[T2dak668]

like some sweet sleek kick ass apple branded speakers, 2.1 , 5.1 surround 7.1 surround ect??

[Brad]

I guess you never saw these?



or these?

[BlueRabbit]

Or these:

[Wrao]

or this guy!

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Wrao or this guy!

Damn you. I almost spit on my screen

[Bryson]

They have some flavour of "deal" with Harman Kardon. I would have thought that's why.

Anyway, Apple is all about the AIO, which has speakers anyhoo...

[pPOD]

I think it is benifical for them to leave a lot of the accessory market open to 3rd party providers, the more other companies have invested in apple the more free advertising they get for themselves. Say griffin or harmon have an ad for one of their add on products then apple gets iPod press.

[Dave]

What about the AppleDesign Powered Speakers?



There was even a subwoofer output on them, but you had to make sure that it could take the massive 9w output

[Meltedbutter421]

nice wrao

[Dave]

Hey, Brad's second image works now. I guess he beat me again. If it wasn't for those kids and their darn dog...

[julesstoop]

5.1, 6.1 7.1 and all that sh*t is much too un-elegant for Apple. Hell, I hate it myself.
Once surround-like effects from 5.1 encoded audio can be done reliably with two speakers again, Apple might jump on the bandwagon.

I believe though they'd rather leave this market to other players.

[T2dak668]

Originally Posted by Brad I guess you never saw these?

nope ive seen those, but im talking about GOOD speakers those are junk. PS no need to be a smartass just saying. THANKS

[Gregg]

Originally Posted by T2dak668 PS no need to be a smartass just saying. THANKS

Don't hang around here much do you?

[T2dak668]

Originally Posted by Gregg Don't hang around here much do you?

haha tell me about it, most people on here are so sad.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by T2dak668 haha tell me about it, most people on here are so sad.

I feel honored.

[Matsu]

Yeah, I don't see Apple branded 5.1 untill such a time as all the speakers can be wireless. That means a self contained amp in each speaker, and an appropriate wireless receiver/ decoder. We're close, though. Maybe fronts and rears (wired) would do it, just so you don't have to run looonggg wires to the rears. I always thought

Apple's little pro speakers were quite decent, especially with an iSub, but there are better solutions out there now.

The iMac has the potential to be a really great speaker. There's a company out there that makes a driver that will essentially turn any flat surface into a speaker. With the iMac case, two such drivers could run the left and right halves of the display as two rather large panel speakers. Additionally, the rear (sides and top) could also be so driven to create virtual (reflecting) surround channels. If done right, the effect can be quite convincing, especially for someone sitting at desktop user distances...

Bose's 1-2-3 system works quite using a similar principle of sound processing and direct and reflected sound. It's sensitive to speaker placement, but really takes a minimum of space.

[ast3r3x]

Originally Posted by Matsu There's a company out there that makes a driver that will essentially turn any flat surface into a speaker. With the iMac case, two such drivers could run the left and right halves of the display as two rather large panel speakers. Additionally, the rear (sides and top) could also be so driven to create virtual (reflecting) surround channels. If done right, the effect can be quite convincing, especially for someone sitting at desktop user distances... Bose's 1-2-3 system works quite using a similar principle of sound processing and direct and reflected sound. It's sensitive to speaker placement, but really takes a minimum of space.

Yeah, the Pro Speakers with the iSub make decent sound, the Pro Speakers by them selves can't handle loud volumes and a full frequency range.

I've never heard it, but I've always questioned the quality of that any flat surface speaker. I don't understand how it could produce mids or especially lows. I just don't see many flat surfaces moving that much, even if that thing has a lot of force to it.

<standard bose sucks>

[Ebby]

The problem nowadays is that Apple, if they did make speakers again, is expected to emphasize style over functionality. I don't really need speakers than want to be seen, but heard. I have a pair of 8 year old Yamaha speakers (25 watt) in front of me and a PolkAudio sub (500 watt) and I'd put up my system to any Apple speaker and sub combo out there. Don't let the sub throw you, I barely use ANY of that power from my G5. Those Harman Kardon sound-sticks look great but I found them to be too tinny especially at high volumes. (The sub was great though)

[T2dak668]

i just recently picked up a set of logitech x-530 at slickdeals for a GREAT price, and i'm pretty happy with them. I was just wondering why we usually don't see apple powermac's and ect. coming with some sort of speaker, but o well.

[julesstoop]

Flat-surface electro-static speakers do sound great indeed. You wouldn't want your screen to be one though.

In order to generate sound, one needs actual physical motion of the screen, back and forth many times a second. Allthough the deflection needn't be great, it's easily in the order of a few tenths of a millimeter and even more for low pitched sound.

