Hello I'm new to this forum but definately not new to audio, it has been a passion of mine for some time (since I was 7 years old , now I'm 46). Unfortunately I was unable to afford my tastes in audio as they go pretty high-end & have been forced to turn to the pro market to find good sound at affordable prices as the consummer products are more hype than honest sound. Of coarse that is what brings me to this review of the BX5's from M-Audio.

I must admit that these are at the very low end of the price market for any gear pro or not. Even so they have a very honest sound & for once tunable to the environment (as most pro speakers are). Most even very high-end speakers ar not tunable to the environment at all (what a travesty).The fact that these are means they already have a leg up on consummer gear.

Ok, what about the sound?? Well in a word or two Honest but not perfect but with a lot of unrealized potential. Frequency balance is very good from the mid-bass up but lacking on the bottom. The mid-band is a little forward & 2-D as is the treble. This is where the high priced stuff even consummer stuff will beat these is the lack of any 3-D qualities. The tone is very good for the price but they lack any sense of depth whatsoever. The soundstage is flatter than a pancake. I guess this is somewhat to be expected at this price point.

The build quality is excellent especially for the price. It has a very very beefy power supply considering its rated wattage & the drivers are of very good quality with huge magnets( as big in diameter as the woofer driver itself & about 1 inch thick and shielded for use next to CRT screens. The ratings of the Amps are a bit puzzling as the woofer & tweeter are of different impedances so the amps cannot as claimed deliver equal power to both but I believe that the overall power rating is indeed correct though I have not measured it (they claim 38 watts for both the woofer & tweeter though i believe from my calculations that the power is more like 50 watts for the woofer & 25 for the tweeter both amps driven into thier respective loads. The tweeter is 8 ohms & the woofer is 4 ohms. The power supply is beefy enough to support 100 watts per channel in stereo if the voltage was higher but there is a definate need to keep the voltages in check as these are only IC power amps, not discreet & the heatsink is inside the box with very limited airflow & it does get very hot!! (poor design choice in my book but it is cheap).

The cross overs are populated with very good quality parts & are definately not the limiting factor in reproducing the depth in the recordings. Don't mess with them!! The flat amp section is anouther matter as it is populated with several low grade coupling caps that smear the low level sounds that reproduce the sense of depth in the recordings as I discovered (I modify most everything that has to do with audio & can hear very clearly the effect of low grade coupling devices compared to good ones or non at all as in direct coupling.I actually went one step further & DC coupled them meaning they are flat down to & including DC amplification not that you want DC on any of your drivers of coarse you don't but having the capability removes anouther layer of veiling that was bieng caused by a low grade cap that controlls the gain of the amp by bleeding excess negative feedback to ground in the audio frequencies.

Power supply fuses are alse a limiting factor as the thin wire heats & cools very rapidly to the signal thus modulating the impedance of the power supply (I'm not talking of the power line fuse as I found these to be quite inaudible. The fuses that I talk of are betwwen the filter caps & the amps & cannot be compensated for as they are outside the negative feedback loop & effect the available current to everything past the filter caps. It is very important in transistor amps to maintain a very very low & constant impedance power supply.

With these easy to do changes I was able to extract a wealth of depth information out of the recordings, so much so that it now puts some very very high-end consummer gear to absolute shame. And the best part is it is still tunable to the environment, no mods have been done to the crossovers period. The only shortcoming is still in the bass but less so than stock. All in all an extremely good buy especialy if you are handy with a soldering iron & have a volt ohm meter that reds both AC & DC volts As well as knowing how to use it & knowing what to look for.

Wow, that's a great write up of the BX-5's. Ryan, one of our contributing editors also had some thoughts on this speaker in his review done last year:

http://www.futurelooks.com/display.php?i=199&p=1

I have to agree that studio monitors sound flat as a pancake. They are supposed to be that way to ensure that the sound is not coloured in anyway. You will notice that a studio monitor has a lot of detail, but they have very little depth. Again, just the way they are. I've listened to DJ Jaspa's speakers (Tannoy Reveals) and yes they do "REVEAL" the sound, but they do no more.

