Antec Soundscience Rockus 3D 2.1 Speakers
by Dustin Sklavos on November 18, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Audio
- Antec
- Soundscience
- Rockus 3D
Music on the Rockus 3D
Music playback testing was done much more comprehensively than I had previously; I tried just about everything. The first issue I took with the Rockus 3D, but one that became progressively more minor as I became accustomed to the character of the sound the system produced, was that the high end feels a bit tinny. Double-blind with the Bose, the Rockus generally sounded better and produced clearer, more dynamic sound that was in many cases far less muddy. The problem is that some of that muddiness did mask compression and artifacting in some of the songs; you can't really fault the speakers for doing what they're told, but the highs can be so thin that it can get to the point of making some of the artifacts physically painful to listen to.
The sound also isn't quite as rich and full as one would hope. It certainly has worlds more depth than you'll get from a hundred dollar speaker set, but the highs and mids nonetheless can feel a bit thin and sometimes don't feel like they're separating quite as well as they could. You'll pick up nuances and details in the music better than you might with cheaper speakers; I just wish the sound had more body in those regions. When you get to the lows, the subwoofer does a solid if unexceptional job of picking up the rear. Not having a more fine-grained control over the subwoofer's power beyond the three presets hurts, but even the highest preset can feel a little weak.
Across different types of music, I found that industrial and electronic music could actually feel the thinnest in the highs and mids, but softer more instrumental fare works far, far better. If "Spitfire" by The Prodigy produces a good if not outstanding listening experience, something more downtempo like Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Otherside" can sound quite lovely.
Trying to buff up those thin highs and mids through the equalizer is an exercise in futility, though, and this is one of the Rockus 3D's biggest perks and worst flaws: the speaker system is calibrated to sound as good as it possibly can from the factory, a point the Antec rep was keen on mentioning and something that I can confirm in practice. The Rockus 3D is never going to sound better than it does shipped from the factory, and tweaking the equalizer in either analog or digital connection modes only seemed to make it worse.
That said, across the board the Rockus 3D sounded better than the Bose Companion II's attached to the Xonar DX.
While playing music, however, just go ahead and keep your finger off the 3D mode. It allows the speakers to suddenly produce a tremendous amount of body, but it more or less massacres the arrangement of the instruments in whatever you happen to be listening to. On a couple of songs I felt like the listening experience was slightly improved by 3D mode, but in almost everything else the distortion completely ruined them. Listening to music in 3D mode on the Rockus is akin to watching a standard-aspect movie stretched across an HDTV.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
chrnochime - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
Just because the speakers sound "great" doesn't mean they're actually accurately reproducing the recording. The speakers can be overtly coloring and alter the music so that it sounds "better".Here's something to chew on, no matter how good your speakers/amp/pre-amp/DAC/player is, if the recording itself is already lossy/compromised from the moment it is captured, then placed on the media(again more info lost), everything after that is moot point. Not to mention the signal degradation/alternation that inevitably occur in the links between the recorded media and the speaker(itself is imperfect as well)...
EddyKilowatt - Monday, November 22, 2010 - link
"Only the subjective sound matters" is the siren song that led the hi-fi field to cryogenically frozen AC outlets, and enough holier-than-thou golden-eared 'experts' to turn the entire business into a laughingstock.Sure, the subjective sound matters, but the objective facts matter too, and ignoring them leads rather quickly to expensive la-la land.
That said, I agree with the sentiment that audio reviews is a high cost-of-entry business, already populated with some credible sources. I'm happy to see Anandtech diversify a bit, but they need to choose their battles.
kmmatney - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
I think the comparison to the Bose speakers is probably good enough for most readers.Graphs and specs aren't going to do much for a lot of us. My last set of speakers were purchased simply because they were on sale, and the NewEgg user-reviews were favorable.
ckryan - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
I would very much like to hear these. I made it a few paragraphs in before it sunk in that these are not Logitech units. That's a very good thing. That earns this system points before it goes anywhere else.The main problem as I see it, is the subwoofer. A switch with three settings does not an acceptable option make. It would really just need two knobs. How about this: A level control knob, and a crossover knob. Why don't they utilize these cheap, easily added extras to the sub? Put some recommended settings as hash marks or in the manual. Let the user have some kind of actual control. A semi-parametric control would be a nice extra. None of this requires any addition knowledge, but could be invaluable for for both sub placement AND my sanity.
The satellites could sound as good as a Ferrari F1 exhaust note -- but if the sub (an integral part of the satellite + sub idea) isn't versatile in terms of placement, then all is for naught. Good for Antec though. I used to love them but they fell out of favor with me for a few years. I took a chance on them again though, and have found them to be better than I remembered in their traditional case/psu area. I'm glad they are branching out. But making good sounding gear isn't easy. There isn't a good formula for it when it must be done cheaply. I hope they can pull it off.
Antec_Jessie - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
We certainly agree with the last portion of your paragraph. Making good sounding gear isn't easy. Even at $250, which many consider a "premium," there's not going to be a perfect set of speakers. There's just too much subjectivity in evaluating speakers. What we wanted to do was make the best $250 set of speakers would could.JCheng - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
> two satellites rated for 25 watts and a frequency response between 10 Hz and 20 kHz10 Hz? I think you meant 100Hz.
Stuka87 - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
I noticed this too. I highly doubt they go down to 10Hz.Spivonious - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
Yeah there's no way those satellites go down to 10Hz. I doubt the subwoofer goes that low.WhatYaWant - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
It may make a sound at 10 Hz, albeit music it is not. Not the biggest error of this junk review tho'.absx - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link
$250 would also fetch a nice pair of entry-level studio monitors like a pair of Behringer B1030A's. Why bother with the wiring mess of a subwoofer or the tinny little satellites?