For games? Probably. For music? Probaby not. Z-2300 is all bass and nothing else. M10s have good treble and mids. For gaming or bass heavy music it will be a problem but for most music it is much better.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Swan M10s
- Thread starter DEE9299
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For games? Probably. For music? Probaby not. Z-2300 is all bass and nothing else. M10s have good treble and mids. For gaming or bass heavy music it will be a problem but for most music it is much better.
The Logitech Sub is bigger of course it will have better bass.
Comparing these Swan Speakers to These Logitech Speakers are like comparing a Symphony Concert to a Rock Concert.
You're paying about the same for both but they each give you a different experience, with seperate positives and negatives. It's about personal preference and taste in music.
But to say a Rock Concert or a Symphony "SOUND" better or worse than each other is not only asinine, but seriously misguided.
I'd like you to show me where I compared a rock concert to a symphony. I didn't. Please don't put words into my mouth. Thanks.
I have owned both the Logitech's, as well as the Swans. If you look in the early stages in this thread, I never said the Swans didn't sound good. I said for the price, there are better out there, with more options such as a easy to get to volume control, headphone out, and line in (some consumers like those). Sure, at mid to low volumes, the Swans sound decent. Are they worth $100? - no. GOD no! Why anyone would pay this money for a speaker system that you can't even jack the volume up every now and then, is beyond me.
The Logitech's, as many have said, have loud bass. So do Klipsch's. However, if you jack up the gain on the sub, of course it will sound like a rock concert. But, if you only have it up 10% - it has great deep bass, and the clarity is awesome. That's why they are so popular, with so many positive reviews.
So many people are being blinded by the nice, clean look of the Swans - and not looking beyond that. It's a sub-par USB powered speaker set, with low wattage, and lack of bass. Plus the inconvenience of having to put the woofer on your desk.
In the end, I ended up returning both of them. I'm an audiophile, and neither fit my needs. I have monitors in my studio, and I ended up buying monitors for my home computer as well. I bought Mackie MR5's, which in reality are the low end of monitors for Mackie, but still blow away the Swans and Logitech's, and probably every "computer speaker set" on the market. Then again, they should sound better - they are monitors, not speakers. Not to mention more costly.
If you're a true audiophile why are you even discussing 2.1 systems?
That would be like Brett Favre talking about the Poduck County high School Pop Werner Championships...
You pretty much missed my point, but judging from your post history that's too be expected.
I don't know about you, but I am a High School Band Teacher and a classically trained musician. My musical tastes require a large variety of style and substance. Something not every System can provide. I'm quite happy with my Swans as are many, many others. Just as many are happy with their Logitechs. That's the point we're trying to make. People ask for or opinions and we give our advice based on taste, preference and background. Others must process the information given and make up their own mind. But for you to claim superiority of one over the other is quite short sighted and immature.
Ok, so because I'm an audiophile, I can't discuss 2.1 systems? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
I prefer all kinds of music too. I love everything from rap, to classical rock, and everything in between - which is EXACTLY why I am not recommending the Swans. If you like ALL kinds of music, you wouldn't want the Swans. Swans give you little bass, and a lot of music genres have bass.
I'm claiming superiority over one, because I owned both, and feel I can give an opinion on it. I'm entitled to my opinion. I am not immature whatsoever. People can buy whatever they want, obviously. I've been in the audio business for many years, and feel I have the right to give my opinion on this.
Why is it called common sense, when no one has it?
Claiming to be something doesn't make it so. Also Rap to Classic Rock and "everything in between" is a severely limited sample of all the different genres and styles of music out there.
Why are you obsessed with Bass? There is much more to music than Bass. And I can think of literally thousands of instances were a strong overpowering bass would be a negative. In fact I can think of more instances where you DON'T want an overpowering bass than when I do.
It's not a matter of claims, it's a matter of specs.
Satellites
Swan's - 8 watts
Logitech - 40 watts
Frequency
Swan's - 100Hz-20kHz
Logitech - 35 Hz20 kHz
The Swan's only go down to 100Hz. That's a problem.
I can go on and on with the specs. Again, not a claim.. FACT.
Why am I obsessed with bass? Because the low end of music is just as important as the mid, and high end. If you don't have all 3, you aren't listening to what was intended. You keep on mentioning "overpowering" bass. I know you don't want overpowering bass, obviously. Again, putting words in my mouth - something I never said. Some music calls for it, some doesn't. The Swan's can't handle ANY decent bass. The Logitech's can. People with Swan's might not need the low end bass based on their music preference, but it would be nice to have in case you do listen to some music with some bass, or even a movie.
