![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Razer mako?
- Thread starter Jospeh
- Start date
Daishiknyte
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2004
- Messages
- 333
You will be hard pressed to find anyone who will recommend the Mako, or any other Razer product over a similarly priced system from a 'real' audio company. For $300, it is incredibly easy to find equipment that far surpasses the Mako.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/multimedia/review/2009/01/08/Razer-Mako-2-1-Channel-Speaker-System/p1
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/02/13/razer-mako-exclusive-first-hands-on-and-review/
http://www.futurelooks.com/razer-mako-thx-21-speaker-system-review/4/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2280993,00.asp
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/02/06/razerthx-mako-21-review/
http://www.gamingnexus.com/Article/Mako/Page3/Item1808.aspx
Funny, these are all from the first page of "razer mako review" Google results. I wasn't particularly hard-pressed to find someone who would recommend these speakers, especially given that the price as reviewed was much higher than the current price of between $250-300 shipped. I did my research, ordered a pair, and have to say they are great for a small/medium 2.1 speaker setup. At home I run a Harman Kardon receiver connected to RF-82 floorstanders with a sub, but the space sacrifice is...well, a sacrifice. I've owned several average 2.1 computer speaker setups over the years, and the mako trumps them all easily. It's no match for a discrete receiver/satellite/sub setup, but a good setup there would be a minimum of $500 for anything worthwhile.
I can definitely recommend the Razer Mako setup, just don't pay full price (was $399) for them. I got mine at ~280 shipped, and could probably have gotten them for less had I been patient--I watched the price jump up $20 between production cycles and didn't bother to wait for it to drop back down. I know firsthand that the retail profit margin on these is not particularly high because I do part-time retail work (for the discount!) when I get off IT work and it looks like big-box retailers pay well over $200 for these from the manufacturer according to direct pricing.
I think some of you guys dislike Razer because, frankly, they used to suck. But their new stuff--like the Carcharias/Megalodon, Mamba, Mako, etc. are all rather nice. Expensive, yes, but the prices drop over time and you can get them on sale from time to time.
"Verdict
Razer has created an absolutely superb set of 2.1-channel speakers in its Mako system. However, even considering the sublime styling and terrific audio quality, it's hard to recommend them over Creative's T3 speakers which retail for some £100 less. If money is no object or the Mako's price can fall below £180 then the situation would be different."
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/02/13/razer-mako-exclusive-first-hands-on-and-review/
"Wrap-up
As if you couldn't tell, we honestly think Razer (and THX) has a winner on their hands here. No, it won't replace any bona fide multi-channel setups or anything, but unfortunately, it never intended to. Our biggest gripe with the Mako -- beyond the finicky control pod -- is the fact that it's not available in a 5.1 flavor. This unit packs quite a punch, and certainly rivals some of the more expensive 2.1 systems our ears have been lucky enough to hear. But it removes itself from the ever-expanding HTIB category by not including a bit more oomph and three more channels. Still, it's hard to knock the Mako for what it actually is, but we do feel that it's launching about $50 to $75 higher than it should be. Nevertheless, if you're willing to pony up in order to make sure your next bedroom / computer / office setup has George Lucas' approval (and sounds mighty fine, too), we can't imagine this product disappointing."
http://www.futurelooks.com/razer-mako-thx-21-speaker-system-review/4/
"The Razer Mako THX 2.1 speaker system, with its beautiful and absolutely smooth sound production, is positively orgasmic. If youve got $400 to blow and youre happy with 2.1, the Mako is the system for you. Overall Rating: 9.5/10"
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2280993,00.asp
"Spending $400 on a 2.1 system is a bold move. For only a bit more, you could buy a pair of excellent Paradigm Mini Monitor bookshelf speakersconsidered by audiophiles to be reliable, entry-level hi-fi speakers that produce plenty of rumble without a subwoofer. But the passive Mini Monitors are designed to be used with a stereo receiver that provides power, while the active Mako powers itself and comes with a usefulif slowremote. For less than half the Mako's price, you could get Harman/Kardon's SoundSticks IIa terrific-sounding, very stylish 2.1 PC speaker set. The SoundSticks lack multiple inputs and don't produce the power or rumble that the Mako can, however. The THX technology may not widen the sweet spot as promised, but it does do an excellent job of dispersing the sound and using desktop reflections to its advantage. If you're a gamer, watch movies on your PC, or if your computer is your primary music source, the Razer Mako is an excellent choice that's worth its high price."
