And this looks smaller than the average TV soundbar, since I imagine it's at least partially intended for desktop use. Soundbars are all about aesthetics, almost always a terrible value if you care about the actual sound first.
Yep. The reality of sound is you can't combat physics. Simple fact of the matter is to produce certain frequencies, primarily low frequencies, you simply have to be able to move enough air, and the only way to make a small speaker do that is to increase cone excursion, which has plenty of its own problems. I kind of chuckled when i read the 20hz supposed response on the 5.25" "subwoofer". yeah, 20hz at what 60db? Anyways, enough audio snobbery.
A $200 sound bar isn't going to get you the kind of sound separation and high fidelity audio quality you're looking for. If you want that kind of sound from a bar, expect to pay for it from a high end manufacturer like Definitive Technology or someone else. While Razer's aim is clearly for the gamer who's short on space but still looking for good sound in a small footprint, it's clearly not going to be as well rounded as an audiophile grade manufacturer.
No one wants to run audio cables for surround, nor deal with setting up drivers and output configurations for 5+ channel audio. I can't even count on 1 hand how many console gamers I know that are running surround speakers with stereo output...
Bottom line is if it's easy to set up and even remotely simulates surround sound, it's a good product.
That said, sound bars are usually not very accurate when sitting close up, so this will probably not work well for PC settings.
>No one wants to run audio cables for surround Obviously false.
> nor deal with setting up drivers and output configurations for 5+ channel audio This is not complicated. Install the audio driver, then install k-lite codec pack. This will generally take less than 5 minutes.
You seem to be projecting your limits onto other people, but you won't find many people who can't handle a simple 5.1 or 7.1 setup at Anandtech.
oh wow... I just found out I'm the only person in the entire world that uses a 5.1 surround speaker setup... I just thought I was ordinary, but I guess I'm a unique snowflake.
More than likely though your sample pool is just smaller than your 1 hand.
Uh, no, the main problem with console surround sound, is that you'd need a digital receiver, so that you can actually split out the sounds to 6ch. Otherwise you get to only use stereo with a console, because they lack analogue, be it RCA or 3.5mm jacks for a proper 6ch setup.
For PC, that's not a huge issue, since any modern desktop PC will have the appropriate 3x3.5mm outputs for 6ch and it's VERY EASY to set this up. The main downside to 6ch PC speakers is that they usually lack digital input or multiple surround inputs for anything other than PC.
Now, what this $200 thing does, is fill in a niche between digital/HDMI reciever + 6ch speaker setup (costly), and analogue stereo speakers or integrated speakers on the TV/monitor. I wouldn't pay $200 for it, however. $100 yes, $150 maybe, but definitely not $200.
Why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry think they can waltz into the market and sell headphones/soundbars/speakers? It's sad that companies that actually do proper sound engineering like Sennheiser/Bowers&Wilkins/Paradigm are being out-marketed and outsold by Beats/Bose/Vizio, or even worse, Chinese OEM products with big brand names like Skullcandy and Razer with zero experience whatsoever...
Because every Tom, Dick, and Harry thinks he knows how to pick out good speakers from a listing on Amazon/etc using a simple 2 step process. 1 Decide how much he wants to spend. 2 Find the model with the most watts from a brand he's vaguely heard of before.
Because Skullcandy and Beats realized that a huge chunk of the population buys headphones/earbuds/IEMs based on fashion and not audio quality, and capitalized on it.
B&W kind of glitz on the marketing too, they just aim it higher... And everyone's getting in on the act because it's a fast growing market, doesn't mean they'll necessarily succeed, Beats is like the one outlier...
Skullcandy has actually put out some decent cans tho, no clue about their IEM, even Beats have gotten better. Beats' market share eclipses everyone else's tho, even put together, guess there's something to be said for being first to tap the mass market.
Even companies with decades of experience put out duds too, or get bought by Harman and turned into a budget brand that regurgitates old designs. The lines are getting blurred all over, if the average consumer can't be bothered to do any research then they deserve their fate.
Skullcandy started out as a rebrander of Chinese products - the kind of bulk crap that anybody with a tiny bit of savvy can get in quantities of 1000 from Alibaba/TaoBao. If they've become more discerning, I'll have to re-evaluate.
I still haven't found a pair of Beats that are reasonable on sound, regardless of price. I have Sennheiser HD380s in my office drawer and they may be ugly-ish, but they sound pretty phenomenal.
