What budget speakers you like to see reviewed?

[EJ3]

In the OP it was around $200/pair. If you're looking to spend $2-7k you're in the wrong thread.

It said main heading said "budget speakers". That is a "Budget".
BUDGET does not mean "inexpensive" (or, as some think: 'cheap')

 

[TheAVInsider]

I second the previous Chesky Audio speaker recommendation at $1000pr. Also requesting a review on the Kanto Ren at $500pr.

 

[RHO]

It said main heading said "budget speakers". That is a "Budget".
BUDGET does not mean "inexpensive" (or, as some think: 'cheap')

I agree that "budget" isn't an absolute number. But neither is "inexpensive" nor is "cheap".
It's not even absolutely related to what you can spend, but rather to what you want to spend.

So I think it would help if we can put a hard number on what budget we are talking about in this topic.
Amirm suggested $200/pair. (see OP)

 

[heraldo_jones]

It said main heading said "budget speakers". That is a "Budget".
BUDGET does not mean "inexpensive" (or, as some think: 'cheap')

I agree that "budget" isn't an absolute number. But neither is "inexpensive" nor is "cheap".
It's not even absolutely related to what you can spend, but rather to what you want to spend.

So I think it would help if we can put a hard number on what budget we are talking about in this topic.
Amirm suggested $200/pair. (see OP)

In English, the word "budget" when added to a name, especially in commercial terms, usually implies that something is inexpensive, low-cost, or designed for a limited budget.

The term you are refering to is "to be in a budget", then there is no indication of price limit.

 

[RHO]

In English, the word "budget" when added to a name, especially in commercial terms, usually implies that something is inexpensive, low-cost, or designed for a limited budget.

The term you are refering to is "to be in a budget", then there is no indication of price limit.

That's what I say. What number is "inexpensive", "low-cost" or "designed for a limited budget"? Is it the exact same number as "cheap" or "affordable"?

 

[EJ3]

In English, the word "budget" when added to a name, especially in commercial terms, usually implies that something is inexpensive, low-cost, or designed for a limited budget.

The term you are refering to is "to be in a budget", then there is no indication of price limit.

Not the way I was taught by either my mother (learned [who is Austrian] English at the great Universities of England and was a Construction Cost Accountant in control of billions of $'s), nor in schools, colleges that I went to.
If explained as a Budget limited to ...., then yes. But that is not what the OP said.
Yes, that suggested by Amirm is $200. I took that as a suggestion. And obviously did not take that to heart. Naturally, you can skip what I said, if you like. Or you can argue.
But it is NOT incorrect, as the OP's use of the word BUDGET was undefined.
Please do not be facetious.
This is supposed to be a place of science & preciseness.
And the OP was not precise.
Hence we have this discussion.
I am not always right, nor do I pretend to be.
But I am pretty sure on this one.

 

[RHO]

Not the way I was taught by either my mother (learned English in Emgland and was a Construction Cost Accountant in control of billions of $'s), nor in schools, colleges that I went to.
If explained as a Budget limited to ...., then yes. But that is not what the OP said.
Yes, that suggested by Amirm is $200. I took that as a suggestion. And obviously did not take that to heart. Naturally, you can skip what I said, if you like. Or you can argue.
But it is NOT incorrect, as the OP's use of the word BUDGET was undefined.
Please do not be facetious.
This is supposed to be a place of science & preciseness.
And the OP was not precise.
Hence we have this discussion.

I think we would best stay within the limits suggested by Amir.
I assume he suggested this limit because that is what he is willing to spend on speakers, as a review object, himself. (easy to re-sell with just a minor loss in absolute numbers)
For speakers costing more, he relies on members or manufacturers sending them in.

 

[EJ3]

I think we would best stay within the limits suggested by Amir.
I assume he suggested this limit because that is what he is willing to spend on speakers, as a review object, himself. (easy to re-sell with just a minor loss in absolute numbers)
For speakers costing more, he relies on members or manufacturers sending them in.

I did go back & reread it.
If that is how you feel, then why not just chose to ignore what I said.
I will note that I am not the only one that stated the idea of speakers on a different budget.
And I obviously disagree with the OP that $200 is a realistic budget for speakers (perhaps A [as in 1 {you know: one} speaker)
And, I have no problem allowing you to pretend that you won an argument that is based on an imprecise tenant.
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY HILLARIOUS.
First you say that AMIRMS statement was a suggestion (which it was).
Then you act like it's a hard line of concrete in the sand by arguing a point on that.
I was simply going based on what the OP title said.
And the modified by the OP in the body.
LMAO!
I think that I'll take a shower now, I'm sweating from laughing so hard.
There is the intent of the OP as stated in the heading.
It's is certainly in the thread that I am not the only one that believes that the budget selected was too low.
And I went further in the budget size idea than others.
I made up my mind based on the heading.
No need for me to respond anymore, I see that in your mind, that you have chosen to believe that you are correct.

 

[frantakiller]

An ELAC DF63 is here for testing.

Really interested in this one

 

[heraldo_jones]

That's what I say. What number is "inexpensive", "low-cost" or "designed for a limited budget"? Is it the exact same number as "cheap" or "affordable"?

I would say something you can buy without affecting your monthly expenses ... maybe a 1/4 or 1/2 max of your monthly savings.

 

[RHO]

I would say something you can buy without affecting your monthly expenses ... maybe a 1/4 or 1/2 max of your monthly savings.

