Since we moved house last year, we've been making do with unsatisfactory sound from our TV. Our old sitting room allowed us to stand the hi-fi speakers either side of the screen, but in the new room the watching and listening axes have to be at right angles.
Fortunately, our taste in TV and cinema doesn't require much in the way of big effects and surround sound, so we won't be running speaker wires all round the room. But we do have some music DVDs, and we miss the clarity and depth of sound we had before.
So when I saw Yamaha's range of 'sound bars', I was intrigued. These are integrated blocks of speakers with a built in amplifier and, in Yamaha's case, a signal processor that generates a simulation of surround sound without rear speakers. The surround bit doesn't really excite me, but decent sound from a discreet package does. Has anyone any experience of these or similar things?
|
save your money and buy a good pair of 2:1 PC speakers. One of the types with a sub woofer
This is amazing sound the little units are quite tiny, with great base and the sub is not too large
www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/jbl-creature-iii-2-1-pc-speakers-black-06774027-pdt.html
|
Wouldn't say they probably sound amazing, but for the purpose and money it is what I would do. I have bought PC speakers for my parents TV in their bedroom, the rest our LCDs are connected to HIFI separate systems.
Even cheaper PC speakers (£30ish) will be a lot better than the standard built in sound.
|
There is a question of aesthetics here too. The TV is mounted on the wall, so any speakers also need to fit on the wall or sit on the floor. PC speakers are generally designed to sit on a tabletop, and I'm not sure how Z's JBLs would fit the space, whereas that's exactly what the Yamaha device is designed to do.
PC speakers come with plug-top transformers too; horrible things that don't play nicely with neighbouring appliances.
Anyway, I have a couple of pairs of PC speakers lying around doing nothing. Even got a PC sub somewhere, so I could try the principle with them and then look for something prettier if it works.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Tue 18 Oct 11 at 17:57
|
We have a sound bar, not a Yam but a well known make. I can't remember what without going downstairs and having a look.
I found that the new telly, a 32 inch Bravia, directed it's sound backwards into the corner and was very muffled to my ear. The soundbar works fine and is much better. It's exactly the same width as the telly but I found that putting it on the cabinet in front of the tv masked the sensor for the TV remote control. I sorted it by using some pieces of 3 x 2 timber, sprayed matt black and raising the telly on them, The soundbar hides the wood from view, anyway.
I did try some PC speakers and the sound was fine but, of course, there was no remote volume control with them.
Ted
|
>>
>> I did try some PC speakers and the sound was fine but, of course, there
>> was no remote volume control with them.
>>
>> Ted
>>
Turn their volume up and connect 'em to the headphone socket on the TV.
|
From how you describe your TV setup/needs WDB I reckon a well chosen soundbar will do the job well. More expensive doesn't always mean better so worth trying to listen to them before buying.
For their size the simulated surround/expanded sound is pretty impressive for the right material like action films but I find it leaves a hole in the middle for speech or a lone singer so needs turning off sometimes.
I don't have one but have listened to them on demo. Currently I use a Sony midi hi-fi to amp the TV but it's another lump of kit in the way. In a few months we aim to upgrade the TV and plan to buy a soundbar unless the TV comes with decent speakers and a sub.
|
|
I am glad our LCD TV is an older one. i.e. not slimline. It has decent speakers. The problem with a lot of slimline TVs is there is no space for speakers. It's not as if you really notice the extra depth when watching. Although it will use more electric for the CCFL.
|
How thick is 'not slimline', RTJ? Ours is a 2009 Sony that, including the bracket, sticks out about 170mm from the wall. The latest Samsungs are much slimmer, but I still don't find the Sony speakers adequate for more than speech.
I've no problem in principle with the TV being merely a screen; we've never used the built-in tuner of ours, feeding it from a PVR and a PS3, and most sound bars I've looked at can be trained to work from the TV's remote, so no button-proliferation either. Perhaps because I'm used to a multi-box system for music, it's no great hardship to do the same for TV.
|
>> How thick is 'not slimline'
Ignoring the dimensions of the stand, the depth of the actual screen for a CCFL (cold-cathode fluorescent lamp) back lit TVs was a few inches. The latest using LEDs for backlights (or even OLED screens) are less than an inch deep. So fitting any half decent speakers in an LED backlit screen is practically impossible.
I'm still happy with my choice of a Panasonic back in 2008. It doesn't bother me it's nowhere nearly as slim as an LED backlit one because you don't see how deep it is anyway.
|
I have the TV sound routed through a cheapish Hitachi midi system in the caravan.