B&W does spend more on marketing than most other audio brands, but they generally have the engineering to back it up - B&W 8-series speakers aren't known to be great values, but they aren't known to be particularly poor performers in their price bracket, either.
I agree, I have a pair of Sennheiser HD280 Pros. I would choose them over a pair of Beats anyday. I actually remember a time when Beats weren't used as a signature product for Dr.Dre, and they actually had a phenomenal quality, but then Mass production and commercialization happened and the quality of the product just kept dropping every single year. In terms of leisurely listening I just use a pair of Sol Republic earbuds. They cost me $40 and sound just as "good" as a $60 pair of Skullcandy's. The issue with Skullcandy though isn't necessarily the fact that they focused on design over sound. The issue is just that they haven't put any research into new audio drivers, but they still charge the same amount of money every year for their products. As far as Boss is concerned I think that they sound awesome if you just want to listen to some music, but as far as audio work is concerned (what I use my HD 280's for) they are not ideal at all. Their drivers are very unique to them. It's something that nobody else really has, but as a result if you try to mix something with them it's going to sound like a huge mess on anyone else's earbuds/headphones.
The overall sound quality of Beats cans has gone up since their introduction IMO, not down... It isn't saying much because they were awful to begin with, but they were mass produced junk from the start so that hasn't really changed, I don't know how you could suggest they were ever NOT mass produced...
Recent models like the Solo 2 sound pretty good in comparison to their direct competitors from Senn, Beyer, V-Moda, B&W, etc. Other models are just ok; they haven't improved to the point where I can say some of their cans AREN'T a rip off. I'm not trying to defend them or Skullcandy, I haven't even kept a headphone from either brand, but I do think blind brand hate is silly (specially if you haven't kept up with their releases).
FWIW, my small collection of headphones has an equal mix of old school brands (Beyerdynamic, Etymotic, Sennheiser, Koss) and more recent newcomers (NAD, Philips, V-Moda, Xiaomi) as well as budget stuff (JVC, MEElectronics)... I've tried a few headphones and IEM up and down the product lines of those brands and I can't confidently say one is consistently offering a better value than the rest.
Shoot, I think Philips of all things has a more consistent lineup thru the low to mid end, even compared to something like Senn, but they don't fill every gap regardless (e.g. still tough to beat an HD558 on sale for budget open headphones). Skullcandy's slight transformation seemed to start earlier than Beat's but it may have stagnated, they put out a few pretty decent models a few years ago (Aviator etc) but still seem to be pushing those.
Bose has been around far longer than some of the more audiophile grade associated names you've tossed around and makes some outstanding products. They're far better than the group you've placed them in, but that's your opinion.
Personally speaking, when it comes to high end speakers, I'm all about Definitive Technology. Such a shame they don't make headphones. I have a very nice pair of Bose ones for that, but I'd be all over a pair made by DT.
The Infinity speakers at my desk's side have bigger drivers than that sub's woofer... :p More like "subwoofer"*, the whole setup might actually be a step back from a pair of crappy Logitech 5.1.
Not only is that subwoofer never going to reach anywhere near 20hz and be audible, but crossed at 180hz it's going to sound like total ass. Though I guess that's expected from cheap junk like this. Sad thing is, some people will buy it and swear it's the best thing ever.
A lot of comments about the subwoofer. I have to say, I question how this will sound with the low wattage and tiny size. Then I'm reminded of the first time I ever heard an 8 inch Sunfire subwoofer at Audio King like 15 years ago. I was blown away how that sucker could just kill the 12 inch Cerwin Vega I was using.
It's all relative, but the 2.5" drivers are just as bad as the 5.25" sub, it just means the tiny sub will be over burdened trying to reproduce a lot of frequencies the bar should be able to but can't.
I honestly question how much of an upgrade this would be over decent TV speakers... There's much better ways to upgrade your sound setup for $200, tho if surround effects while gaming are the priority you're probably better off with headphones.
Like meaculpa said, there are other sound bars for around the same price with larger drivers that will likely sound better. And as others have also pointed out, this sound bar is so narrow you will get absolute crap stereo separation.
There are way too many variables to say what is the smartest buy for someone else without knowing all of the details. Available space is one. If you have enough room for more than a sound bar, you'd be better off getting the cheapest halfway decent receiver you can find, and a pair of cheap but decent bookshelf speakers. For example, without even shopping around, Newegg has a Pioneer 5.1 receiver for $162. They frequently have the Polk Monitor 30/35B bookshelf speakers on sale for $80/pair. That's only $42 more for a system that will sound better for movies/games and will sound *far better* for music, while giving you something you can grow into if you want. You can add a dedicated sub/rears/center channel as needed/wanted.
