Read all my previous posts on the topic in other threads then . 'Nuff said.

Bro,nice indeed . At least have one more person saying GMX 2.1 better than MX5021.Anyway,i think this is personal opinion so nobody need to get angry.If you think MX5021 better,than get one.Don't buy the GMX.

Although the GMX don't have wireless remote, i can use my hp to as "remote" for application such as winamp,media player and etc.

a quick search of your previous posts revealed a recent [and lenghty] post on the gmx, the mx5021 and the aegoM

the one comparison againts the mx5021 i did read was personal preference on 'overall sound signature' which of course is a subjective thing and your preference would most probably vary greatly to the next guy.

cheers.

Beside that, I really don't know how you "adjust" the settings to gain back the totally missing midrange?
If there is such a settings, please tell us here, I would like to help my friend who curretly own a Klipsch GMX 2.1 and Philips PCS805 to gain back THE TOTALLY MISSING MIDRANGE.

*Just realize that you were using Prodigy 7.1 LT. Never mind, I can get a Prodigy for him to test out "the settings", just tell us what "the settings" are, thanks.

saiga,
Be a man, do the right thing.

This post has been edited by EAC: Sep 16 2006, 09:27 PM

good,can help me "tune" my GMX also

EAC,i'm a man.or do you want some prove?

Opinion is based on personal audition done at Sri Comp(they have a nice rig setup for all these PC multimedia speakers....go try on a weekday where nobody is around yet...don't go on Sun/Sat, too noisy for proper evaluation). Also heard them at ALL IT, just ask the sales guy to demo both for you and audition on a weekday lunch/morning if possible. Other places also heard them but separately, not A-B style. However, if u like more bassy tracks by far, maybe you should spring for the GMX2.1.

BTW, i don't own either sets. My PC rig consists of Klipsch ProMedia 2.1, Aego M, Midiland S2-4100, FPS2000, AL ACS48, AL ACS45.1, VAL M20 MKIII(tube).....and just a few others like some ATC/Epos/Ls35a/Quad monitors and the like. Best advice, go listen like what everyone is telling you, once u hear both, there won't be any doubts as to your decision anymore regardless what anyone says, be they audiogurus or just budding enthusiasts.

Take care!

no need to go test,i already got myself gmx 2.1 coz i prefer a bit more bass.

Good for you, have a nice day

Wow crap, you've got all those plugged into your pc?
Pretty amazing list there man
Btw, always wondered, how's the VAL?

OT : Agrh...must control myself from flaming....

This post has been edited by KilJim: Sep 17 2006, 04:43 AM

Hi KJ,

The VAL is nice with a warm & lush sound sig, bass is surprisingly punchy(I think no need sub for small room although VAL does sell a matching sub to accompany this line), I replaced the stock tubes with some EH(didn't try JJ). Got them from yuckfou > 1 yr ago in almost new form, they look very polished and built is reasonably good cf to some standard hifi monitors. I like the sound and btw, they come originally without grilles...(memang no grilles in original form and box).....I don't have all those gear plugged into 1 PC LoL (I am still a sane audiophile), some are relinquished to my younger sis, and some older ones in bedroom as multimedia, some in box, some unopened(Edifier RT1900 MKII rosewood not the MKIII black one). I am currently looking at the Swans M200 or the T200B(new with remote) but wondering any reasonable dealer in Singapore/KL?

Cheers

This post has been edited by Omegaminx: Sep 18 2006, 07:48 AM

how is the condition now?
miss it alot.

Hi bro, sill in good shape, no dents or marks yet, how ya doing?

haha... a proud klipsch user here... i started one similar thread last year.... but i didnt compare the gmx with the al mx5021... i compared it with edifier s2.1 and i know edifier is more to music... i own the cheap edifier 102... sweet sound and bass... for just rm65... plus i think my speaker already burn-in... so u may imagine how is the sound now .... as for my klipsch... i love it.... the bass is powerful but not sloppy... no offense to altec lansing users... but i still prefer klispch, edifier more than altec lansing.... plus they are more established company even in high-end home teather systems.... correct me if im wrong...

and u may consider the aego2 series...
dunno whether they still sell it now or not... try ur luck....

