The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Focal Alpha 65 vs Yamaha HS8 vs LSR305
Old 17th April 2016 | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxedPoetic ➡️
I have both the Focals and the JBLs. IMO, the Focals blow them out of the water. Not saying the JBLs are bad by any means, they got the job done. But in my listening area/workplace the Focals sound so much better and have resulted in better mixes.
Which JBLs and Focals do you have/are comparing in your comments?
Old 17th April 2016 | Show parent
  #62
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️
Which JBLs and Focals do you have/are comparing in your comments?
Focal Alpha 65's and the JBL 305's
Old 17th April 2016 | Show parent
  #63
Lives for gear
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaxedPoetic ➡️
Focal Alpha 65's and the JBL 305's
Thanks.
Old 17th April 2016 | Show parent
  #64
Dot
Lives for gear
 
Dot's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️
I value this comment. It appears that technology improves with time. Am always trying to understand why?

In sequence of technology development :

1. The Yamaha HS is derived from an earlier era of studio monitors.

2. The JBL's and Alpha's use more recent improvements in design, such as their waveguides, and materials, DSP, and are a more recent design.

I think if one had a limited budget, the Alpha 65's would be the best in a small room, and the Alpha 80's in a larger room.

Its important to note all of these lower priced monitors compromise the low end to some extent, but I guess for the recording and mixing needs of most, especially home studios and emerging professionals with a limited budget, these Alphas are the best you can get, for the price.

Some confidence comes from the fact that these are manufactured by Focal who also make some of the highest end monitors and hi-fi speakers, in the world, and some benefit is likely to have tricked down to these lower end monitors.
There are actually technologies that were refined to such a high level, that they're not improving over time. Analog technology reached it's zenith years ago, and most of what goes on now with development is more along the lines of tweaks, new flavors, and workflow features.

Microphone technology has not improved in over 50 years. But it's gotten less expensive in many cases. It's easier for designers and manufacturers to source parts. It's also easy to get the word on with the internet, so we've had more and more companies jump on the bandwagon.

Some of the newer materials used in speaker drivers are not necessarily an advancement. It's just something different. And for many, those differences aren't a positive. Good ol' pulp paper cones are still preferred by many, who feel that synthetic materials in cones slow down the responsiveness. This is true of even very high-end speakers.

In many cases DSP is incorporated to solve problems that were not solved in the analog design of the monitor. And also DSP if often more of a gimmick, and doesn't really solve any problems, or even actually legitimately provide the results claimed.

More often than not, a purist approach is still what produces the best monitors and microphones. Though, one area where that's been helped by tech advancement is the ability for manufacturers to use computers and software measurement programs to more accurately refine and produce their products.

I wrote an article on some of the history of accurate reference monitors, which also addresses the use of materials.

The Danish Connection: The Rise of Accurate Reference Speakers and Monitors - Dan Richards

Last edited by Dot; 17th April 2016 at 11:37 PM..
Old 17th April 2016 | Show parent
  #65
Lives for gear
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dot ➡️
There are actually technologies that were refined to such a high level, that they're not improving over time. Analog technology reached it's zenith years ago, and most of what goes on now with development is more along the lines of tweaks, new flavors, and workflow features.

Microphone technology has not improved in over 50 years. But it's gotten less expensive in many cases. It's easier for designers and manufacturers to source parts. It's also easy to get the word on with the internet, so we've had more and more companies jump on the bandwagon.

Some of the newer materials used in speaker drivers are not necessarily an advancement. It's just something different. And for many, those differences aren't a positive. Good ol' pulp paper cones are still preferred by many, who feel that synthetic materials in cones slow down the responsiveness. This is true of even very high-end speakers.

In many cases DSP is incorporated to solve problems that were not solved in the analog design of the monitor. And also DPS if often more of a gimmick, and doesn't really solve any problems, or even actually legitimately provide the results claimed.

More often than not, a purist approach is still what produces the best monitors and microphones. And one are where that's been helped by tech advancement is the ability for manufacturers to use computers and software measurement programs to more accurate refine and produce their products.

I wrote an article on some of the history of accurate reference monitors, which also addresses the use of materials.