I am still scratching my head why you would question why an audiophile is discussing 2.1 systems. Last I checked, 2.1 systems are speakers, and produce audio.
Like you said, people ask for our opinions, and we give our advice based on taste, preference and background. I go a step further, and facts. Numbers don't lie.
It's obvious you just don't understand music. Just because you teach music in HS doesn't make you an expert. Am I an expert at this? - no. I am always learning new things every day. It's all part of the profession. However, with the amount of years I've been in the recording industry, I am certainly able to state my professional opinions on speakers, no matter if they are 2.1 systems, or high-end concert sound systems (which I also do). Most people want the 3 elements of music, not just two. I guess you don't. You might as well buy a $10 set at WalMart if you're just happy with the mids and highs of music.
I'm not going to get into a pissing contest.
It's obvious that not only do we not share the same taste in music we also do not listen to music in the same way.
You're claim that Swans produce no bass is false. They do produce bass. And it's enough to shake the change of my desk if I desire to do so.
But I think most folks are smart enough to process the information themselves, despite foolish claims.
It's obvious that not only do we not share the same taste in music we also do not listen to music in the same way.
You're claim that Swans produce no bass is false. They do produce bass. And it's enough to shake the change of my desk if I desire to do so.
But I think most folks are smart enough to process the information themselves, despite foolish claims.
Despite foolish claims?? .. I got that information straight from the manufactures websites!! LOL! How am I making foolish claims??
Us not listening to the same music, or music in the same way doesn't add or take away from the specs that both Swan, and Logitech put out in their specifications. Even if that was the case, people still watch movies, which most have tons of low end, and the Swan's aren't good for that.
Once again, putting words in my mouth, I NEVER said the Swan's don't produce any bass. I said they produce very LITTLE bass. Again, huge difference. You like to put words in my mouth. How about fully reading what I say before quoting me?
You're making no sense whatsoever. I provide you facts from each manufactures website, and you're claiming that's foolish claims. Still figuring out why an audiophile wouldn't be interested in discussing 2.1 systems, which you clearly are dodging answering.
If you put as much effort into making sense, rather than putting words in my mouth, we'd be able to have a normal conversation. Instead, you've resorted to calling me names, such as being "immature".
I'm sorry, but facts don't lie - the Logitech's are a better system. I even ask you Nuck, have you owned both systems to be so against the Logitech's? Because you are in the minority here, most people like them. I'm sure you'll dodge that question to.
Us not listening to the same music, or music in the same way doesn't add or take away from the specs that both Swan, and Logitech put out in their specifications. Even if that was the case, people still watch movies, which most have tons of low end, and the Swan's aren't good for that.
Once again, putting words in my mouth, I NEVER said the Swan's don't produce any bass. I said they produce very LITTLE bass. Again, huge difference. You like to put words in my mouth. How about fully reading what I say before quoting me?
You're making no sense whatsoever. I provide you facts from each manufactures website, and you're claiming that's foolish claims. Still figuring out why an audiophile wouldn't be interested in discussing 2.1 systems, which you clearly are dodging answering.
If you put as much effort into making sense, rather than putting words in my mouth, we'd be able to have a normal conversation. Instead, you've resorted to calling me names, such as being "immature".
I'm sorry, but facts don't lie - the Logitech's are a better system. I even ask you Nuck, have you owned both systems to be so against the Logitech's? Because you are in the minority here, most people like them. I'm sure you'll dodge that question to.
I am sorry but an "audiophile" claiming that Z-2300 sounds good demeans the word "audiophile".
p.s. Stats are never facts about what a system sound like. There are plenty of high end speakers with worse frequency response than crappier ones. Just because it can reproduce a certain frequency does not mean it can do it well.
p.s. Stats are never facts about what a system sound like. There are plenty of high end speakers with worse frequency response than crappier ones. Just because it can reproduce a certain frequency does not mean it can do it well.
OK, have some common sense.
I'm not saying Logitechs are the best 2.1 system out there. I'm saying compared to the Swan's, they are.
And yes, specs mean a lot. The exact reason why people bash Bose for not posting theirs.
I really needed to make that clear? Wow.
I'm not saying Logitechs are the best 2.1 system out there. I'm saying compared to the Swan's, they are.
And yes, specs mean a lot. The exact reason why people bash Bose for not posting theirs.
I really needed to make that clear? Wow.
