How about hooking up 5 JBL Control 1's and an active sub to a decent 'home cinema' aplifier, instead?
I need the DD/DTS decoding functionality as well.

Someone disagrees:
"In the studio, once the bass was tweaked, the system provided rich, full and surprisingly high-SPL reproduction, and mixes translated well to large and small home speakers. True, it lacked some of the subtle detail of far more expensive systems (such as my Meyer HD-1s), yet at a fraction of the price, that's understandable. The point here is that the ProActive 5.1s go a lot further than Auratone Cubes, sounding a lot like NS-10s but with far more bass. As such, these are an excellent “real-world” reference for larger 5.1 studio monitors, providing a low-cost/high-impact system in an edit suite, MIDI room or with a desktop DAW. At $499 for a complete system, these are ideal for studios of any size or budget."

http://mixonline.com/products/review/audio_alesis_proactive/index.html

I've read this story, too. But if somebody says that a cheap set, in fact Logitec Z-680, sounds like vingate Yamaha NS-10s, I have an impression that he or she had been paid (advertising) for what he wrote. No offence to the author, though. I haven't heard Alesis Proactive 5.1, have you, MrPhil?

The Alesis speakers are a POC, IMHO. (That's piece-of-crap.) The bass power is totally out of line with "true" reproduction. These are gamer speakers for cranking the volume. They might sound "good", but they don't sound "right". And they're far too expensive for their poor quality.

The Alesis is the same speaker as the Logitec Z-680. Go to any Best Buy or whatever and they'll probably have a set of Z-680s which you can listen to. Even given the fact that they'll be set up badly in the store, you should be able to judge for yourself.

I got my LX4s for $405. That's a great price for great speakers. You cannot blast your neighbors with them - they're designed for a small room, but their clarity is outstanding. If the source is great, you'll get a woody. If the source is good going on bad, you'll hear every flaw. If you want to hear what you're really mixing, you'll find nothing better in that price range.

Last point: I don't know what your editting setup is (here is mine), but how close will you be sitting to the speakers? My front and center speakers are only 2 ft from my head. Conventional speakers are not designed to sound good this close up (near-field). The LX4 *are* designed for near-field. Stick your head right up next to the Alesis, then step back. Notice how the sound changes. Which one is right? Answer: Neither.

"if somebody says that a cheap set, in fact Logitec Z-680, sounds like vingate Yamaha NS-10s, I have an impression that he or she had been paid"

ooohh.... that's pretty harsh accusations....

Anyway, I haven't heard them so I can't give my own input. I'll get back after I've checked the facts with Alesis themselves about the Logitech issue!

After comparing the two choices tho, just by info on their homepages, the Alesis are marketed as "powered performance speakers" and the M-Audio as "reference monitors". That tells you something.
The Alesis is THX-certified and has lots of digital connection abilitys.
It also has a wider frequensy response, but no info on the +/- dB, it has lots of more power.
The M-Audio focuses more on accuracy, by the look of it. But less power.

So just by looking and comparing, not listening, I would say it depends a bit on what you want to mix. (or what else you need it for)
For film sound, maybe the Alesis would work better.
For music maybe the M-audio, if you don't need to crank the volume up too much.

>ooohh.... that's pretty harsh accusations....

But justified, unless the reviewer is a chump.

>I'll get back after I've checked the facts with Alesis themselves about the Logitech issue!

Do a google search on "alesis logitech" and you'll find plenty of confirmation that they're the same system. try Alesis manual for one thing, go to the last page and note the Logitech information.

>the Alesis are marketed as "powered performance speakers" and the M-Audio as "reference monitors". That tells you something.

Sure does. The first term means "you've got stone ears and like to listen to it loud", and the second means "you want to know what's really going on" :-)

>The Alesis is THX-certified ...

In all seriousness, after listening to the Logitechs I lost all respect for THX-certification. If THX-certification means you can charge an outrageous amount for crummy speakers with totally over-balanced bass, well ok then.

>It also has a wider frequensy response, but no info on the +/- dB, it has lots of more power.

A wider frequency response is just marketing BS in this case. Why do you think they left out the +/- dB? Yes it has lots more power, but only in the sub. And if you want it to sound ok, you have to turn that sub way way down because its got twice the power it needs to match those satelites. There goes your power. And there is the efficiency issue. The LX4 have good efficiency.

>For film sound, maybe the Alesis would work better.
>For music maybe the M-audio, if you don't need to crank the volume up too much.