The Danish Connection: The Rise of Accurate Reference Speakers and Monitors - Dan Richards
Thanks. So much to consider.
Old 19th May 2016
  #66
Gear Head
 
🎧 5 years
Hi! I have some question about Focal Alpha model i'm a huge electronic music lover especialy by 90's house music, underground house, tech-house, funky house, nu disco and all funky/groovy music for dancing.

What choose between the 65 and 80 i read here the bass of 80 were very boomy and flabby with less mids and 65 more punchier and tigh with with very less subass and more mids. But i'm afraid of take the 65 and have not enough low end because i search the same sensation like hear music in good nightclub with big sound system. I think with the break-paper cone alpha 80 will soften and will provide a clearer and solid bass with better mids

Very hard choice my speakers are yet simple logitech 2.1 I hope the gap to its quality level will be huge
Old 20th May 2016 | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by funknroll ➡️
Hi! I have some question about Focal Alpha model i'm a huge electronic music lover especialy by 90's house music, underground house, tech-house, funky house, nu disco and all funky/groovy music for dancing.

What choose between the 65 and 80 i read here the bass of 80 were very boomy and flabby with less mids and 65 more punchier and tigh with with very less subass and more mids. But i'm afraid of take the 65 and have not enough low end because i search the same sensation like hear music in good nightclub with big sound system. I think with the break-paper cone alpha 80 will soften and will provide a clearer and solid bass with better mids

Very hard choice my speakers are yet simple logitech 2.1 I hope the gap to its quality level will be huge
Audio is like racing a Formula 1 car, so many small things which come together to make the end result.

Not all of us can have or own a Formula 1 car, so sometimes we have to settle for a Honda Civic i.e we get the best for what we can afford, and for our requirements, but the same principles apply, fuel, oil, tyres, a good driver, nice engine, etc, only on a smaller scale.

I interpret your requirements as being able to hear the music with the same level of chest thumping as you have in a good night club.

Let's get back to the basics, what causes the chest thumping, feet and body thumping sound in a night club - low frequency waves that are not just hitting your ears, but vibrating from the speaker through the ground. - The root cause of this is lots of volume - or amp power - especially at low frequencies.

In my experience most studio monitors do not give you that physical thump/via low frequency vibrations and audio, you need a subwoofer.

The Alpha 80 will give u a nice low end and excellent volume, but that low end thump, you will more "hear" than "feel", cos the cabinet will not transmit the vibration to the ground so you can also feel the sound.

Because of your room reflections, that low end sound may be slightly exaggerated, but there are controls at the back of the Alpha's, to roll off(lower) the deep bass or increase. The only way to get the large thump like a night club is large speakers with mid/woofer or woofer only diameters of 10 inches or more.

So decide if what you want is a thump in your ear(which the Alpha 80 will give you) or a thump in your chest/feet, for which needs the addition of a sub woofer or larger speakers.

Why? most desktop placed studio monitors or when placed on a stand or pads are setup to prevent the vibrations from getting to you via the physical contacts, cos in most cases everything is done to present these contacts with adjacent surfaces - using vibration resistant cabinets.

If you increase the volume to unhealthy levels, you can get some thud pumping through the air, but by the time you feel bass from the Alpha 80, the overall volume will be too loud to hear properly in a mixing scenario.

I suggest you consider the Alpha 80 complemented with a powered/active subwoofer.
Old 5th June 2016
  #68
Gear Head
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
The 65's have smaller woofers which are slightly more accurate than the larger woofers on the 80's, but do not go as deep.

The 80's deliver an effortless bass, but are not as distinct in the low end.
I think i prefer take the alpha 65 because i prefer have less bass but a lot tighter and dynamic with better resolution and precision in entire spectrum and take after a sub.

Is it a good solution ? Maybe it's a mistake and alpha 80 has the the same precision, resolution in mids and with a ton of burning the same bass tighness like the 65. Because you have changed your mind now that you prefer alpha 65 now like a lot of forumers here.