In other words: you are going to see it.

[Matsu]

Electrostatic speakers do sound great, but that's a different technology, not really doable in an iMac enclosure. I'm talking about something like either NXT flat panel technology or a set of resonance drivers.

Resonance drivers attach to any flat surface to in effect turn that into a speaker. Sound quality is questionable, but only because there's no way of knowing what sort of surface some of the novelty items out there would be attached to -- what material, what dimension, what size... In a fixed application you could definitely tune the driver to produce a natural sound curve, which is what NXT does with their speakers, though I'm not quite sure if NXT's can be called a resonance driver???

Would vibration interfere with the display? It's shouldn't: NXT's drivers only excite a vibration of 40 microns across the surface of the "speaker" -- you shouldn't notice it if implemented right. 4/100ths of a mm.

[dfiler]

I think it would be a great idea to bring back the iSub. The speakers in the iMac G5 are suitable for alert sounds and the human vocal range at moderate volumes. Beyond this, they are pretty unsatisfying.

However, with the addition of something like the iSub, they become reasonable by most people's standards. Granted, I'll always prefer a higher fidelity system, but the iMac + iSub is "good enough" for most. By removing the bass from the iMac speakers, they are able to play louder and clearer with less coloration from attempting to play mid bass. I've given refurbed iSubs to two eMac and iMac owners as xmass or birthday presents. At $40 online, it's a steal.

The best part? No need for extra objects and wires all over your desk. Why rain on the iMac's AIO parade? Bring back the iSub!

[jcoley2]

For my new Quad I am assuming we get nothing, so I am in the market for speakers. Does any one offer 5.1 surround sound system with wireless (bluetooth?) speakers for my office? I do not want to put in wires anywhere since I just finished wall papering the office.

[dfiler]

Wired stereo or 2.1 speakers are a much better choice for the office. You'll get better imaging and clarity for the same amount of money. Plus, you won't have to deal with extra batteries or power cords.

5.1 computer systems are a bad choice unless you'll be using the computer almost entirely for watching movies. Even then, they're mostly popular with kids and novices. Once the novelty wears off, it becomes clear that a pair of higher quality speakers will sound better for most purposes. Surround sound is desirable when you have a large screen, a wide seperation between the main speakers, and more than one person in the audience. It makes a more uniform surround field for everyone.

With a (relatively) tiny computer screen and one person in the audience, a properly configured stereo or 2.1 system generally makes more sense.

[EDIT]
Not that I'm anti surround sound. I have an 8.1 setup in my home theater. (Yes, eight point one.) But for an office computer, surround sound almost always sounds worse once the novelty wears off. A gunshot wizzing overhead will be more convincing on a $300 pair of speakers than on a $300 set of 5 speakers. I recommend spending your money on better but fewer speakers.

[Matsu]

I second the better but fewer option.

I think an ideal solution for the iMac, if you really must have surround, is something akin the Bose 3-2-1 system... It's virtual, but in the relatively closed environ of a desktop -- where you sit pretty close, and the "sweet spot" isn't that big -- you can get a surprisingly good illusion of surround. The rest of the time, if you're just milling about the room, you can play good old stereo.

I also like the iSub idea, though I'm not enamoured of USB Audio, with the bandwidth now on tap in USB2, it can work better... it might not fit now that they've really pared down the interface/clutter. Wires have almost disappeared. just a power cord, keyboard and short mouse cord.

iPod seems to be getting most of the mac specific 2.1 attention these days...

[Gaslight]

Hi:

Define good speakers. If by good you mean audiophile level for the desktop, then you're getting into real money. Besides, why bother, the iTunes store sells at 128 bit, which s fine on headphones but sounds thin when played on higher end gear.

Gaslight

[jcoley2]

Good enough to listen in my office and not have to wear head phones since I cannot do this with the phone listening. I would consider a 2.1 also as previously recommended.

[dfiler]

Originally Posted by Gaslight Define good speakers.

The goal shouldn't be to define "good". Instead, it's best to focus on "best" given intended usage and budget constraints.

For computer use, on nearly any budget, a 2 or 2.1 system will sound better than a 5.1 system. This is true no matter whether the budget is $100 or $10000. 5.1 systems ruin the sound unless speakers and audience positions are set up quite meticulously. Once set up, a 5.1 system has a larger sweet spot for the audience to sit in. But for a single person, a stereo system provides quite good imaging. Also, given the average budget for computer speakers, better sound is acheived by spending that money on fewer, but higher quality drivers.

[intlplby]

Gaslight-

that depends entirely on waht headphones you're listening on.... on my Joe Grado HP-1 there is a definite difference between 128k and vinyl/cd