As an audiophile type guy sometimes, I enjoy a sound that is warm, detailed, and with a three dimensional presence. I've even dabbled in tubes to find this sound. However, if I was a musician monitoring my own work, I would probably not want to hear any coloration whatsoever.

DJ Jaspa? Do you have any thoughts?

I thought about the extra tweakage that you did. I'm sure that you were able to extract more detail from them by using the higher quality parts, but did it change the type of sound or did it merely change the level of detail you experienced?

From my experience, monitors are supposed to be neutral and flat. Way different than my Parasound HALO Setup with JAMO Reference Towers which bring out the layers of sound and wrap you with sound.

Depth in a recording is not a coloration but a lack of it. not being able to hear it when it is there is the coloration not the other way around

On recordings that are basically panned mono with close miking not having depth is the correct sound but on simple miked recordings done in a reverberant invironment hearing depth in the reproduction is in fact correct & I have recordings that can demo both types of sound.

To address low bass frequencies, our contacts at M-Audio actually made us aware that they build a subwoofer recommended for these speakers:

http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=products.main&ID=bc9c51bba50131ebde66335d989757a4

If any thing I took away parts not added or changed. I took only the parts known to cause smearing in the sound. All others were untouched the frquency balance is unchanged except that the increased detail does lend to a slightly brighter sound which is offset by the improved bass brought about by DC coupling.

yes I was already aware if the sub but is not available locally yet

Sorry. I guess we kinda mean the same thing. My use of the term coloration could be a bit off.

Since I don't do any recording myself, but merely listen to what my own system produces, I apologize if my understanding of studio jargon and methods is off.

I guess what I mean is that when I listen to a set of studio monitor speakers, and I've listened to a few, I just notice that they don't exhibit the warmth and presence that I'm accustomed to with a high end 2 channel audio system. I hear all the details, but the sound just doesn't wrap around me. I would describe the sound I hear as being "flat" to me. When I listen to my 2 channel system, the sound is almost three dimensional. There is a presence and warmth that takes me into the recording and makes me feel like I'm there, rather than standing on the outside of the room looking in.

I had a chance to listen to the BX5's, and from what I describe from my experiences above, I guess I expect them to sound the way they sound: flat, but detailed and accurate, almost cold.

I've heard other monitors, like the Reveals, and they seem to exhibit the same behaviour, to my ears anyway, though I can agree that the BX5's don't have quite as much detail as other monitors that are available.

Originally posted by germanium
Depth in a recording is not a coloration but a lack of it. not being able to hear it when it is there is the coloration not the other way around

On recordings that are basically panned mono with close miking not having depth is the correct sound but on simple miked recordings done in a reverberant invironment hearing depth in the reproduction is in fact correct & I have recordings that can demo both types of sound.

M-Audio Canada actually has this unit available, and we're usually a bit behind up here. I think if you click on the "Where to Buy" link, it will allow you to punch in a postal or zip code and figure out where you can get it near you.

Originally posted by germanium
yes I was already aware if the sub but is not available locally yet

By the way even the pro's at Sound on Sound decried thier lack of depth (sp5's the previous model to this one). They are from across the pond so thier tasts differ but they are still pro's that use them for mixing & monitoring recordings.

Oh, and Welcome to Futurelooks! :D

It looks like you'll find some audio guys here to discuss things with afterall. They are asleep right now though ;)

When you use the word "Depth" are you describing "layers of sound"? When I hear the word "Depth" that's what I immediately think of. Like one layer contains the drums, while one layer contains the guitars etc, both extending behind and in front of the speakers. If the layers are aligned right, then you get a feel of spaciousness, accurate to the original event of the actual recording. I guess the word "depth" is part of the jargon, but is this what you mean by it?

Originally posted by germanium
By the way even the pro's at Sound on Sound decried thier lack of depth (sp5's the previous model to this one). They are from across the pond so thier tasts differ but they are still pro's that use them for mixing & monitoring recordings.