Precision and resolution of sound are the most important factors for me and i want create deep house and tribal house so the tighness of bass is very important

Sorry for my english
Old 7th January 2017 | Show parent
  #69
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️

I suggest you save up and get something that you may not need to change for at least 10 years :

e.g Focal - CMS 65, Focal Solo 6 Be, or Neumann KH120, or Neumann KH310, or Focal 6 Twin Be, or one of the new raves at the moment - the Amphions - which need a good amp also as they are passive, not active like many other studio monitors.

I appreciate that money is always in limited supply for all of us, but sometimes spending less is simply an exercise in futility, and you end up spending the same amount on two or three poorer quality items over time, when you could have got one that simply does the job, and you never have to think of changing it for a long time, and it would have earned back the money you invested in it, in real money or mixing pleasure. Mixing in a warehouse is also not recommended.

I'm in a similar situation with audio interfaces. I have invested over the years in several and if I had simply bought a good RME interface which certainly costs premium bucks, but I may not need to change it for another 15 years. and absolutely enjoy using it, rather than the competitors products which I bought trying to save money but now face so many limitations......I'll end up buying an RME one day, God willing, so I can finally focus on making music and not concerning my self about limitations and compromises, of less capable audio interfaces.
Dear Kodebode and all who tested yamaha hs8 and focal alpha 65 please share your thoughts.

I have a pair of alesis m1 active 520 and one american friend suggests buying yamaha hs 8 (he has yamaha hs80). He says there are yamahas in many studios. They are everywhere.
I got a hungarian friend who suggests buying the focal alpha 65 (he bought these 1 month ago).

I tested these monitors in hitspace in Hungary yesterday and fully agree with these statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️
Thanks.

Focal Alpha 65 (and even moreso the Alpha 80s) is a bit dark sounding compared to others such as the HS8 and Presonus Eris 8, but this should prevent ear fatigue.

HS8 - slightly smiley

HS 7 - a bit more balanced

With the HS's being brighter in the high end than the Alphas
The room in the shop is acoustically treated the monitors are placed on pro stands and an apogee symphony functioned as an audio interface for a macbook pro. I played tracks on spotify and listened to a sound test.
I noticed the yamaha makes a bit of high sound between 35 hz and 50 hz (along with the low frequencies) whereas the focal produces only low frequencies.
The shopkeeper run ableton's tone to check whether the issue is with the soundtest file uploaded on youtube. Turns out not. I heard the same high(pitched) sound between those frequencies in Ableton on the yamahas again. The shopkeeper attributed it to the yamaha speaker box he said it resonates. Obviously they are not pro speakers. wonder why the focal did not make this sound. Is it perhaps because the focal box is smaller?

Overall listening to billie jean by M.J. I found the yamaha sounded way better mid and highwise. It is like the eq settings were totally different on the speakers. I found the focals' sound dirtier compared to the yamahas.
Maybe the yamahas colour the sound?!
Also in the tone test the yamahas went 5 hz lower than the focals.I mean I could hear the frequencies around 25-30 hz louder on the yamahas and nearly nothing coming out from the focals.
But when I listened to a full track and A/B tested them more bass came from the focals.

Also I would like to ask you what sound interface shall I go for?
What did you buy? RME babyface, fireface?
What would you recommend?
I will most likely buy a synth ; a korg minilogue.

Also, how much shall I spend for room acoustics? I am not good at DIY at all.
How much would you pay/ is recommended to pay for an expert? Room is middle-size/average.
I make electronic music, techno, house.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️

I suggest you save up and get something that you may not need to change for at least 10 years :

e.g Focal - CMS 65, Focal Solo 6 Be, or Neumann KH120, or Neumann KH310, or Focal 6 Twin.
Why is it better to buy a better pair of monitors if I am not such a great producer yet?

Happy new year all.

Last edited by thomassmith; 7th January 2017 at 05:45 PM..
Old 1st February 2017 | Show parent
  #70
Lives for gear
 
9 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomassmith ➡️
Dear Kodebode and all who tested yamaha hs8 and focal alpha 65 please share your thoughts.

I have a pair of alesis m1 active 520 and one american friend suggests buying yamaha hs 8 (he has yamaha hs80). He says there are yamahas in many studios. They are everywhere.
I got a hungarian friend who suggests buying the focal alpha 65 (he bought these 1 month ago).

