneven too. It's a bad choice either way.

 

[Marakk]

Measure a flat speaker in a anechoic chamber and an Indian room with lots of windows made of glass, and no curtains.. they won’t meaure the same at same listening distance.

They aren't supposed to measure the same. That's the point. In-room response needs to follow the Harman target curve, which takes reflections into account. That's the whole point for Floyd Toole's research, that good speakers are good, no matter what it the room is like. This was tested and verified.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

[QUOTE="Marakk, post: 880080, member: 91448] ample subjective testing has been done, and on basis of that only flat anechoic response that follows Harman target curve of sloping downwards room response has been settled as the best subjectively and objectively.

[/QUOTE]

If you don’t mind, can you explain what this means ? Serious question here,as I couldn’t follow.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

They aren't supposed to measure the same. That's the point. In-room response needs to follow the Harman target curve, which takes reflections into account. That's the whole point for Floyd Toole's research, that good speakers are good, no matter what it the room is like. This was tested and verified.

What do we consider as a standard set of reflections ? My room can be made of wood or completely of glass. Both reflect different frequencies differently. So when they say reflections in account, they might have used a model room somewhere in between all of these. But Still this leaves room for lot of unpredictable things until the actual target room is measured too.

 

[Marakk]

What do we consider as a standard set of reflections ? My room can be made of wood or completely of glass. Both reflect different frequencies differently. So when they say reflections in account, they might have used a model room somewhere in between all of these. But Still this leaves room for lot of unpredictable things until the actual target room is measured too.

Again, this has been covered by the research. Good speakers were considered good, irrespective of the rooms. Subjectively, they were chosen above others by listeners. That's why I keep pointing out the book. It's covered there.

As long as the speakers have good, controlled directivity, the sum of the reflections and on axis sound will be smooth, and in that room, such a speaker will be preferred over others.

Just read the book. All covered there in detail.

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

They aren't supposed to measure the same. That's the point. In-room response needs to follow the Harman target curve, which takes reflections into account. That's the whole point for Floyd Toole's research, that good speakers are good, no matter what it the room is like. This was tested and verified.

Yes I agree to this point. Good speakers are always good no matter the room is. Bad speaker can sound good in some rooms as room may fix the flaws sometimes. But what is good and bad? It’s too subjective To audiophiles and for audio engineers there is only one set of rules for good. That’s the reason why we still have audience for tubes amplifiers, vinyl players and all sort distortion producing instruments. Amir totally discards the likes of the people thinking they all never heard a neutral sound. At some point many of them had approached a neutral sound and would have felt it boring. Me personally like the neutral part as it lets me appreciate the artists and engineers behind the music more than the system itself

 

[Marakk]

Yes I agree to this point. Good speakers are always good no matter the room is. Bad speaker can sound good in some rooms as room may fix the flaws sometimes. But what is good and bad? It’s too subjective To audiophiles and for audio engineers there is only one set of rules for good. That’s the reason why we still have audience for tubes amplifiers, vinyl players and all sort distortion producing instruments. Amir totally discards the likes of the people thinking they all never heard a neutral sound. At some point many of them had approached a neutral sound and would have felt it boring. Me personally like the neutral part as it lets me appreciate the artists and engineers behind the music more than the system itself

Why bring Amir into it? Ignore him.

I'm talking about actual research done over decades here. Let's discuss that. The subjectivity aspect has been tested in various studies and tests. Which one do you disagree with?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

Why bring Amir into it? Ignore him.

I'm talking about actual research done over decades here. Let's discuss that. The subjectivity aspect has been tested in various studies and tests. Which one do you disagree with?

I did not disagree with you on anything.

 

[Marakk]

I did not disagree with you on anything.

I find that hard to believe, but ok. Lol

Anyway, let me phrase another question. We can see Fyne F301's response, and then we have many soundbars with uneven response. Let's say similar distortion, sensitivity, and bass, even if soundbar takes the help of a subwoofer. What makes F301 better than the soundbar? What uneven response is better than another uneven response?

 

[Passive_audio_enthusiast]

I find that hard to believe, but ok. Lol

Anyway, let me phrase another question. We can see Fyne F301's response, and then we have many soundbars with uneven response. Let's say similar distortion, sensitivity, and bass, even if soundbar takes the help of a subwoofer. What makes F301 better than the soundbar? What uneven response is better than another uneven response?

if it’s closer to flat then that would be personal preference. But if there is a possibility to fix both with a eq them it would be the fyne audio, if I sit only at one spot which is in the middle. Also I can keep them wider to have a feel of larger space in stereo. To get the feel of stereo from a soundbar it’s hard. So despite the flaws, for stereoe listening, preference would go for two separate speakers.

 

[Marakk]

if it’s closer to flat then that would be personal preference. But if there is a possibility to fix both with a eq them it would be the fyne audio, if I sit only at one spot which is in the middle. Also I can keep them wider to have a feel of larger space in stereo. To get the feel of stereo from a soundbar it’s hard. So despite the flaws, for stereoe listening, preference would go for two separate speakers.

The soundstage is definite win for speakers in most situations, but I should mentioned that I was gearing towards differences in audio fidelity, as the name of our forum says, hifi-vision. I'll wager that there are many mid-budget soundbars that can deliver better fidelity than F301/302 and similar speakers with uneven responses. I just got Q60R myself, as even though I was really attracted by setting up an atmos home theater, I couldn't swallow the feel of speakers all around and receiver too in a small room. Not for me. So Samsung's surround mode is actually pretty good, and doesn't make vocals sound harsh and distorted. Listening to Sympathy For the Devil or Bohemian Rhapsody, in surround mode, I can get the sense of a wide soundstage and voices coming from beyond the wall right next to the soundbar. Couldn't have gotten that with separate speakers and an amp in my situation without drilling a hole in that wall and consequently my apartment building. lol

So soundbars have their place. For movies, with a tight budget that OP has, I feel a soundbar can be a better solution, especially if clear dialogues are needed. Of course, I was hesitant in recommending it earlier as OP's mind was set.

 

[NadirT]

@Marakk @Passive_audio_enthusiast I find your discussions fascinating and helpful. I hope there are just intellectual differences.
For now, my plans are to visit Yamaha dealer on Tuesday(hectic schedule till Monday). Will check Rs202 + BS/FS combo, Yas 109, and YAS 209. I will also audition few soundbars in Reliance Digital. LgSl6Y(3.1 channel, not very good reviews but what’s wrong in auditioning if available), LgSL8Y(3.1.2, somewhat good review), JBl, Samsung, and Sony soundbars. I think it’s better to eliminate all possible options I have that can be auditioned. Iff I don’t find myself satisfied with any of these, then will move on to IAs and speakers that I cannot audition and then decide accordingly.