Works well, the bookshelf speakers sit either of the telly, and the sound is decent without being too big or overpowering.
|
|
Willdebeest - some of the sound bars are really good and judging by your stated requirements would suit you perfectly. Find a decent shop that will let you have a listen first. Some of the other contributors are right that you could get a quick improvemnet with some pc speakers etc but as I say, some of the soundbars now doing a rather fine job. I'll confess to being a bit of a hi-fi snob and I think they're ok.
|
|
I see they are being tested on the gaget show tonight at 8pm ch5.
|
|
In case you missed it the B & W at £1500 was the best. The yamaha was ok. Some cheapo £300 one was almost useless. Yamaha would probably be an ok buy at £700.
|
At those prices i'd want a half decent surround system, integrated with hifi all using the same speakers selectably via a receiver amp.
The trouble with these all in one box systems is that when one item blows the whole thing is scrap, with separates you can replace/upgrade at relatively small cost as and when things come up, used separates can be very cheap for excellent quality.
|
>> At those prices i'd want a half decent surround system, integrated with hifi all using
>> the same speakers selectably via a receiver amp.
at those prices half decent aint good enough.
1500 / 700 quid for a sound bar? you are joking.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 31 Oct 11 at 22:11
|
Crikey, it's been two years since I asked this question. But I've gawn and bought one, the Yamaha YAS-101 that first caught my eye in 2011. I decided I couldn't justify £250 but when I noticed last week that they were going for £150, I made an executive decision and pounced on a black one at Richer Sounds. I even - don't laugh - paid £15 for four years of extended warranty. RS offers my £15 back at the end (presumably they bank on customers forgetting) if I don't make a claim.
Anyway, how does it work? Well enough for us, is my answer. It has no separate subwoofer - although there's an output for one - and I don't think it needs one. Bass guitar and orchestral bass, inaudible through the TV speakers, are pleasantly present and easy to follow without unnatural dominance, especially once I'd lifted the bar off its temporary location on the floor and mounted it on the wall. The built-in not-quite-subwoofer has its own control, which I've backed off several clicks from its default setting.
As for the simulated surround effect, I find it hard to test because I don't have anything where I'm sure sound should be coming from behind me. Most likely is our Blu-ray sets of Mad Men, where I've heard the occasional telephone ring a long way from the speakers. Do I feel surrounded? Not really, but I wasn't expecting to, so I don't feel cheated either.
What I do like is that complex, rapid dialogue is now much easier to follow. We've picked up The West Wing where we abruptly lost touch with it years ago, and the no-prisoners exposition dialogue in the corridors now makes more sense than before.
I've also revived our forgotten Logitech Harmony remote, which does a surprisingly good job of coordinating speakers, TV and BT Vision+ PVR. So instead of five remotes on the coffee table, we're back to two. Result.
Would I be getting better sound if I'd spent - as I considered - £600 on a Sonos Playbar instead? Possibly, but I have a serious music system for when that's a priority. Do I wish I had a separate subwoofer to find space and power for? Certainly not. Do I think the Yamaha is good value at the price I paid? So far, yes I do.
|
>> What I do like is that complex, rapid dialogue is now much easier to follow.
>> We've picked up The West Wing where we abruptly lost touch with it years ago,
>> and the no-prisoners exposition dialogue in the corridors now makes more sense than before.
Crikey. We've always had a fantastic sound system via an amp and so on, and never had a problem actually hearing the West Wing words. But a system that actually turns them into something comprehensible? Sign me up!
Joking apart, I think the West Wing, in its prime, was one of the best TV series ever. Just saying.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Thu 16 Jan 14 at 09:31
|
|
My Denon audio system sits beneath my TV and is connected to it with an optical audio cable. It provides vastly improved TV audio for the price of a £5 cable.
|
My 42in Panasonic TV actually has excellent sound quality - but only if you are sitting behind it...:-(
The reason is that some of the sound is delivered directly downwards to the glass cabinet on which it is housed and the rest behind it into an alcove, which means the output becomes scattered in various directions.
I looked at sound bars, but in the end decided on a 2.1 system from Charles Roth that has proved ideal for the purpose. Cost was £130 and worth every penny.
|
The idea of the 'television set' is obsolete. The explosion in sources of content - Sky, Netflix, YouTube - and methods of delivery mean that it no longer makes sense for the device that presents the pictures to be a single appliance that also collects the content, because other devices can do that much better. Similarly, the shape required for presenting pictures is completely wrong for producing sound.
