|
KillHour posted:What TV do you have? They will, I use my Roku remote pretty much exclusively.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:02 |
|
|
bird with big dick posted:They will, I use my Roku remote pretty much exclusively. Okay, so then pretty much any option will let you change your volume with the remote without changing anything. Except maybe optical(?) depending on your TV I would probably just go HDMI ARC to the receiver and be done with it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
KillHour posted:What TV do you have?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:LG C1 Get a receiver with eARC and keep your Roku plugged into the TV. Make sure you hook the receiver up to the port on the tv labeled "ARC" That should work more or less like the sound bar did.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
This is sort of a general question about battery life in android devices, but it’s a DAP I’m asking about so maybe I’ll try it here. I got a used fiio m11 a while back and it works great. However, the battery seems to drain kind of fast when I’m not using it. Currently it has 75% battery life and was fully charged four days ago. The battery screen says it’s only had 25 minutes of screen-on time since it was fully charged, and I’ve only played it for about 90 minutes. Maybe this is all totally normal, but I took a look yesterday and the battery was at 80 something percent, I didn’t play it at all, and today it’s down to 75. Is it normal for a fairly new battery to drain that fast in an idle device? I’m a bit paranoid because I saw some post somewhere online about fiio batteries swelling (whatever that means, but it sounds bad).
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
I'm keeping my old phone standby for no reason and without sim card but with wifi and bluetooth on, doing absolutely nothing with it, it needs charging every 8 days. What you're seeing wouldn't alarm me. You can probably fully power it off when you're not using it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
Okay, cool. That makes me realize that the only comparable device I use is my phone, and that just isn’t that comparable since I use it a lot every day, but it needs charging every 24 hours. Yes, I can power the DAP off entirely when I’m not using it. I’ll fully charge it, power it off, and see how much battery it retains for a few days in that state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 19:16
|
|
|
I recently built a 7.1.2 system but I have a big problem. My main source is Plex 4K remuxes (full rips of the 4K blu ray). My everyday streaming box is one of the new gen Apple TV 4K units, which is so loving good it almost hurts, love that little thing and couldn't recommend it any more especially because it has an insanely fast processor in it that should make it relevant for a super long time, along with HDMI 2.1 and fast media switching, but anyways it has exactly one flaw: unless I'm missing something, it simply can't pass Dolby Atmos  First, could someone confirm that I understand Atmos? My understanding is that Dolby Atmos on a 4K Blu Ray is basically just an additional "layer" on top of TrueHD, which is to say, it's two semi discrete things. You have the TrueHD 7.1 track and then you have the Atmos layer on top that makes it 7.1.4 and does all the cute things that Atmos does like allow much more speakers, and providing data to the height speakers so an object can exist across speakers in a 3D box instead of sending sounds to particular speakers. Is that right? In theory that sounds completely awesome and the future of audio. And I do get Atmos on my receiver through Apple TV (Pioneer elite VSX-LX305) if I'm streaming content instead of my local Plex/Infuse library. My understanding is that this works because it's an entirely different format form TrueHD and simply doesn't rely on the pass through that makes TrueHD Atmos work. If I'm hanging out and listening to lossless Atmos on Apple Music- which I do a lot, Atmos music owns- or watch a show, I do enjoy the Atmos experience for sure. I don't get the people who say that Atmos is a gimmick, I mean maybe so but it's a good rear end gimmick then. The problem is, I think the only way I can use TrueHD Atmos is to get an Nvidia shield TV Pro?? That's $200 just to get Atmos on my remuxes and then on top of that I would have to stop using Infuse on the Apple TV which is like the single best app ever? Is that worth it? That's my real question: is TrueHD Atmos vs "normal" 7.1 TrueHD worth spending 200 bucks and switching to a different device every time I want to do it? I'm very conflicted. On one hand I've spent all this time and a decent chunk of change to accrue a truly amazing Plex library with hundreds of TrueHD Linux ISOs, along with the home theater to do it justice. It feels weird to go through all of this effort and then not even be able to do TrueHD Atmos once everything is built!!! Not only that, we dedicate a huge space to the project as of course the setup is contained within its own dedicated room, so overall there is just an incredible amount of resources being thrown at this setup which starts to make $200 for TrueHD Atmos maybe start to make more sense...? Anyways, thoughts? Also a side question: does Apple TV not support TrueHD Atmos passthrough because they view it as a super niche feature that only pirates want to do, or is there some technical reason? Taima fucked around with this message at 12:44 on Jun 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 12:28