Sound bars usually sound much better than the built-in speakers in TVs (especially cheap TVs). This isn't surprising with TVs getting much thinner and needing to be fiercely price competitive in most segments. However, you can get far better sound for not much more money...provided you have room for the equipment.
Not sure if that was a serious question but I'll bite... Terrible place to ask for recommendations tho. I'd say if positional audio for gaming is a priority and you have a small space or only $200 to spend then you're better off looking at headphones, you'll get far better bang for your buck and positional cues will be easier to pick up.
If we drop the pretense that the Razer bar's virtual surround is worth anything or that the sub is, well, an actual SUBwoofer, you can do much better as far as a stereo system goes for even half as much cash. Pioneer BS22 when on sale ($65/pair) + $30 T-amp is about as cheap as you can go yet it'll still stomp many low end sound bars. Micca MB42X are smaller and a decent low budget choice ($90/pair), the Pioneer are large for 4" speakers but that well built enclosure is part of what makes them sound nice.
You can get better larger speakers (I like Infinity's Primus P163 for ~$150) or a better amp (Emotiva) or a receiver if you have the desk space and want better bass management and calibration (particularly if you intend to add a sub, tho some of these probably dig deeper than Razer's "sub"). You could look at powered monitors like the JBL LSR305 if you wanna avoid extra components/amps on the desk, seen those on sale for under $250/pair.
Audioengine's A2 are decent sounding powered speakers and tiny but kinda overpriced at $200, still, if you need something diminutive it probably beats a bar with even smaller drivers, a mid woofer, and worse stereo separation.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
Back to Article
EzioAs - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Virtual surround sound...nice try...dishayu - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
I've read up about this quite extensively. I science behind is solid but I don't know how good the actual implementation is : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQmQD27uCt0RazrLeaf - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
The science is solid, but the implementation is a lot harder with a sound bar. I have yet to use a sound bar that has sufficient stereo separation.Impulses - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
And this looks smaller than the average TV soundbar, since I imagine it's at least partially intended for desktop use. Soundbars are all about aesthetics, almost always a terrible value if you care about the actual sound first.Kutark - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Yep. The reality of sound is you can't combat physics. Simple fact of the matter is to produce certain frequencies, primarily low frequencies, you simply have to be able to move enough air, and the only way to make a small speaker do that is to increase cone excursion, which has plenty of its own problems. I kind of chuckled when i read the 20hz supposed response on the 5.25" "subwoofer". yeah, 20hz at what 60db? Anyways, enough audio snobbery.SkyBill40 - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
A $200 sound bar isn't going to get you the kind of sound separation and high fidelity audio quality you're looking for. If you want that kind of sound from a bar, expect to pay for it from a high end manufacturer like Definitive Technology or someone else. While Razer's aim is clearly for the gamer who's short on space but still looking for good sound in a small footprint, it's clearly not going to be as well rounded as an audiophile grade manufacturer.spacebarbarian - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
No one wants to run audio cables for surround, nor deal with setting up drivers and output configurations for 5+ channel audio. I can't even count on 1 hand how many console gamers I know that are running surround speakers with stereo output...Bottom line is if it's easy to set up and even remotely simulates surround sound, it's a good product.
That said, sound bars are usually not very accurate when sitting close up, so this will probably not work well for PC settings.
JeffFlanagan - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
>No one wants to run audio cables for surroundObviously false.
> nor deal with setting up drivers and output configurations for 5+ channel audio
This is not complicated. Install the audio driver, then install k-lite codec pack. This will generally take less than 5 minutes.
You seem to be projecting your limits onto other people, but you won't find many people who can't handle a simple 5.1 or 7.1 setup at Anandtech.
HanzNFranzen - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
oh wow... I just found out I'm the only person in the entire world that uses a 5.1 surround speaker setup... I just thought I was ordinary, but I guess I'm a unique snowflake.More than likely though your sample pool is just smaller than your 1 hand.
meacupla - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
Uh, no, the main problem with console surround sound, is that you'd need a digital receiver, so that you can actually split out the sounds to 6ch. Otherwise you get to only use stereo with a console, because they lack analogue, be it RCA or 3.5mm jacks for a proper 6ch setup.For PC, that's not a huge issue, since any modern desktop PC will have the appropriate 3x3.5mm outputs for 6ch and it's VERY EASY to set this up.