What i mean is sound that originates 20 feet from a mike sound like it is 20 feet away when reproduced from the speaker. The speakers location in terms of how wide they are spaced & how far they are from you should rarely be audible with recordings that were done with capturing depth in mind as most classical recordings are done now & were done in the late 50" & early 60' before multitrack/multimiking became the rage. I'm glad to see the return of the simple miking as it does a better job of making you feel as though you were there when it was recorded. Indeed the early 60's recordings done on 35 mm magnetic film were some of the best ever done even compared to the best done currently

I guess I am thinking that when I hear something. I just don't use that word in my head.

So from that, I guess with a good monitor, you should be able to hear "Depth" meaning you should be able to accurately hear where and how far away individual instruments and tones are placed in the sound space, but not really be able to hear the physical location of the speakers when they are doing their thing.

Did I get it right? :)

correct

Excellent! Thank you for setting me straight! ;)

So I guess what you mean by the BX5's lacking depth is the fact that you can actually make out where they are actually physicially spitting the sound out, which is not a good thing, because it screws up or disrupts the "depth" of the sound environment. I felt that from them too actually. I just didn't really know how to describe that. Cool.

So I guess my JAMO Reference towers produce excellent "depth" because once they are turned on, I cannot make out their physical positioning, but instead, if I close my eyes, I can make out a piano about 10 feet away, and someone singing to me from behind it. :D

The interesting thing is that some even try to get this in spite of using low grade electronics by using trick such as sonic holography (Carver) or in the speakers (Polk SRS series a few years ago but good speakers & amps will do it very well by themselves with no artificial help.

It's amazing how many people are mesmerized by the surround sound bug, when all along, even 20 years ago, a good 2 channel system could always create a 3D image of sound.

Now you've got Joe Blow and their Dog out buying a home theatre receiver and the cheapest satellites you can find just to get the same thing 2 channel people have had all along...and it doesn't even sound good...

I really like my Parasound HALO system, and these JAMO E855's I've got here just sound awesome together. No signal processing. No weird "Holographic" or "Surround" hocus pocus. Just great, detailed, and realistic sound with excellent "Depth" of sound ;)

I agree & with that I have to say good night as I have to work in the morning.

It has been nice chatting with you and I hope you have a nice day. Feel free to e-mail me

Ron Brandt

Hello everyone I'm back. I hope every one enjoyed the review even though its not intirely about the stock BX5's. It's just I seen a lot of potential in them & couldn't resist the temptation to void the warrantee & go whole hog for the best possible with them. Indeed it is very very good & very cheap both to buy & to modify as it only cost me 300 to buy & absolutely nothing to modify but my time (precious little of that even really as I knew what to look for already from experience).

I've been doing some more looking at the BX5 crossovers & EQ board & did some more mods but more importantly discovered that the acoustic space switch actually read backwards to what it really does. The -4db should actually be the flat or 0db setting & the ones that read-2db &0db should read +2db & +4db as that is the way the actual curcuit works. The way it reads currently you should only use the 0db setting for 1/4 to 1/8th space when there is no nearby reflective surfaces in the front or sides. The -2db should be used in 1/2 space & -4db (the true flat) should be used in 3/4 to full space. if they must be used near reflective surfaces then back the settings down by one on the acoustic space switch & set the tweeter level to -2db. The correctness of these settings is very appearant in the modified speakers. Using them in the so called flat setting in open space can be an escruciating experience especially on the modded speakers but run at -4 (the true flat) is an eye opening experience that is actually quite pleasant to listen to but very very detailed at the same time. The sound stage is absolutely huge.

Nothing brings this fact home better than Hearts Live In Seattle (Columbia Legacy SACD60541) & Litzt's Dantes Symphony (Telarc SACD60613). Both have huge soundstages & excellent bass for such a small speaker & not at all unpleasant or shrill when setup properly.