|
|
|
which PC speakers are the best mainly for listening to music at a budget of $200-300?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 14:52
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:which PC speakers are the best mainly for listening to music at a budget of $200-300? what are your priorities? Sound quality? Looks and materials/finish? Size? Connectivity? You can maximize sound quality bang-for-buck by going with a set of monitors, but they can also be big, utilitarian looking, and require a preamp or breakout box/etc to easily work with other gear, or work wirelessly, etc. On the flipside, something on the more consumer focused side from the likes of Audioengine, Kanto, Edifier, Klipsch, etc might be smaller, prettier, and easier to live with but you might make sacrifices in other areas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 15:37
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:what are your priorities? Sound quality? Looks and materials/finish? Size? Connectivity? primarily sound quality. don't care how it looks or what its made off, as long as it sounds as good as it can be for that price range. connectivity wise, i've had bad experiences with wireless devices so i'd prefer wired
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
Taima posted:Anyways, thoughts? On a side note, one of the things about going whole hog on the latest formats is those speakers will be unused some or even a lot of the time with catalog material.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
The matrixing in Dolby Surround (the new one included for Atmos receivers) where there's not an actual Atmos mix is actually quite good for using my overheads to add to the atmosphere. Stuff like helicopter fly overs, big storms, wind gusting, etc. All comes across really well even where it wasn't coded for it
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:which PC speakers are the best mainly for listening to music at a budget of $200-300? https://www.amazon.com/Edifier-Bookshelf-Subwoofer-Bluetooth-Wireless/dp/B077Y6PHKQ?th=1
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:https://www.amazon.com/Edifier-Bookshelf-Subwoofer-Bluetooth-Wireless/dp/B077Y6PHKQ?th=1 Budget of 200-300 and you recommend 400? I agree with Edifier speakers, just get whichever model you want. I have the Edifier R1700BT, they sound decent for the price. e: before that I had the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 THX, the Edifers are a clear step up. Fozzy The Bear fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Jun 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
It was $359 when I recommended it he could probably find another $59 somewhere. e: says 359 for me right now. bird with big dick fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Jun 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:It was $359 when I recommended it he could probably find another $59 somewhere. Your link says $399 for me 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 19:17
|
|
|
It says join prime to get this item at $359.99 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
Mederlock posted:The matrixing in Dolby Surround (the new one included for Atmos receivers) where there's not an actual Atmos mix is actually quite good for using my overheads to add to the atmosphere. Stuff like helicopter fly overs, big storms, wind gusting, etc. All comes across really well even where it wasn't coded for it I agree, I leave my receiver on Dolby Surround all the time and it really does a great job. Doesn't take anything away from normal stereo recordings either like most other upmixing options. I have a 5.2.4 system, basically never watch actual Atmos content but don't regret the heights at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:It says join prime to get this item at $359.99 $329 used
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:$329 used don’t buy used on Amazon like that. At least not for hifi equipment. Total crapshoot and not worth the hassle if you have to return an item
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:It says join prime to get this item at $359.99 $339.99 upon approval for Amazon Visa.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
If I was gonna spend that much I’d get LSR305s and a volume knob / adapter thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
powderific posted:If I was gonna spend that much I’d get LSR305s and a volume knob / adapter thing. or ADAM T5V/etc
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
And then you’d have no bass
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
You shouldn't need a subwoofer to listen to music. Those ADAM AUDIO T5V show: Total RMS Amp. Power: 70 W Frequency Response: 45 Hz - 25 kHz (-6 dB) The JBL LSR305: 41 W Class D Frequency Range 43 Hz-24 kHz That is plenty of bass e: Looked up that subwoofer: 40Hz~160Hz (Subwoofer) Better quality speakers ALWAYS sound better than cheap speakers + sub Fozzy The Bear fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Jun 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 21:49
|
|
|