Lol people bash Bose because they sell overpriced stuff purely based on marketing. Not because they don't post specs. Who cares what the specs are if it sounds good, most manufacturers exaggerate the specs anyway. Again frequency response does not mean it will reproduce all the said frequency well.
Anyway if you are happy about your Z-2300 good for you but please don't drag the word "audiophile" into your arguments to make them seem more valid.
Anyway if you are happy about your Z-2300 good for you but please don't drag the word "audiophile" into your arguments to make them seem more valid.
People bash Bose because of their price, and their specs not being released.
Regardless of what you say, specs mean something. The Swan's only go down to 100Hz, that's a huge negative for those speakers. 100Hz is pure crap.
Did you not read ANY of what I said in this thread? Because if you would have, you'd know that I don't own neither the Swan, or Logitech. My wife had them at one point, and I heard both. I don't even have a 2.1 "computer speaker" set. I use Mackie monitors for my home computer. What myself, and my employees use in my studio is a completely different setup, and probably costs more than what you make in a year - actually, I'm quite certain of that.
I am not dragging the word "audiophile" into my posts to make them move valid - because quite frankly, I don't need to. I'm not a fly by night audiophile who runs a business out of their basement.
I think the Logitechs are a great system. and If I mainly listened to Rock and Rap I'd probably have them.
But listening to the Royal Phil is rather stupid with the bass so loud you can't hear any other instrument.
And I agree with that 100%. But, if you listen to something that shouldn't have that much bass, you can easily turn it down.
I feel like we already did all of this, once. See here.
I repeat, WE DID ALL OF THIS BEFORE.
The only new part we learned was that nyguy4u's studio cost more then what everyone makes in a year? There are plenty of inconsistent parts and non-sensical things. I'll stop now, as I was told to earlier on in this thread.
The facts remain, over 90% of the forum users that have them say that they are happy with them...
I repeat, WE DID ALL OF THIS BEFORE.
The only new part we learned was that nyguy4u's studio cost more then what everyone makes in a year? There are plenty of inconsistent parts and non-sensical things. I'll stop now, as I was told to earlier on in this thread.
The facts remain, over 90% of the forum users that have them say that they are happy with them...
contemplations
I should be on my way to test out a pair of m10s in a few days, but i'm contemplating it between a pair of m audio av30s.. Im residing in australia, and i can't seem to find any place to demo the pair of maudio. Has anyone heard both of 'em?
Though im siding a lot towards the m10, the contemplation's caused by price,the m10 is about 180 here in comparison to the 140 for the av30. and heh, budget constrain
I should be on my way to test out a pair of m10s in a few days, but i'm contemplating it between a pair of m audio av30s.. Im residing in australia, and i can't seem to find any place to demo the pair of maudio. Has anyone heard both of 'em?
Though im siding a lot towards the m10, the contemplation's caused by price,the m10 is about 180 here in comparison to the 140 for the av30. and heh, budget constrain
I am bring this thread back as it had some good information.
I do enjoy my M10's but over the past few months, I have begun to notice a lot of radio interference. I have tired the speakers in several outlets (grounded and non-grounded) in two different locations (Muncie, IN and Columbus, OH ). It seems to be getting worse. I don't remember noticing this interference when I originally bought these speakers back in August 2009.
Although I agree that "you get what you pay for" and am in the process of upgrading to studio monitors, I am at a loss as to why this is happening only recently.
On the plus side, I can listen to classical whenever I want.
I do enjoy my M10's but over the past few months, I have begun to notice a lot of radio interference. I have tired the speakers in several outlets (grounded and non-grounded) in two different locations (Muncie, IN and Columbus, OH ). It seems to be getting worse. I don't remember noticing this interference when I originally bought these speakers back in August 2009.
Although I agree that "you get what you pay for" and am in the process of upgrading to studio monitors, I am at a loss as to why this is happening only recently.
On the plus side, I can listen to classical whenever I want.
after some reading i didnt buy the swans. the looks werent enough for me to justify weak specs and lack of features.
instead i went with samson 3i speakers. headphone out. more watts. aux connection. regular red/white audio connection and USB connection + ipod dock. for about $20 less.
sure its not as pretty as the swans but i can connect my ps3, ipod and macbook pro at the same time.
instead i went with samson 3i speakers. headphone out. more watts. aux connection. regular red/white audio connection and USB connection + ipod dock. for about $20 less.
sure its not as pretty as the swans but i can connect my ps3, ipod and macbook pro at the same time.