The latest mods have to do with reducing the high frequency rolloff on the tweeter wich is down by about 6 db at 20KHz. This seems to effect the whole presentation well down into the midrange as there must be a lot of harmonics that go up there even on voice & the soundstage is improved even over the previous mods. Again all mods were done on the main board (flat amps)

My current settings are -4db (the true flat) on the Acoustic space, 0db on the tweeter, Out on the mid boost & 56Hz on the low cutoff. I'm operating in 3/4 space with no nearby reflective surfaces. In other wards I am running them as a true flat speaker & they sound very very good that way.

Keep up the great work! This thread is a valuable resource! :thumb:

Hi all,

New forum member here - but I've got a pair of BX-5's and some initial impressions of the matching M-Audio SBX sub (http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=products.main&ID=bc9c51bba50131ebde66335d989757a4).

http://www.m-audio.com/images/global/product_pics/big/sbx.jpg

I've been very happy with the BX-5's in my edit suite, but as other reviewers have noted, they are a little light in the bottom end. My local pro audio supplier recently had a bunch of M-Audio stock arrive - including an SBX sub. I was able to have an extended trial of this unit, but I came away very disappointed.

Physically, the unit is quite small - not much bigger than a BX-5. It uses an 8" driver which is protected behind a metal grille, and the whole box is quite lightweight. Coming from a background with several years experience as a live FOH engineer, I have never lugged a light subwoofer - so I wasn't filled with great hope even before we had it hooked up.

At low volumes (ie. background ambient levels, below what you would use to monitor at), the sub sounded quite convincing. At normal monitoring levels, it wasn't bad, but bass extension wasn't terribly deep or authoritative. When I wound the wick up above normal levels, the whole bottom end descends into flappy mush xx) There simply isn't enough grunt to really keep up with serious bass action in this little box.

We played with crossover frequencies and phasing to some improvements - but the underlying conclusion is that this box just doesn't have the goods for anything over normal volumes or deeper bass extension. Disappointing to say the least.

Pricing on the SBX sub is on a par with the BX-8's here in Australia, but for that money and just a little more, there are several other options in the pro audio space, and numerous other options from the home theatre arena.

So, all up, the SBX was something of a letdown for me. Anybody else on the board tried/liked/disliked this unit?

Rgds,

Gil

Just a quick question... I recently ordered the bx5 monitors, but I'm lacking any XLR or TRS input where I could wire them.
I was thinking of using an XLR to RCA adaptor, and plug them to my FireWire Audiphile? Would that work alright?
Thanks for the info,
the ar

That should work fine - just make sure that you wire the XLR <-> RCA lead properly.

Like this:

http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/connection/images/XLR-RCA2.gif

Hope you enjoy the BX-5's :)

Gil

Thanks Gil, I was wondering if I'd have some balancemente issue, but since those xlr outputs are balanced, it should work fine.
Cheers,
the ar

Anyone got suggestions on how to set the back switches of the BX5 for the best audio in a small environment?
Thanks,
the ar

Anyone got suggestions on how to set the back switches of the BX5 for the best audio in a small environment?
Thanks,
the ar
I set mine to 56 on the low cut, out on the mid boost, -2 on the tweeter & -4 on the acoustic space switch & found it works nicly there but you may want to set the acousic space to -2 or even 0 if you have too much lower mid bloom. in that case you will want to set the tweeter to 0 or even +2.

If it is a small square room I reommend setting the speakers up both in one corner of the room facing the opposite corner. This breaks up standing waves that would muddy the otherwise excellent midrange. If you do this leave the controls as I specified before as they work great in this position & you get truly extended & powerfull bass there without muddying the mids.

Sorry it was so long in answering you as I've had many thing going on & my computer was in storage a while.

Sincerily Ron B.

Hello I'm Back with more on the BX5 from M-Audio. Yes I know that it is out of production now but there may still be some around for sale.

