Audio setups

Mostly I listen to standard two-channel stereo, so I plug my netbook into my home theater system with all virtual surround settings off.  Same kind of 2.1 stereo you have I guess.

In my humble opinion, if money were no object, an ideal system would be a set of active studio monitors and sod all else.  I'm sure some might prefer to put a graphic equalizer between the PC and the monitors.

If space were no object, I wouldn't rule out a stereo tube amp and a pair of vintage Rolas in large, open-back baffles.

Edirol has a fairly good reputation in terms of quality.

Whether you go with speakers or headphones, if the word "monitor" is in the description they're designed to be transparent.  Most other speakers and headphones are either designed to be cheap to produce or to "sweeten" the sound in a way that makes them better for listening to music from a wide variety of sources.  (Some people find listening to music on transparent studio monitors causes listener fatigue.)

If you watch DVD's on your PC, you probably want a 5.1 or 7.1 sound card.  I'm of the opinion that price does not necessarily equal quality; there was recently a discussion in a home recording forum where several of us - myself included - steered a guy who was looking for a simple, high-quality mic preamp away from the high-end MOTU gear and towards an inexpensive Behringer preamp.  If it sounds good, it is good.

There are quite a few great A/T and Sennheiser headphones available for under $100US, but my favorite headphones are still the old stalk-style headset that came with my Sony MiniDisc recorder.  You can find the same headsets for about $20 or so.

I have my laptop's internel speakers (which are actually quite nice 2.1's, the positioning is really well done and it doesnt sound tinny).
On top of that, i have a really nice pair of ~$300 headphones (Sennheiser). Headphones can surpass speakers for sound quality, if you get a good pair.
I had done a lot of research on the matter, and here is what i believe the secret is to having a good experience. Buy headphones which are 'monitoring' headphones, or something similar. These are used in professional recording environments, or security setups, where you want an equal distribution of sound. This means you don't want it to have a higher bass or treble, or have any 'characteristics' that make headphones unique. You want a 1:1 version of what your listening to.

As you said earlier, 'music headphones' arent the same , or may not be good for, 'speech / recording headphones'.
This is how you get around that. With a pair of the above mentioned style of headphones, you've got just about the best headphones you could possibly want for the speech side of things. However, your music may sound dull, or less vibrant, or like something is off just a bit. This is  because it is not boosting the base, or anything like that to make it sound more music-like.
The trick is to use a software-based equalizer. Most mp3 players, and almost all computer-based audio software comes with such a thing. You can raise the different audio-levels. This means, when listening to speech and movies you have a great set of phones, and when you want to listen to music, you can have the computer output a higher base or treble to compensate for the phones.

I have never been impressed with these "computer sound systems" that sell for hundreds of bucks and are all about being discreet and concealable like they are your scanner or something.  I have never bought a Labtec or Altec product and I doubt I ever will.  Desktop speakers certainly have their place, but if you want more, don't relegate yourself to them.

Most users will be quite happy plugging into a decent stereo, which should include a receiver/amp, a pair of decent speakers (bookshelf size, not ones that look like your TV remote standing upright) and a sub.  A 5.1 or 7.1 connection is great if you want to run surround, but not necessary.  A good receiver can run impressive surround with just a two channel input, like most Crunchbang hardware offers up.

If you are editing music, then you will be looking for ridiculously good headphones, monitors or even a PA system.  This is not going to achieve what most home users are seeking.

Ideal setup:  A HTPC with DLNA accessibility sitting in the living room, attached to a quality 7.1 component surround system and a flat TV.  This is networked and accessible through any number of computers and controllers in the house.  All of the audio files on it are FLAC.  Dampening material has been discreetly incorporated into the room's decor.  What's the quietest color of paint?  The drapes are delightful, even if they look tacky.  Every glass must have a coaster as not to rattle; every beer a coozie.  Then there is the music recording/editing studio, complete with full dampening padding, multiple monitors and $400 headphones.  Guitars may only be played through tube amps...  (karaoke ist verboten.)

Sound is pretty subjective. I just spent Saturday comparing Studio Monitors at GC. As always, test as much as you can. What's good for the goose isn't always good for the gander.

For my listening I send the signal through the good'ol Edirol UA1-EX to an Onkyo TX-DS484 and out to my old JBL HLS bookshelf speakers. When I was younger I sold Stereos and Surround systems. If I were to ever do a surround set-up I'd have to build a room specifically for that reason. In reality Stereo sound is hard enough to image correctly and when you throw 3 or 4 more speaker into the mix the imaging just gets more difficult. Back when I did it though 5.1 and DTS was all the rage. Now we're getting into 7.1, 8.1, Blue Ray and all that Jazz. I'll always personally lean towards an old 70's era receiver and a good pair of speakers with a sub. To me the sub has to be set right. A lot of people want to sound like a Honda Civic coming down my road every night at 1 a.m. (True story, like clockwork and I live in the boonies! ) You should never notice your sub until it's not there. I've always gotten the best results that way.

For the real, I haven't heard that in that song before, transparency, headphones are still king. A good set of Near-Field monitors do really well too, but a good set of headphones are a must for anyone. My next pair are going to be the Beyer:Dynamics. They're really full to my ear, warm and not aggressive and really transparent. AKG are really dynamic, but way too aggressive for my taste, though my dummer prefers those and Sennheisers. Sennheissers cancel outside sound really well, but they lack the warmth in the mid-bass frequencies.

When I mix I use my Sony headphones (really balanced, not great, but balanced) and my JBL stereo set-up. After I get a good sound on those systems I burn a disk and dump the files onto my Cowon media player. Then I do the litmus test on a boombox, through some other old floor speakers from the 80's and 90's and the final test is to listen to it in the Jeep. If my mix sound good in the Jeep then it's a win.

Try a Tech 21 PSA-1.1, that's what I'm running in my rig now and I have yet to miss a tube amp. Someday I'll post some recordings. It records so much easier than micing an amp and it sounds the same. I know it's sacralige, but I can't afford the upkeep of a tube amp or to have it "go down". I kind of rely on it to play out.

Amen, but what about my Whiskey?

I honestly don't know what movie you mean, I must not of seen that one. I read about the practice in EQ or Sound on Sound a long time ago. The whole idea is that you can have multi-thousand dollar monitors in your studio and things sound great, but the person buying your album might only have a cheap shelf system. I learned from experience that a mix will sound great in the headphones and through your monitors, but like dog-doo the minute you put it through a cheap boom-box or laptop speakers. Or worse your album gets ripped to Mp3.

I built my system so I could do both Guitar and Bass through one rack and just change the speaker cab. I swear that little unit is amazing. It's one of those deals that when you get the rest of the band involved no-one can tell that they aren't hearing a Marshall or a Fender, really even alone it's convincing enough. It's the only solid-state pre I've found that's worth anything tone wise. Don't get me wrong, I love tube amps, but I can't afford such niceties on a working/ married musicians bank account and since I'm branching out more and more lately I need as many tones as possible from a small package. One day I'll have my Bassman and '52 Tele, maybe a Twin, but the Martin comes first. Besides you could always send me one of your amps to run through it's paces in my little "Chicken Shed" and studio.

As long as it's not a Crate solid-state, deal?