This post has been edited by CGLegacy: Sep 18 2006, 12:39 PM

the old school altec lansing are built for cinema / home theather. their old floor stander like "santana" still owned by some person and still love it until today. =)
in USA, midland has their own car team to carry speaker. but altec lansing around 10 plus years ago has their own plane team to carry and deliver their speaker. no doubt., they did successfull once last time.

well, im sure many of us would love to swim endlessly in nostalgia but fast forward to today and their 'heritage' isnt doing them much, is it?

well as their main designer left altec lansing they produce crap mainly. i didn't deny it.
what is my point is. klipsch is famous for their speaker long time ago. so do altec lansing.
and klipsch now also producing somethings good for cinema speaker.but undenyable somethings bad. so as altec lansing. i stay neutral in this case not offending or protecting any brand. =)
just to share somethings i had read, or nostalgia you call.
i am pretty sure there's bunch of people hate Mx5021. and also another bunch of people hate klipsch GMX. and some even call call it as a joke.
as a so call big and famous company produce somethings with imbalance sound at low volume... what you call it?
=) i myself feel pretty annoying for that. they can add another couple bucks, to buy a better pot. they just don't wanna do it.

anyway. threadstarter had got himself a GMX.


by the way. i compared mx5021 with AEGO M .
MX5021 in shop(The mines, E-Lite Computer Shop) VS AEGO M in my room.
source. creative ZEN Micro.
mp3 rip from CD 320 KbPS.
cable = 9" canare L-4E6S with normal gold plug.

over impression.... (ps test is not conduct A/B)
altec lansing overall quite ok. treble is nice. not too sharp in my ear. bass is tight.
but sound stage is much more narrow than the AEGO.
and i found the lower mid of altec is some how stronger compare to AEGO M.
BASS. AEGO M bass is shaking. and relatively DEEP compare to altec lansing. altec lansing produce a lot of hard bass. which i guess the resonance point for the woofer box is tune at around 60-70 hz.

while aego M in room. is kinda deep...
as i said. it's in room. sure much deeper.
besides the environment factor. i guess
AEGO M is much more woth to take. i feel the performance is much more better.


This post has been edited by PcWork: Sep 18 2006, 07:18 PM

PcWork, i dont hate AL or klipsch, but i must say im not too convinced of them either. so dont take this or what ive said/gonna say the wrong way


as with the bright cables that AE supplies with the aegoM, i cant help but wonder what kind of a company could do something like this?

[in this paragraph im talking about other companies as a whole]
design a top notch speaker to conquer its intended market and at the same time ruin the product with crappy components? i dont care what the reason is. it just shows what kind of a company it is.

i know, i know, they need to sell more in order to make more, but there has got to be a minimum level on how low companies will suck down to in order to sell.

as for AE and the AM in particular, the image of AE that will always remain in my mind is of a company that is willing to sell the aegoM in its current form [with the crappy cables] and market the AM as a hifi speaker. needless to say, i wont be looking at AE with high regard when i move to bookshelfs in the future. [the fact that admist all the *$^!% hype and reviews no one (except one or two people here ) was able to clearly state how it sounds just adds bitterness to my experience ]



and thanks alot for your opinion on the AM vs mx5021

i do have a few questions though:

1. you mentioned the Zen micro and 320kbps MP3. so i assume you ripped from a CD at 320kbps and then uploaded the files to the zen micro and played on both speakers?

2.'not too sharp'. so it is sharp, but not too sharp?

3. mid range is stronger than the aegom: do you mean you hear EVEN more vocals and the mid range??

4.'hard bass'. can you please explain a bit on this?


how was the environment btw? any nasty tiles or lots of reflective walls?

once again, thanks for the descriptions

1. yes. both play from my zen player. same album same song.
Josh Groban First Album - Josh Groban ,
Track 3. You're Still You

Josh Groban 2nd Album -
Track 5 . When You Say You Love Me.
This two track i listen a few time.
got other song. those blassing bass one...