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/02/06/razerthx-mako-21-review/
"Overall, Im thoroughly impressed by the THXs first foray into the speaker business and Razer is a perfect match to bring the highest quality 2.1 speaker system to market. Its loud, sounds great, thumps hard and looks badass. I cant wait to use these for an upcoming party. Do yourself a favor and spend the extra coin on this system. You wont regret it."
http://www.gamingnexus.com/Article/Mako/Page3/Item1808.aspx
"The Conclusion
The Razer Mako is simply the finest desktop audio system that I have ever tested or used. Everything about it oozes quality, class and innovation. While the $399 price tag may seem steep for a desktop 2.1 system, the Razer Mako is more than capable of providing a fantastic multimedia experience for gaming consoles and even TV. The soundfield is not only rich and deep, but very attentive to even the smallest audio detail. I hope that Razer and THX continue their relationship and deliver more high-quality products on an even bigger scale."
Funny, these are all from the first page of "razer mako review" Google results. I wasn't particularly hard-pressed to find someone who would recommend these speakers, especially given that the price as reviewed was much higher than the current price of between $250-300 shipped. I did my research, ordered a pair, and have to say they are great for a small/medium 2.1 speaker setup. At home I run a Harman Kardon receiver connected to RF-82 floorstanders with a sub, but the space sacrifice is...well, a sacrifice. I've owned several average 2.1 computer speaker setups over the years, and the mako trumps them all easily. It's no match for a discrete receiver/satellite/sub setup, but a good setup there would be a minimum of $500 for anything worthwhile.
I can definitely recommend the Razer Mako setup, just don't pay full price (was $399) for them. I got mine at ~280 shipped, and could probably have gotten them for less had I been patient--I watched the price jump up $20 between production cycles and didn't bother to wait for it to drop back down. I know firsthand that the retail profit margin on these is not particularly high because I do part-time retail work (for the discount!) when I get off IT work and it looks like big-box retailers pay well over $200 for these from the manufacturer according to direct pricing.
I think some of you guys dislike Razer because, frankly, they used to suck. But their new stuff--like the Carcharias/Megalodon, Mamba, Mako, etc. are all rather nice. Expensive, yes, but the prices drop over time and you can get them on sale from time to time.
Can't speak to a lot of their other stuff, but their audio gear still sucks. Or did you want to listen to an assortment of reviews from people who (1) don't do audio and (2) think "it's not 5.1" is an intelligent criticism? It's not a woolly rhinoceros either...
Funny, these are all from the first page of "razer mako review" Google results. I wasn't particularly hard-pressed to find someone who would recommend these speakers, especially given that the price as reviewed was much higher than the current price of between $250-300 shipped. I did my research, ordered a pair, and have to say they are great for a small/medium 2.1 speaker setup. At home I run a Harman Kardon receiver connected to RF-82 floorstanders with a sub, but the space sacrifice is...well, a sacrifice. I've owned several average 2.1 computer speaker setups over the years, and the mako trumps them all easily. It's no match for a discrete receiver/satellite/sub setup, but a good setup there would be a minimum of $500 for anything worthwhile.
I can definitely recommend the Razer Mako setup, just don't pay full price (was $399) for them. I got mine at ~280 shipped, and could probably have gotten them for less had I been patient--I watched the price jump up $20 between production cycles and didn't bother to wait for it to drop back down. I know firsthand that the retail profit margin on these is not particularly high because I do part-time retail work (for the discount!) when I get off IT work and it looks like big-box retailers pay well over $200 for these from the manufacturer according to direct pricing.
I think some of you guys dislike Razer because, frankly, they used to suck. But their new stuff--like the Carcharias/Megalodon, Mamba, Mako, etc. are all rather nice. Expensive, yes, but the prices drop over time and you can get them on sale from time to time.
the point is that, although the mako setup maybe alright, you can get something else so ridiculously better for that money, that mako is junk compared to the alternatives in that price range
People say the same junk about logitech speakers. These have to be paid or something. Or people are just dumb.Can't speak to a lot of their other stuff, but their audio gear still sucks. Or did you want to listen to an assortment of reviews from people who (1) don't do audio and (2) think "it's not 5.1" is an intelligent criticism? It's not a woolly rhinoceros either...
the point is that, although the mako setup maybe alright, you can get something else so ridiculously better for that money, that mako is junk compared to the alternatives in that price range
Can anyone link to a breakdown of 2.1 systems in this price range? Specifically some sound systems in this price range that are better? I've got some friends in the market as well and they want me to demo whatever it is they end up getting.