The main downside to 6ch PC speakers is that they usually lack digital input or multiple surround inputs for anything other than PC.
Now, what this $200 thing does, is fill in a niche between digital/HDMI reciever + 6ch speaker setup (costly), and analogue stereo speakers or integrated speakers on the TV/monitor.
I wouldn't pay $200 for it, however. $100 yes, $150 maybe, but definitely not $200.
aliasfox - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Why does every Tom, Dick, and Harry think they can waltz into the market and sell headphones/soundbars/speakers? It's sad that companies that actually do proper sound engineering like Sennheiser/Bowers&Wilkins/Paradigm are being out-marketed and outsold by Beats/Bose/Vizio, or even worse, Chinese OEM products with big brand names like Skullcandy and Razer with zero experience whatsoever...DanNeely - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Because every Tom, Dick, and Harry thinks he knows how to pick out good speakers from a listing on Amazon/etc using a simple 2 step process. 1 Decide how much he wants to spend. 2 Find the model with the most watts from a brand he's vaguely heard of before.otherwise - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Because Skullcandy and Beats realized that a huge chunk of the population buys headphones/earbuds/IEMs based on fashion and not audio quality, and capitalized on it.Impulses - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
B&W kind of glitz on the marketing too, they just aim it higher... And everyone's getting in on the act because it's a fast growing market, doesn't mean they'll necessarily succeed, Beats is like the one outlier...Skullcandy has actually put out some decent cans tho, no clue about their IEM, even Beats have gotten better. Beats' market share eclipses everyone else's tho, even put together, guess there's something to be said for being first to tap the mass market.
Even companies with decades of experience put out duds too, or get bought by Harman and turned into a budget brand that regurgitates old designs. The lines are getting blurred all over, if the average consumer can't be bothered to do any research then they deserve their fate.
aliasfox - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
Skullcandy started out as a rebrander of Chinese products - the kind of bulk crap that anybody with a tiny bit of savvy can get in quantities of 1000 from Alibaba/TaoBao. If they've become more discerning, I'll have to re-evaluate.I still haven't found a pair of Beats that are reasonable on sound, regardless of price. I have Sennheiser HD380s in my office drawer and they may be ugly-ish, but they sound pretty phenomenal.
B&W does spend more on marketing than most other audio brands, but they generally have the engineering to back it up - B&W 8-series speakers aren't known to be great values, but they aren't known to be particularly poor performers in their price bracket, either.
GimmickMusik - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
I agree, I have a pair of Sennheiser HD280 Pros. I would choose them over a pair of Beats anyday. I actually remember a time when Beats weren't used as a signature product for Dr.Dre, and they actually had a phenomenal quality, but then Mass production and commercialization happened and the quality of the product just kept dropping every single year.In terms of leisurely listening I just use a pair of Sol Republic earbuds. They cost me $40 and sound just as "good" as a $60 pair of Skullcandy's. The issue with Skullcandy though isn't necessarily the fact that they focused on design over sound. The issue is just that they haven't put any research into new audio drivers, but they still charge the same amount of money every year for their products. As far as Boss is concerned I think that they sound awesome if you just want to listen to some music, but as far as audio work is concerned (what I use my HD 280's for) they are not ideal at all. Their drivers are very unique to them. It's something that nobody else really has, but as a result if you try to mix something with them it's going to sound like a huge mess on anyone else's earbuds/headphones.
Impulses - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
The overall sound quality of Beats cans has gone up since their introduction IMO, not down... It isn't saying much because they were awful to begin with, but they were mass produced junk from the start so that hasn't really changed, I don't know how you could suggest they were ever NOT mass produced...Recent models like the Solo 2 sound pretty good in comparison to their direct competitors from Senn, Beyer, V-Moda, B&W, etc. Other models are just ok; they haven't improved to the point where I can say some of their cans AREN'T a rip off. I'm not trying to defend them or Skullcandy, I haven't even kept a headphone from either brand, but I do think blind brand hate is silly (specially if you haven't kept up with their releases).
FWIW, my small collection of headphones has an equal mix of old school brands (Beyerdynamic, Etymotic, Sennheiser, Koss) and more recent newcomers (NAD, Philips, V-Moda, Xiaomi) as well as budget stuff (JVC, MEElectronics)... I've tried a few headphones and IEM up and down the product lines of those brands and I can't confidently say one is consistently offering a better value than the rest.
