anyone familiar with these?

[don maico]

good bad or indifferent?
Logitech® Z-5450

 

[Seth=L]

Haven't heard it myself, but Logitech PC 5.1 systems are always pretty good. It looks good on paper. And the fact that it has it's own decoders is pretty cool. For around $300 on the internet it seems like it is a good deal as well. It is versitile to, you can connect it to a DVD player for surround sound without even using a computer.

 

[don maico]

http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/details/US/EN,CRID=2177,CONTENTID=10928

These are th ones.What attracted my attention the fcat they are digital and the rear speakers are wireless and I just wondered what people felt aboput them

 

[no. 5]

If you are using it only for a computer it looks great for that, but, I would not buy it to be your only theater system; the satellites are a one way desing, and the sub looks a shade small to give you deep bass.
but thats my ears talking, if you want a cheep HT system (Amazon.com $250) for a small room... it's better than nothing.

 

[Wafflesomd]

The Logitech z5500's, I would reccomend those instead, tehy arnt wireless, but the wireless kinda sucks, each speaker needs its own wall power outlet.

Excuse me? did you say that itsw sub doesnt have enough bass? Hah.

These things get extremely loud, way louder than the point that its safe to listen, they will easily cuase ear damage. And I could feel the sub from at least 200 feet.

If your budget limit's you to $250, you cannot beat the z5500's. Heck, I'd even get them if they were $100 more.

 

[no. 5]

I said LOW not LOUD, there is a deffrence

 

[WmAx]

You can get MUCH better performance by piecing together some budget home stereo components.

-Chris

 

[Wafflesomd]

You can get MUCH better performance by piecing together some budget home stereo components.

-Chris

Depends, some ppl have their own set of ears

And you edited your post n0. 5, not cool.

 

[no. 5]

what post did I edit?

 

[Wafflesomd]

Post #4.

Last edited by no. 5 : Yesterday at 11:18 PM.

 

[no. 5]

that wold be strange as this is the first day I have posted on this forum

 

[Wafflesomd]

The forums dont lie.

 

[don maico]

TBh I have a kef base 5.1 system I am happy with . I was just curious about the Logitechs particularly as the word digital is mentioned nad wondered how htis technology would affect speakers.Seems odd to me that after all these years we still rely on rectangular shaped boxes with crossovers etc when everything else is going digital.
These attracted my attention due to their unusual shape ,unusual construction and only one driver:
http://www.audiodigit.com/index.php?section=50
As it happens I am looking for a stereo pair that are not fussy aboiut placement and they may well fit the bill except no one seems to know anything about them

 

[Wafflesomd]

TBh I have a kef base 5.1 system I am happy with . I was just curious about the Logitechs particularly as the word digital is mentioned nad wondered how htis technology would affect speakers.Seems odd to me that after all these years we still rely on rectangular shaped boxes with crossovers etc when everything else is going digital.
These attracted my attention due to their unusual shape ,unusual construction and only one driver:
http://www.audiodigit.com/index.php?section=50
As it happens I am looking for a stereo pair that are not fussy aboiut placement and they may well fit the bill except no one seems to know anything about them

Those are odd, they look like they use the exact same driver.

 

[no. 5]

those are very intresting looking speakers, if you can give tham a listen let us know how thay sound.
there are a few singel driver speakers that have very good performance (like the Cain-Cain abby), and it may be worth it.

 

[WmAx]

Depends, some ppl have their own set of ears

And you edited your post n0. 5, not cool.

You are correct: as an example, someone can find anything preferable regardless of actual performance. But if one wants far better technical[and audible for the vast majority] performance, it is best to piece together some high value home components. I have yet to come across a mass produced computer speaker system that is well designed[compared to low cost budget home component speakers] in regards to audio signal reproduction, and I check them out on a regular basis out of morbid curiosity.

It seems to me [and I could be wrong] that most people don't bother to piece together components[perhaps partially because of the extra work/research required], and instead assume that a moderate cost system sold as a 'computer speaker system' will be of comparable high fidelity.

-Chris

 

[Seth=L]

Pardon my confusion, why does it matter if someone edits their post?

 

[Wafflesomd]

His post: He stated that the sub does not seem like it would be loud, keyword, "loud".

My post: Stating how from personal expereince, I know that the sub is quite "loud".

His next post: He then said that he said "deep", and not loud.

If you notice, his post originally containing "loud", was edited.

 

[no. 5]

His post: He stated that the sub does not seem like it would be loud, keyword, "loud".

My post: Stating how from personal expereince, I know that the sub is quite "loud".

His next post: He then said that he said "deep", and not loud.

If you notice, his post originally containing "loud", was edited.

I know that I'm geting old, but I beleve my orignal post said somthing like:

"If you are using it only for a computer it looks great for that, but, I would not buy it to be your only theater system; the satellites are a one way desing, and the sub looks a shade small to give you deep bass [because there is a defrence between low and loud].
but thats my ears talking, if you want a cheep HT system (Amazon.com $250) for a small room... it's better than nothing."

the bit with the [ ] is what I edited out, because I thought it was a obvious, and to agressive of a statment.
And, I wrote that post after I read the systems specs that say it can reach 103dB, which is inded loud.

 

[no. 5]

sorry to go all Mattlock

the post was edited six minuts after it was origanly posted, the next reply is not for another 32 minutes after that