Most of the 2.1 threads around here are in this range. Don't forget 2.0 either...while a sub always helps (well, a good one), some systems need the help a lot less than others. For $300, I bet you could still get ELT525s and a Gizmo amp or some other passive satellites + amp combo. If you must have a sub, that squashes the satellite budget somewhat so you might want to look at actives like the AV40s. These systems are also all component-based (well, active speakers less so), meaning you can make upgrades later very easily when kits (e.g. Logitech) leave you with a pretty much all-or-nothing proposition.
I have the Razer Mako's,
They are really good speakers, the sound that these Mako's orchestrate are really beautiful and crisp! I really like them, and i definitely don't regret getting these. They save me alot of space, and they are low profile, so to me, its all worth it.
People in the Computer Audio section however, would bash the hell out of these, because its Razer, well, w/e to them.
BUT, these are NOT junk,
yeah, they are overpriced for a 2.1 system, but in the end it was well worth it.
They are really good speakers, the sound that these Mako's orchestrate are really beautiful and crisp! I really like them, and i definitely don't regret getting these. They save me alot of space, and they are low profile, so to me, its all worth it.
People in the Computer Audio section however, would bash the hell out of these, because its Razer, well, w/e to them.
BUT, these are NOT junk,
yeah, they are overpriced for a 2.1 system, but in the end it was well worth it.
People in the Computer Audio section however, would bash the hell out of these, because its Razer
Not at all. It's absolutely nothing to do with who's selling it, and everything to do with what they are (or rather, aren't).
Not at all. It's absolutely nothing to do with who's selling it, and everything to do with what they are (or rather, aren't).
I have yet to see a single review of anyone generally displeased with these speakers on the grounds of anything but the inflated release price. I'm not exactly a huge Razer fan (as I said earlier, I hated the brand circa a year+ ago) but I have seen several times in this subforum that anytime someone mentions Razer hardware, it is dismissed out of hand as " overpriced trash" or "something nobody would recommend."
I think this subforum has the tendency to confuse Computer Audio with General Audio. I am sitting next to a pair of Grado RS1s coming out of a HK receiver fed by optical, but that is not a computer audio solution--there is no mic, no inline volume control, or other things you might use while gaming (a huge part of why Hardforum exists!) That is a music solution...this box basically became an HTpc with capital HT and little pc.
Razer, in the last year or so, has focused on the hardcore gaming market. Not the absolute best sounding headphones possible, or the absolute most-transparent speakers. Those are a different market entirely, and frankly, it is a market of declining returns (even though as I said before, I buy into it occasionally). When I look for a gaming keyboard I don't go to a Das Keyboard Ultimate, even though it is probably the most reliable modern keyboard around and would have the best overall build quality. That's a different product, different market, different feature set and intended use.
Anyone who sees the Mako and thinks "Hmmm, could this be my next critical listening speaker setup?" is doing it wrong. Razer makes upper-end gaming hardware with a distinctive style, not audiophile gear. The Mako is THX certified--that is a cinema certification, not an award from Audiophile Magazine for lossless audio reproduction. Might as well use a jigsaw to cut down trees.
Pardon me while I have my car stereo replaced with a Denon AVR and throw in some floorstanders...I've got some critical listening to do.
It's not trash either. It's just only worth about $50 tops. At $300, the A5s will crush them easily. Hell, at $100, the Swan D1080s should still crush them easily. They are what they are, and what they are is targeted at the gaming market, not the audio market. Reason being, most educated audio consumers know better. Most gamers do not.
Other issues:
Inline volume controls are a kludge, and a bad one at that. You can adjust software volume with a keystroke easily, or if you have a better setup, change the volume on the amp.
Grado headphones don't have a microphone because they're headphones, not a microphone. If you want a microphone - buy one, they're cheap. The Zalman clip-on is great and only $10.
"Gaming audio" doesn't have to mean that we disregard quality as a factor. The only people who benefit from that equation are the companies that try to feed you shit products by making them all flashy and trying to sell on brand instead of on quality. In fact, quality is a huge factor in gaming whenever there are complex audio clues, for example positional data signaling the direction of an incoming attack. The most suitable audio solution may differ - for example, Grados are not recommended for gaming but are nice for music alone, while DT770s do nicely for both. But there is no reason to disregard quality and only go off of brand recognition.
Other issues:
Inline volume controls are a kludge, and a bad one at that. You can adjust software volume with a keystroke easily, or if you have a better setup, change the volume on the amp.
Grado headphones don't have a microphone because they're headphones, not a microphone. If you want a microphone - buy one, they're cheap. The Zalman clip-on is great and only $10.
