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
Testing the Rockus 3D
I'll go ahead and preface again in saying this testing is largely subjective, and with a $249 speaker set that admittedly becomes a little harder to excuse. That said, if this is going to bother you, I strongly recommend curling up with your studio monitors, because at the end of the day this is still a consumer product. A moderately expensive one, but a consumer product.
The first big point that needs to be made is the difference between the Music and 3D modes for the Rockus 3D. The Music mode could probably be more accurately referred to as "reference mode:" the Rockus 3D simply tries to produce as clean and accurate a sound as possible and functions as a basic albeit high quality 2.1 speaker system.
Switching to 3D mode invokes what Antec calls "3Dsst," a sound processing algorithm designed to simulate a larger space. This should be fairly familiar to most users, as even many sound cards include some way to try and simulate surround sound using only two speakers (i.e. the HS1 we reviewed recently had a similar mode it could operate in). I'll tell you right now, 3D mode isn't going to produce accurate sound, but its value depends entirely on how you're using the speakers at a given time. The rep was very proud of 3Dsst; I personally tend to be skeptical of simulated surround environments and haven't yet heard one that felt convincing.
I'll also point out that I tested the Rockus 3D using three different connections: I used the optical connection plugged into my ASUS Xonar DX, tried it again with the TOSLINK port on my motherboard (Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R), and then used an analog connection with the Xonar. I actually asked the rep via e-mail which connection he felt would present the Rockus 3D in the best light, and he suggested using the analog connection with the Xonar. Color me surprised when I found that the digital connection seemed best overall, regardless of whether I used the motherboard sound or the Xonar DX. In fact, the Xonar's equalizer wouldn't affect the sound quality at all, while the equalizer in my motherboard's Realtek ALC889 drivers was able to manipulate the digital signal just fine.
I also frequently double-blinded my existing Bose Companion II speakers connected to the Xonar against the digitally connected Rockus 3D. It's not entirely fair, but close enough: the speakers and sound card together cost about $200, just $50 shy of the Rockus 3D.
With all that said, I did the majority of my testing with the Rockus 3D connected optically to my motherboard, and before getting into any of the nitty-gritty of it, I feel it prudent to note that unless you have a more expensive sound card, an optical connection is probably going to be the way to go. Analog quality is for the most part comparable, but the digital just works, requires very little calibration, and operates independent of the quality of analog components used by the audio hardware itself.
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?