2. well.. it's like it is clear. but some times, when the song "memang" have a lot of treble there. mx5021 tend to "poke" my ear a bit... sort of unconfortable with the level of treble. but with proper positioning. that can be slove.

3. lower mid. where those male singer with low vocal, will sound actually thicker in mx5021. but IMHO quite muffle compare to AM.

4. those bass like "bam bam bam"... higher HZ ,, or i should call it mid bass.. =P
aego is like "Doooom"
my room has reflective wall, very small. but some minor treatment done, like stick some sponge. use tennis ball as a stand for my woofer... eg.
the MX5021 is placed on rack, at open space. with carpet.
their rack has many layer. so i put the satelite on the rack which is same level as my ear. distance is 1.5M. and woofer on floor, side to wall.
that's best i can do. else the shop ppl will kill me for messing around with their speaker.


ps: all the sound comparison is some how based on my impression. after i heard MX. i go home straight away to listen to AEGO..
PS: silon. perhaps the reason u and i have different opinion with AM is because i changed the stock cable to Canare L-4E6S the first day i got it. not sure L-4E6S is better or not. but my fren, anand__2 which also using canare cable for his AEGO M claim that there's a different.
as for myself. i didnt really try to listen to the stock cable. but in my impression i though it is some how quite similar to canare.

conclusion : sound of mx5021 is particular very ok for a computer speaker. perhaps. IMHO it's much better than GMX. watching movie (FF;advent children, Demo) is so nice. and i guess that's why it has a THX over it. everythings well controled. sound stage is some how narrow compare to AM. it's like firing the song direct to your ear. no atmosphere. and close your eye. you can point where the sat is... and this problems comes with every multimedia speaker i ever heard. including GMX (super narrow sound stage)
but for multimedia speaker Mx5021 has the best sound stage i ever heard.
AM. while comparing it to MX, i can feel that AM is slightly "not so aggresive" sound compare to mx. so meaning it can play song loud, yet you can relax. but when comes to movie, i think people prefer mx5021 which can blass until the floor is shaking... (trust me AM in my room shake my floor too, with bass =1 )

if my MAX budget is RM 550, i will definately take MX5021. =) well. i said "I" prefef how mx sound. no offend to GMX lovers.


This post has been edited by PcWork: Sep 18 2006, 08:56 PM

great! i forgot to ask about speaker placement somewhere along the way but it seems you sorted it out

once again, thanks for the detailed descriptions. i woudnt have settled for anything less

no.2 and "it's like firing the song direct to your ear. no atmosphere. and close your eye. you can point where the sat is... " is enough to say its bright. super no-no for me
btw, did you notice the AM's mid range emphasis on the mx5021?

no.3: got what you mean. im assuming they werent many additional factors manipulating the overall sound by a large margin and from your descriptions, it sounds as though the mx5021 has been tweaked all over the frequency response spectrum to 'enchance' its sound

no4 has something to do with the speakers emphasis on the mid bass/upper bass/lower mids and is quite the same as no3, right?




as for the difference in sound before and after the cables, well, im more interested to know how it is different


excellent post. its thoroughly informative

i feel MX5021 some how emphasis on lower mid. it's like the satelite and woofer both playing the lowermid... making it very very thick.. and some how quite muffle.. as the woofer is mono, and the midrange is "terkacau" AM also have sort of problems. but not as serious as mx. if i choose a describ to sound of MX. it will be like going through slight V shaped EQ.where the lowest point is upper mid.

sound before/ after recable of AM. will need to check back, hear it for longer periods then i update with you. this few days kinda busy for exam + assignment.

a female singer voice is some how not as smooth as AM especially when the singer sing louder... it's like got "spike" along the spectrum , and not smooth.

i say this is kinda mx is a bad speaker, infact, it still quite impressive. at least i give it higest ranking among all computer speaker i ever heard. it is bad when compare to AM , according to my song, my taste, under the specific testing environment. =)


This post has been edited by PcWork: Sep 18 2006, 09:22 PM