Fozzy The Bear posted:You shouldn't need a subwoofer to listen to music. Totally depends on your taste in music but I would say even classical can make use of a good subwoofer. For a lot of the stuff I listen to and for what I get out of it (i.e., my personal tastes in enjoyment), the sub bass is a huge part, if not the focus. I know everyone is on the same page but it bears repeating for the people who might be newer to audio - you're buying this stuff for your own enjoyment and that's all that matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
oh for reference, i currently have a 2.1 logitech z533 speakers, and i've really been happy with them for the most part. i'm assuming the ones recommended would be way better than these? they also have a really good subwoofer
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 23:09
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Totally depends on your taste in music but I would say even classical can make use of a good subwoofer. I agree that a good subwoofer can help speakers. I was pointing out that specific cheap subwoofer had basically the same low frequency range as slightly better quality speakers. $200 speakers with a $200 subwoofer is going to be worse than just $400 speakers (for the most part). I'm just talking in generalities. Sound is very subjective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
I’m in the ‘don’t really want a sub for music’ camp but I’m not sure I’d want to play fairly bass driven music through 5” speakers either. I have 10” cones in mine and while the overall quality won’t be studio monitor levels, eh that’s a compromise I’m happy to make.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
qirex posted:You have selected a very specific use case the Apple TV is bad at. They might add support for it later, the hardware seems powerful enough but the question would be why would they? Apple's views on that kind of content seem pretty tuned to "we're not going to stop you but we're certainly not going to help," see iTunes/Apple Music internally supporting FLAC for a decade but not playing it, even today when 95% of the music market is streaming. There may also be specific things involved in their Atmos license, there's no way to know. The newer formats are extremely tied up in Hollywood politics and they just don't license them to rando companies that would produce stuff like that. The whole industry's official answer for owning Atmos media is to buy discs and play them on a dedicated player [or I guess Kalidescape] so if you're someone who doesn't do that none of the mainstream companies are going to help you. Zappiti has new boxes coming out but the "cheap" one is $900. 100% agreed on the Apple TV not being right for my use. Thank you for explaining the regulatory and techincal aspects! For the record I did budget the speakers appropriately- the vast majority of the money is in the fronts and subwoofer, and then the center. The side and rears are budget JBL 530s (which still sound great) but I put my money where I thought it mattered, and not so much the ancillary speakers. Though I agree with other posters that upmixing Atmos can have some pretty sweet results even on stuff not made for it specifically. The Kaleidescape is just funny to me. If I got a Shield Pro it would literally just be a Kaleidescape, there's zero difference that I'm aware of as you're doing remux passthrough 100% with full TrueHD Atmos. Online reviews of Kaleidescape even try to say there is a benefit to the system beyond a remux, which makes no sense to me but if anyone wants to argue for that I would be really curious! Anyways my main question was if full TrueHD Atmos is worth the $200 upgrade for the Shield vs. "just" getting TrueHD 7.1 alone if anyone can speak to that? EL BROMANCE posted:I’m in the ‘don’t really want a sub for music’ camp but I’m not sure I’d want to play fairly bass driven music through 5” speakers either. I have 10” cones in mine and while the overall quality won’t be studio monitor levels, eh that’s a compromise I’m happy to make. Oh that's interesting, could you elaborate on why you don't want a sub for music? All good everyone has their opinions I'm just legit wondering because my experience has been that it's an objective improvement for all music, honestly.  Good fronts and center are the priority in my setup but the subwoofer is right below that. It really changed how I view music and movies, and especially with Dirac correction, the sub never even makes itself noticed; it just naturally improves the natural low frequency response of the other speakers in a way that seems completely organic to me. Of course there are tons of reasons to not want a sub like not annoying your neighbors or partner etc. Taima fucked around with this message at 10:20 on Jun 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2023 10:13
|
|
|
Fozzy The Bear posted:I agree that a good subwoofer can help speakers. I was pointing out that specific cheap subwoofer had basically the same low frequency range as slightly better quality speakers. Without -3 db points for all of them you actually don’t know that and I really doubt 2x5” drivers is going to keep up with that sub. White box van type speakers it might be possible but Edifier is not cheap trash. bird with big dick fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Jun 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 14:17
|
|
|
Fozzy The Bear posted:Better quality speakers ALWAYS sound better than cheap speakers + sub No. First of all these are all “cheap” speakers second of all it depends entirely on your personal tastes and the type of music you listen to so get out of here with your “always.”