Shoot, I think Philips of all things has a more consistent lineup thru the low to mid end, even compared to something like Senn, but they don't fill every gap regardless (e.g. still tough to beat an HD558 on sale for budget open headphones). Skullcandy's slight transformation seemed to start earlier than Beat's but it may have stagnated, they put out a few pretty decent models a few years ago (Aviator etc) but still seem to be pushing those.
SkyBill40 - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
Bose has been around far longer than some of the more audiophile grade associated names you've tossed around and makes some outstanding products. They're far better than the group you've placed them in, but that's your opinion.Personally speaking, when it comes to high end speakers, I'm all about Definitive Technology. Such a shame they don't make headphones. I have a very nice pair of Bose ones for that, but I'd be all over a pair made by DT.
prime2515103 - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
This sort of false advertising should be illegal. 20Hz from a 5.25” woofer? Is that +3/-30db?Impulses - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
The Infinity speakers at my desk's side have bigger drivers than that sub's woofer... :p More like "subwoofer"*, the whole setup might actually be a step back from a pair of crappy Logitech 5.1.coburn_c - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
5.25"? 20Hz? Sounds Legit©...NZ_Cupcake - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
Not only is that subwoofer never going to reach anywhere near 20hz and be audible, but crossed at 180hz it's going to sound like total ass. Though I guess that's expected from cheap junk like this.Sad thing is, some people will buy it and swear it's the best thing ever.
gilmoreisu - Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - link
A lot of comments about the subwoofer. I have to say, I question how this will sound with the low wattage and tiny size. Then I'm reminded of the first time I ever heard an 8 inch Sunfire subwoofer at Audio King like 15 years ago. I was blown away how that sucker could just kill the 12 inch Cerwin Vega I was using.Impulses - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
It's all relative, but the 2.5" drivers are just as bad as the 5.25" sub, it just means the tiny sub will be over burdened trying to reproduce a lot of frequencies the bar should be able to but can't.I honestly question how much of an upgrade this would be over decent TV speakers... There's much better ways to upgrade your sound setup for $200, tho if surround effects while gaming are the priority you're probably better off with headphones.
nousir - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
"There's much better ways to upgrade your sound setup for $200"For example?
meacupla - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
I did find a Polk Audio IHT 3000 sound bar w/ sub (180W total) for $200Bob Todd - Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - link
Like meaculpa said, there are other sound bars for around the same price with larger drivers that will likely sound better. And as others have also pointed out, this sound bar is so narrow you will get absolute crap stereo separation.There are way too many variables to say what is the smartest buy for someone else without knowing all of the details. Available space is one. If you have enough room for more than a sound bar, you'd be better off getting the cheapest halfway decent receiver you can find, and a pair of cheap but decent bookshelf speakers. For example, without even shopping around, Newegg has a Pioneer 5.1 receiver for $162. They frequently have the Polk Monitor 30/35B bookshelf speakers on sale for $80/pair. That's only $42 more for a system that will sound better for movies/games and will sound *far better* for music, while giving you something you can grow into if you want. You can add a dedicated sub/rears/center channel as needed/wanted.
Sound bars usually sound much better than the built-in speakers in TVs (especially cheap TVs). This isn't surprising with TVs getting much thinner and needing to be fiercely price competitive in most segments. However, you can get far better sound for not much more money...provided you have room for the equipment.
Impulses - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
Not sure if that was a serious question but I'll bite... Terrible place to ask for recommendations tho. I'd say if positional audio for gaming is a priority and you have a small space or only $200 to spend then you're better off looking at headphones, you'll get far better bang for your buck and positional cues will be easier to pick up.If we drop the pretense that the Razer bar's virtual surround is worth anything or that the sub is, well, an actual SUBwoofer, you can do much better as far as a stereo system goes for even half as much cash. Pioneer BS22 when on sale ($65/pair) + $30 T-amp is about as cheap as you can go yet it'll still stomp many low end sound bars. Micca MB42X are smaller and a decent low budget choice ($90/pair), the Pioneer are large for 4" speakers but that well built enclosure is part of what makes them sound nice.
You can get better larger speakers (I like Infinity's Primus P163 for ~$150) or a better amp (Emotiva) or a receiver if you have the desk space and want better bass management and calibration (particularly if you intend to add a sub, tho some of these probably dig deeper than Razer's "sub"). You could look at powered monitors like the JBL LSR305 if you wanna avoid extra components/amps on the desk, seen those on sale for under $250/pair.
Audioengine's A2 are decent sounding powered speakers and tiny but kinda overpriced at $200, still, if you need something diminutive it probably beats a bar with even smaller drivers, a mid woofer, and worse stereo separation.