If you don't need to crank the volume up too much, then the M-audio for film and music. It sounds great for both film and music...miles better than the Alesis (or anything else in the sub-$500 range, AFAIK). If you do need to crank, then get yourself something cheap (half the price of that Alesis ripoff) to stand in while you save up your money for something better.

Honestly, if you plan on listening only on the same computer that you do your mixing, then the Alesis is acceptable (over-priced, but acceptable). But expect to be disappointed when you play that mix on any other system.

I didn't mean that it was you who had been paid, MrPhil. No offence.

Back to the subject matter: I've figured out an alternative budged solution. How about hooking five Tannoy Reveal passive speakers to a decent home cinema amplifier and completing the set with a average home cinema subwoofer?

I haven't had a chance to listen to LX-4, but I heard one of their cheaper near field monitors I wasn't impressed. I did have a chance to listen to the above-mentioned Tannoys and I was impressed. If I could cough up some more $$$ I would buy myself either Tannoy SUB 15 5.1 or Blue Sky 5.1 set.
Re. my setup, the room is much smaller than RichMacDonald's, but I won't surrender to my wife's rule and will place the surround speakers in their right positions :-)

>I didn't mean that it was you who had been paid, MrPhil. No offence.

I don't think anyone took it that way.

>I haven't had a chance to listen to LX-4, but I heard one of their cheaper near field monitors I wasn't impressed.

I didn't think they *had* any cheaper near field monitors. I never checked the prices of the other products at M-Audio studio monitors, but I assumed the LX4 was the entry level. Could be wrong.

As for the other speakers, hey you can always go up from the LX4 if you have deeper pockets :-) I'm afraid I can provide no assistance in step-up options.

>I won't surrender to my wife's rule and will place the surround speakers in their right positions

Actually, the positions have grown on me :-) And I found a really good read at essay by Wendy Carlos, which lends good support to placing the rear speakers in the 90deg range.

Peteros, you're all over the map as far as budget goes!
What's the amount you want to spend?
You've gone from Logitech knockoffs to 5 Reveals with separate amp and sub.
If you mentioned how much you want to spend, it would make recommendations much easier.
I've heard Active Reveals hook up to a cheap onboard soundcard, and the sound was AMAZING!

Mario

>ooohh.... that's pretty harsh accusations....

But justified, unless the reviewer is a chump.

only justified if it is true.

>I'll get back after I've checked the facts with Alesis themselves about the Logitech issue!

Do a google search on "alesis logitech" and you'll find plenty of confirmation that they're the same system. try Alesis manual for one thing, go to the last page and note the Logitech information.

I noticed the specs already. I want to know from the source why this is a fact. No answer yet tho

>the Alesis are marketed as "powered performance speakers" and the M-Audio as "reference monitors". That tells you something.

Sure does. The first term means "you've got stone ears and like to listen to it loud", and the second means "you want to know what's really going on" :-)

Well, that's what I meant. The alesis are made for entertainment, m-audio for refrence.

>The Alesis is THX-certified ...

In all seriousness, after listening to the Logitechs I lost all respect for THX-certification. If THX-certification means you can charge an outrageous amount for crummy speakers with totally over-balanced bass, well ok then.

You can set the balance, if you know how. And THX isn't known for crap sound.

>It also has a wider frequensy response, but no info on the +/- dB, it has lots of more power.

A wider frequency response is just marketing BS in this case. Why do you think they left out the +/- dB? Yes it has lots more power, but only in the sub.
Nope, not at all just in the sub. "Satellite speaker power output: 317 Watts RMS (62 Watts RMS per channel for satellites; 69 Watts RMS for center channel)" That's the alesis.


Honestly, if you plan on listening only on the same computer that you do your mixing, then the Alesis is acceptable (over-priced, but acceptable). But expect to be disappointed when you play that mix on any other system.
Now, that statement can prove to be totally un-true. The result of mixing all depends on how well you know your monitors. The first mistake people do when starting getting into mixing and getting their first good reference monitors is pull up too much bass, cause the reference system "don't give enough punch" as they think they need to hear. So they pull it up to make it sound as music (or video in a 5.1) does at home. Happens all the time.

I didn't mean that it was you who had been paid, MrPhil. No offence.

Back to the subject matter: I've figured out an alternative budged solution. How about hooking five Tannoy Reveal passive speakers to a decent home cinema amplifier and completing the set with a average home cinema subwoofer?