I added a subwoofer from Tannoy (TS10) & matched up the levels with the crossover set at about 75 Hz on the sub W/the speakers still running full range. What a difference a subwoofer makes. In fact it encouraged me to take my mods on the BX5 a little further to bring out even more of the subtleties in the music which I did by bypassing the power-supply capacitors with 2-12 microfarad metallized film capacitors for each speaker, one for each powersupply rail.

The results were extremely impressive to say the least as not only is there much more detail but the speakers are actually smoother sounding to boot with no harshness whatsoever at the high end even on songs that were mixed with excessive high end!!!!

Lets now talk about percussion. Bells ring out in exquisite fashon & drums have renewed energy not to mention much more harmonic texture & with the new sub a much fuller sound to the low drums. the sound Is full quick & taut with startling impact when called apon.

And how about the bass?? The bass is extended to the ver limits of audibility & perhaps then some. It can handle the worlds largest pipe organ (Wanamaker Grand Court Organ in Philadelphia) with great ease & sense of power. yet is quick & taut with good punch when needed.

Last but not least is the amazing midrange that is capable now of unraveling the most complex choral or symphonic passages with absolutely no sense of congestion whatsoever. I have heard many highend stereo systems that would fall on thier faces (sound very congested) on these complex passages (I'm talking $100,000 just for the speaker systems here).I spent a total of 600-625 dollars including mods on this setup & that includes all the poweramps as they were built into the speakers.

I also went ahead & modified my computer soundcard to bring it in line with the capabilities of my modded SACD player & that worked very well too so now I can play my DVD-Audio disks in my computer & it not degrade the sound at all. My pansonic DVD-Audio player kicked the bucket so to speak (Laser went dead) which is why i'm using my computer for this function now.

Thanks for the great update! I still find this thread right on top of Google. Sounds like you're quite the Guru according to Google ;)

There is one neccessary mod I haven't listed here yet & this is to prevent overheating due to DC Offset that seems to grow as the amp is played hard.

That is there are 2 muting transisters that are in the signal path in each speaker that must be removed to eliminate this possability. The mute funtion still works as the power IC amps have the same function built into them but without the DC offset hazard that the external muting circuit causes.

Sorry I didn't mention this earlier as It didn't show up till later & only if played loudly for an extended period. Removing the muting transistors completely solves this issue.

I would even remove these from the stock speakers even though they pose no threat to the poweramp, they still pose a threat to the equalization board as even stock this board is DC coupled & is primary reason why the modded speakers poweramps were subjected to increasing amounts of DC as the amps got hot. The eqalization board could no longer sink the 1 volt DC offset completely when the amps got hot which tells me they were stressed. In tests done before final assembly the DC offset was noted but was only pressent when the equalization board was disconnected & went away when it was connected which gave me the clue to remove the mute transistors after seeing the overheating problem as I tracked the DC offset to these transistors. It is posable that the equalisation board could fail even on the stock speakers due to the DC offset present on their output that is not being generatied by themselves.

Sincerely; Ronald Brandt

Note that I have read of failures of the bigger BX8's which operate at higher power hence voltage & this may be in part due to the mute curcuit & the equalization board being subjected to higher voltage hence stress when sinking the high dc offset though this is not for sure as I have not had any expeience with them but they do appear to use the same electronics with only minor mods to the bass limiter for deeper extension.Otherwise I believe them to be identical exept for powersupply.

Had a chance to listen to the BX5a's & they are very good much better than the original BX5 but still not up to the modded BX5 except in the bass where it surpasses even the modded speaker (better woofer) but the mids & top end are still owned by the modded BX5. The stock BX5 isn't even in the running to my ears,not even a close 3rd for them.

I do see them as having huge potential to surpass even the modded BX5's though in all areas, The woofer is lighter & faster than the Stock BX5 so an upgrade in the ellectronics would likely yeild more detail in the end than the modded BX5. The top end is also smoother & more extended than the stock BX5's were (better tweeter).

Looks like they took all the feedback and made them better. Of course, your mods will probably elevate the BX5a's even further ;)