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 14:24
|
|
|
Subs rule
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Without -3 db points for all of them you actually don’t know that and I really doubt 2x5” drivers is going to keep up with that sub. White box van type speakers it might be possible but Edifier is not cheap trash. Ehhh…you can blend even 3-4” drivers halfway decently with most subs if you set the crossover high enough, assuming the sub even sounds good at 80-120hz
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 15:04
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:Ehhh…you can blend even 3-4” drivers halfway decently with most subs if you set the crossover high enough, assuming the sub even sounds good at 80-120hz That's not what I'm saying, we're talking about System A with 2x5" drivers vs System B with 2x5" drivers plus a 8" sub and dude is saying weeeeeel the frequency ranges (without noted -3 dB points for any of them) are about the same so the bass performance will be about the same and that just isn't true. LF is all about moving air and barring absolute piece of poo poo equipment (like white van poo poo) the system with only 2x5" drivers is not going to keep up with the system with the 8" sub (frequency ranges be damned) when it comes to bass. The type of music I listen to I would absolutely rather have the "cheap" speakers plus the sub but, again, that's not even what's being compared here since it's really cheap speakers without a sub vs cheap speakers with a cheap sub.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:That's not what I'm saying, we're talking about System A with 2x5" drivers vs System B with 2x5" drivers plus a 8" sub and dude is saying weeeeeel the frequency ranges (without noted -3 dB points for any of them) are about the same so the bass performance will be about the same and that just isn't true. oh yeah, totally. This one of those things that a lot of people just have to figure out with experience and exposure to the space, to calibrate their expectations and their Bullshit Meter such that they can be like “this is what a bookshelf speaker should sound like”/“this is what a sub sounds like”/etc, given how divorced from reality so much of the bread and butter marketing in the audio space has been since forever. Like, if your understanding of audio is soundbar marketing specs then the idea that “a really good” set of 3” speakers could hang with any subwoofer system seems logical. But even when these kinds of systems do truly exist, and the hype isn’t just lies, they’re always the exception that proves the rule. There’s always some specific technological or engineering or DSP solution at work making the magic happen, or at least tricking your brain into perceiving it that way. Like these new ultra compact subwoofers that everybody’s making with horizontally-opposed and/or nested drivers have a ton of impressive engineering and bespoke parts in them to enable them to get way lower than an enclosure that size should allow, and they’re still not as good as a big “normal” sub
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
I'm just speaking from personal experience, I've had 2.1 computer speakers and 2.0 computer speakers, both at the same price level. The 2.0 speakers sound SO much better. I listen to a ton of hip hop too. I haven't listened to the exact model of speakers listed though, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
Fozzy The Bear posted:I'm just speaking from personal experience, I've had 2.1 computer speakers and 2.0 computer speakers, both at the same price level. The 2.0 speakers sound SO much better. I listen to a ton of hip hop too. I don’t t think anyone is recommending using a lovely sub that comes packed with computer speakers, or anything advertised as a computer speaker.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:02 |
|
|
BigFactory posted:I don’t t think anyone is recommending using a lovely sub that comes packed with computer speakers, or anything advertised as a computer speaker. Edifier is a computer speaker brand, it comes with a 3.5mm cable.... Any $200 sub, by definition is "a lovely sub" I don't know how you could make something quality at that price point
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2023 16:33
|
|