:>) No offence taken! It never even crossed my mind that you could have meant me.

>I noticed the specs already. I want to know from the source why this is a fact. No answer yet tho

From a post by Spot in the video forum:

The LX4 system is a VERY good low-budget system. There is nothing less expensive that I've seen, and believe me, I've seen all of them, that has any quality for semi-pro and pro work. Even though for instance, the Alesis are branded by a pro namebrand, they are built by Logitech. They sound great for listening to compressed, finished audio. They are useless for listening to raw, unprocessed audio. Honky, tweaky, and no where near a middle level monitoring environment.

And another Spot post

The Alesis are made by Logitech. Alesis is no longer the company it once was. Once a maker of reasonable quality recording gear, they are now a shell of the original company. At NAMM last year they introduced Samick guitars under the Alesis name, and they are no longer build anything themselves except the HD recorders. Look at their mixers...cheap imports compared to what they were building 5-6 years ago. Even their firewire input/output system is built by a third party now...
Too bad, as they were once a major power hitter. They just had bad management and the economy, now they're just another import company for the most part.

---
That, plus the evidence in the manual is the full extent of my knowledge on the subject.

>You can set the balance, if you know how.

Of course, which negates the additional power since you have to turn it all down.

>And THX isn't known for crap sound.

So one would think. But those speakers are THX certified and they *are* crap sound. Makes me think its like ISO-9000: "We have a really bad business workflow model and we follow it to the letter and can prove it." :-)

>And you say you've listened to the Logitechs. is it possible the Alesis version sounds differently? (I know it's probably the same)

I've listened to the Logitechs, but only in Best-Buy-like ignorant-salesmen-setup circumstances. IOW, all 5 speakers are on the shelf in front of you. Still, it was clear that no amount of re-arranging would save that muddled mess. A Best-Buy or Circuit City near you is bound to have a set on display, so you could prove it to yourself.

No I have not listened to the Alesis, but all evidence is that its the same system just re-branded.

>Nope, not at all just in the sub. "Satellite speaker power output: 317 Watts RMS (62 Watts RMS per channel for satellites; 69 Watts RMS for center channel)" That's the alesis. "60 watts for sub, 27 watts per channel for satellites" That's m-audio.

My bad, speaking without the facts. Ok, ignore the 317 Watts because you'll have to turn it way down. So we're talking 62/69 vs 27. We'd have to look at the efficiency to know for sure, but I'll concede the point.

>I do agree tho that m-audio seems to do a better job as reference.

I've listened to the Logitechs in the store and I have the m-audio LX4s at home. If these are the two systems you're making a final decision on and you can tolerate that the m-audios won't cause your ears to bleed, trust me and get the m-audios. You won't be sorry. Now if you have more money to spend, then there is a lot more to talk about...

>I have no idea how both of the systems sound, or how they work well or not.

That's why you're gathering opinions and thinking out loud.

>You seem to think I'm doing a campaign for the alesis system by what I said.

Not at all. You're in the same boat I was in back in January (several threads over in the video forum if you're interested) and are just trying to get at the truth. A bit stubborn perhaps, but this is a big decision so you have to remove all doubts before committing :-) No problem.

Well, well, weel, it seems I've triggered a pretty fierce discussion.
MyST, my budget is roughly the same as M-Audio's MRSP for the whole LX4 5.1 set up, or $550. I can get like $100 - should this make sense. My Tannoy idea is based on passive - not active - monitors, provided that I coud buy them second-hand. I would need to power them up with an decent home cinema amp and add a (rather active) subwoofer to the set.
Considering all the pros and cons, I'm closer and closer to the ultimate decision, which would probably be choosing the M-Audio set, even if it still stinks plastic to me.

Re. THX, having heard a few home cinema sets (amps, speakers, subwoofers) this certificatin seems an old marketing trick.

Just an update: I can get five Tannoy Reveal passive speakers for $500. Throwing in additional $150 would buy me an "average" sub. I already have a decent home cinema amp.
How about this idea, as opposed to M-Audio LX4 5.1?

>>How about this idea, as opposed to M-Audio LX4 5.1? <<

I think it would depend a great deal on how good your amp is and how well it works with the Tannoys.

drbam

Weel, it think that making a decent amp is much more easier than good speakers nowadays...

Make sure the amp is a high current model and not jvc crap. This really does matter especially with raw dynamic material.
Steve S.