For some that could still be be a >$10k pair of speakers.
Most would consider that a very expensive pair.
That's why I suggested following Amir's suggestion of $200/pr.

 

[Tovarich007]

You'd better make proposals of reviews for budget speakers, which is the only purpose of this thread, instead of discussing and arguing about terms and numbers in pure theory. That's a waste of time, more tedius to read than hillarious IMO ! Haven't you anything else more interesting to do ?

By the way, in english, a budget speaker (or any other object) is a relatively inexpensive one, considering the market and the way of life and income of the average class people.
In french, we called it "un objet bon marché" ou "peu cher". So, we're not talking here about YOUR budget or income, nor about your supposed philosphy of what's a budget is.

Several K€/pair speakers are by no means budget ones and have nothing to do on this thread, but at the other end you're not obliged to go as down as 100 or 200 € for a pair. just look at the reasonable proposals that have been made yet by some of us.
So back to your proposals of reviews.

 

[RHO]

KRK Rokit 5 gen5 (to see if that new tweeter improves anything and if the that port resonance has been dealt with)
Yes, they are over $200/pr. (if no-one cares, I don't either)

 

[Tovarich007]

Rokit are definitely budget speakers. I proposed in a post in this thread to review all the range of new Rokits, plus the big 3 way (of Rokit 4 series, but this big model is always on catalogue I think).

I wonder how the Rokit series have evolved since KRK has started these Niknamed series ?

a long time ago, more than 10 years, I listened to a small Rokit (series 1 or 2, I don't remember) and I was very disappointed, OK they punched loud for their size, but the sound was anything but neutral, strong resonances in the bass and midbass were muddying the message, the bass was bumped up like bad hifi speakers, the high medium and treble were sharp with simplified timbres and obvious lack of neutrality. On classical, acoustic jazz and well recorded voices, it was very very bad indeed. IMO, the two first generations of Rokit were everything but monitoring, I never understood why they gain such a success ? Some cheap hifi passive speakers of this time were doing much better in terms of timbre accuracy and overall neutrality for the same price overall.

So I hope very deeply that KRK has corrected the flaws of the old ones on this new generation. (at least the new one has some EQ included, but EQ can't correct a flawed design (even if the flaws were purposely designed for flattering some musical sound trends -including among the pros alas- or not).

 

[RHO]

Amir has tested the gen4. They are quite nice for the money. So it seems that already lots has improved since you heard them.

 

[ta240]

Not the way I was taught by either my mother (learned [who is Austrian] English at the great Universities of England and was a Construction Cost Accountant in control of billions of $'s), nor in schools, colleges that I went to.

According to the Cambridge dictionary, when placed before a noun it is an adjective that means "very cheap"

budget
adjective [ before noun ]
very cheap:
a budget holiday/hotel/price

 

[EJ3]

According to the Cambridge dictionary, when placed before a noun it is an adjective that means "very cheap"

budget
adjective [ before noun ]
very cheap:
a budget holiday/hotel/price

obviously use may be different from time & place of where & when one learned it.
I have used many dictionary's over the years, Cambridge is one that I have never actually seen.
Probably because, it's quite new in the USA:

• First edition first published in 2003.
  
  I do not know anyone that would consider that an authority.
  
  Perhaps one of these might back you up:

• American English	American Heritage American Regional Encarta New Oxford American Random House Webster's Webster's New World Webster's Third New International I have other things to do than argue over semantics & "Frankly, don't give a damn".

• 
  

 

[ta240]

obviously use may be different from time & place of where & when one learned it.
I have used many dictionary's over the years, Cambridge is one that I have never actually seen.
Probably because, it's quite new in the USA:

• First edition first published in 2003.
  
  I do not know anyone that would consider that an authority.
  
  Perhaps one of these might back you up:

• American English	American Heritage American Regional Encarta New Oxford American Random House Webster's Webster's New World Webster's Third New International I have other things to do than argue over semantics & "Frankly, don't give a damn".

Wait, Cambridge doesn't qualify as one of the "great Universities of England".

And, clearly you do "give a damn" otherwise you wouldn't be arguing this so much.

But, here you go, from one of your approved sources. Clearly the usage here fits listing 2:

 

[jcarys]

Since I just bought a pair, I suggest the Chane A4.5. I did read Amir's not so great review of another Chane model, and it nearly stopped me from the purchase. However I'm using them as Atmos height channels, so not the most critical area of my system, and I have pretty good confidence that Audyssey can EQ any major frequency weirdness. I was greatly impressed by the Chesky speaker at Axpona, so that would also be interesting too.

 

[EJ3]

Wait, Cambridge doesn't qualify as one of the "great Universities of England".

And, clearly you do "give a damn" otherwise you wouldn't be arguing this so much.

But, here you go, from one of your approved sources. Clearly the usage here fits listing 2:

View attachment 445043

I LOVE it, put words in my mouth about Cambridge.
I want to clarify that I never said that Cambridge was NOT one of the great Universtites of Europe.
The great universities of Europe are were many Cherokee sent their children to be Educated.
I was born in Austria. One of my neighbors whom I dated in Austria & had visit me in the United states is a descendent
from one of those Cherokee.
My mother also attended Cambridge.

Your Peace is hopefully more important than driving yourself crazy.
Let it GO.
I'll do the same,
As my Peace is also more important to me than driving myself crazy.
Please remember that we are moderating ourselves and this SHOULD be an AUDIO GEAR discussion,
not some crazy, one up-man-ship, berating thing.