Thirty years ago, when the technology was rudimentary anyway, a single box made sense because there wasn't really anything to spoil (and a CRT required a deep cabinet that created room for speakers) but now why bother with built-in speakers at all? Better to think of separate source, monitor and sound components.
Discuss.
Ironically perhaps, the age of the 'TV system' arrives just as the true hi-fi audio system is giving way to convenience-oriented digital appliances. Much as I like the Ruark R2i (and the new R7 looks, and apparently sounds, fabulous) and would like one for an office or dining room, it wouldn't do for me as the main music system in the house. Perhaps I'm just a geek in the wrong style of glasses.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Sat 18 Jan 14 at 07:17
|
>> The idea of the 'television set' is obsolete. The explosion in sources of content -
>> Sky, Netflix, YouTube - and methods of delivery mean that it no longer makes sense
>> for the device that presents the pictures to be a single appliance that also collects
>> the content, because other devices can do that much better. Similarly, the shape required for
>> presenting pictures is completely wrong for producing sound.
>> Thirty years ago, when the technology was rudimentary anyway, a single box made sense because
>> there wasn't really anything to spoil (and a CRT required a deep cabinet that created
>> room for speakers) but now why bother with built-in speakers at all? Better to think
>> of separate source, monitor and sound components.
>>
>> Discuss.
My TV Set can (and does) collect and show Sky, Netflix, youtube, catchup TV services, online TV services and locally stored digital media. Its wired through the stereo so is perfect for reproducing excellent sound, and as I shoot all my pictures and video in 16:9 mode now (as most cameras can) its perfect for stills . A TV has always been separate source. Not one of your arguments is valid as the "TV Set" is evolving nicely in line with modern media, and I don't see it dying any time soon.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 18 Jan 14 at 08:54
|
My TV Set can (and does) collect and show Sky, Netflix, youtube, catchup TV services, online TV services and locally stored digital media.
Does it play discs? And record too? That's pretty well an essential these days. I don't suppose we watch more than 5 percent of our TV at time of broadcast, and even then we make lavish use of live pause and rewind.
Sounds like it's a more modern set than ours, which dates from 2009 and has only a Freeview tuner that we've never used. So the sources are all separate and now the sound output is too. What's left is a monitor, which will eventually become the limiting factor - or break - at which time we can select a replacement purely on picture quality and how it suits the room.
Meanwhile, if another online source becomes the next big thing, it will appear as an app on the PS3, or be made available through BT Vision. Is an all-in-one updatable like that?
|
The sound on any TV is crap too. Our telly is 5-6 metres away from the sofa and if you want to hear a variety of dialogue/music/sound FX, you have to have the that cheap tinny sound blasting out towards you at high volume. You can hear it throughout the house.
Use a cinema sound wotsic thingy with the speakers at head-level either side of the sofa and you have a rich, wonderful, warm sound but a very low volume.
|
The picture on my 40 inch Toshiba is lovely, but the sound is carp. As a cheap, temporary solution I plugged its earphone socket into my elderly Demon amp and it sound OK now, though it would probably be better with a proper 5.1 home cinema system.
The TV itself is basically a big monitor. I get YouTube on it via the TiVo, and could have Netflix if I wanted. The freeview tuner is a waste of silicon in my case, as I would need a 20 ft aerial to get a signal here.
|
|
My Panasonic Viera TV has left and right audio sockets as well as one for headphones. Is it likely to drive speakers without an intermediate external amp or PC? If so, would they work without adjustments as regards internal and external speakers?
|
>> My Panasonic Viera TV has left and right audio sockets as well as one for
>> headphones. Is it likely to drive speakers without an intermediate external amp or PC?
No. Insufficient level, needs amplifying.
|
>> My Panasonic Viera TV has left and right audio sockets as well as one for headphones. Is it likely to drive speakers without an intermediate external amp or PC? If so, would they work without adjustments as regards internal and external speakers?>>
All the sound requirements from my Panasonic Blu-Ray players, VCR, external HDD PVR etc are relayed via my Panasonic Viera TV to the powered Charles 2.1 speakers by Roth I've mentioned earlier.
The normal sound output from the TV itself has been permanently disabled; the results are excellent and even the TV's 5.1 inbuilt surround system is still valid when appropriate.
A review:
www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1328386/Review-Roth-Charlie-2-1-dock-speakers.html
but they are now available from Amazon at around £70 for the 2.1 (the 2.0 can cost as much from some outlets!).
|
Improving TV sound: is a 'sound bar' any good? - Zero