"Gaming audio" doesn't have to mean that we disregard quality as a factor. The only people who benefit from that equation are the companies that try to feed you shit products by making them all flashy and trying to sell on brand instead of on quality. In fact, quality is a huge factor in gaming whenever there are complex audio clues, for example positional data signaling the direction of an incoming attack. The most suitable audio solution may differ - for example, Grados are not recommended for gaming but are nice for music alone, while DT770s do nicely for both. But there is no reason to disregard quality and only go off of brand recognition.
Waaaaaay overpriced. You are paying a huge premium.
When buying speakers, try looking for reviews not in crunchgear or endgadget, but in an audio review site.
Many of the reviews are from folks who have not heard better or are hard pressed for space. That is understandable.
They are pc speakers, not stereo aka real speakers. Tiny satellites and miniscule subs do not equal a decent nearfield setup which are used for mixing or HT.
Not worth the $300. $50-100? Sure ok. They are decent for that. They do not make your ears bleed but if you compare them to something like a $100 amp + $100 pair of stereo speakers + $100 sub? Um, they would lose big time, every time.
Just use your common sense.
When buying speakers, try looking for reviews not in crunchgear or endgadget, but in an audio review site.
Many of the reviews are from folks who have not heard better or are hard pressed for space. That is understandable.
They are pc speakers, not stereo aka real speakers. Tiny satellites and miniscule subs do not equal a decent nearfield setup which are used for mixing or HT.
Not worth the $300. $50-100? Sure ok. They are decent for that. They do not make your ears bleed but if you compare them to something like a $100 amp + $100 pair of stereo speakers + $100 sub? Um, they would lose big time, every time.
Just use your common sense.
Gmok Bonecrusha
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 1,090
I own them. Paid 190 for them on eBay.
Absolutely NOT worth 400 dollars. I would say they are worth the 190 though.
They are extremely well built. Everything from the sub to the control pod are top notch. I am not a fan of the ethernet wiring though.
The sound quality is pretty damn good considering it's Razer, I was expecting meh sound.
The satellites are what surprise me the most. I was expecting some tinny highs, or missing some mid...But they actually perform very well. Clean crip and clear. The sub performs well also. Bass hasn't bottomed out yet. But too "punchy" on some hip hop.
Yes Razer is overpriced. Initially they always ask for too damn much for all their products. But for 190 or there bouts, I would personally say they are worth it.
IMO I would say they are slighty better than the Klipsch 2.1 Promedias sound wise. Much better build wise.
Overall, I would give them an 8/10 for PC speakers.
Absolutely NOT worth 400 dollars. I would say they are worth the 190 though.
They are extremely well built. Everything from the sub to the control pod are top notch. I am not a fan of the ethernet wiring though.
The sound quality is pretty damn good considering it's Razer, I was expecting meh sound.
The satellites are what surprise me the most. I was expecting some tinny highs, or missing some mid...But they actually perform very well. Clean crip and clear. The sub performs well also. Bass hasn't bottomed out yet. But too "punchy" on some hip hop.
Yes Razer is overpriced. Initially they always ask for too damn much for all their products. But for 190 or there bouts, I would personally say they are worth it.
IMO I would say they are slighty better than the Klipsch 2.1 Promedias sound wise. Much better build wise.
Overall, I would give them an 8/10 for PC speakers.
I own them. Paid 190 for them on eBay.
Absolutely NOT worth 400 dollars. I would say they are worth the 190 though.
They are extremely well built. Everything from the sub to the control pod are top notch. I am not a fan of the ethernet wiring though.
The sound quality is pretty damn good considering it's Razer, I was expecting meh sound.
The satellites are what surprise me the most. I was expecting some tinny highs, or missing some mid...But they actually perform very well. Clean crip and clear. The sub performs well also. Bass hasn't bottomed out yet. But too "punchy" on some hip hop.
Yes Razer is overpriced. Initially they always ask for too damn much for all their products. But for 190 or there bouts, I would personally say they are worth it.
IMO I would say they are slighty better than the Klipsch 2.1 Promedias sound wise. Much better build wise.
Overall, I would give them an 8/10 for PC speakers.
No, they're not worth $190 either. As other people have said, maybe $100 max. When you consider that you can get a nice pair of bookshelves, and a T-Amp to power them for around $190, there is no point in even considering them.
I think this whole categorizing things into "PC Speakers" so you can justify their ridiculous price for shitty sound relative to what you can get with real speakers is absolutely stupid.