I tested these monitors in hitspace in Hungary yesterday and fully agree with these statements.



The room in the shop is acoustically treated the monitors are placed on pro stands and an apogee symphony functioned as an audio interface for a macbook pro. I played tracks on spotify and listened to a sound test.
I noticed the yamaha makes a bit of high sound between 35 hz and 50 hz (along with the low frequencies) whereas the focal produces only low frequencies.
The shopkeeper run ableton's tone to check whether the issue is with the soundtest file uploaded on youtube. Turns out not. I heard the same high(pitched) sound between those frequencies in Ableton on the yamahas again. The shopkeeper attributed it to the yamaha speaker box he said it resonates. Obviously they are not pro speakers. wonder why the focal did not make this sound. Is it perhaps because the focal box is smaller?

Overall listening to billie jean by M.J. I found the yamaha sounded way better mid and highwise. It is like the eq settings were totally different on the speakers. I found the focals' sound dirtier compared to the yamahas.
Maybe the yamahas colour the sound?!
Also in the tone test the yamahas went 5 hz lower than the focals.I mean I could hear the frequencies around 25-30 hz louder on the yamahas and nearly nothing coming out from the focals.
But when I listened to a full track and A/B tested them more bass came from the focals.

Also I would like to ask you what sound interface shall I go for?
What did you buy? RME babyface, fireface?
What would you recommend?
I will most likely buy a synth ; a korg minilogue.

Also, how much shall I spend for room acoustics? I am not good at DIY at all.
How much would you pay/ is recommended to pay for an expert? Room is middle-size/average.
I make electronic music, techno, house.


Why is it better to buy a better pair of monitors if I am not such a great producer yet?

Happy new year all.
You have asked some interesting questions. I will attempt to answer as many as I can. But you will need to decide what is the most important thing or things which you need to spend the most money on.

1. Choice of equipment. Focus on expenditure.

In audio, one of the key properties that allows us to compare different equipment is something called distortion, and there are many ways of measuring or estimating this. When comparing two of the same type of equipment usually the one with the lower distortion is the better one.

a) Audio interfaces

Let's talk about audio interfaces. While distortion levels differ, the quality of most audio interfaces are more than good enough for beginners.

Therefore if its audio quality, there really is not too much difference to worry about, just get any one...

My earlier point about being able to get an RME was because these interfaces are definitely better in certain aspects like low latency, and overall reliability of the device and have excellent reputations for the capability of the software that is provided, which could be important to some. But the lowest cost RME device is about 3 times the cost of a beginner device which should be more than good enough. This opinion was also formed based on the quality of audio interfaces about 1 year ago. In recent times, some of the lower cost devices have improved sufficiently especially in the area of latency.

If you are a beginner, take a look at devices like the Focusrite - 2i2 2nd generation. (make sure you do not buy the 1st generation version which was the earlier model and is not as good). This has acceptable latency performance.

Another decent device with a reasonable cost, is the M-Audio Mtrack 2x2 M (or the cheaper Mtrack 2x2) The M version has better audio quality.

If you have the cash - buy RME Babyface Pro.

b) Monitors

In general monitors have much greater distortion than any other audio device, and probably the most important decision you will ever take is the choice of monitor. Unlike audio interfaces, there is a much more significant difference between monitors. Furthermore because the technology does not change very often, you are likely to use a monitor for many more years. I've been using the same monitors for over 12 years, and am not likely to change them for quite a while.

Therefore monitors is an area where more judgement is needed. And a good monitor is likely to be one of the most expensive single items in your studio.

If your budget does not stretch to the expensive speakers I mentioned earlier :

"e.g Focal - CMS 65, Focal Solo 6 Be, or Neumann KH120, or Neumann KH310, or Focal 6 Twin"

Then I think that the Focal Alpha 80, is a wonderful monitor. If you want something cheaper, look at the Focal Alpha 65 or the Yamaha HS7 or HS8.

If you get an opportunity - and have the money - take a good look at the Pioneer RM-07, I have not heard them myself, but I am pretty sure they are outstanding, in any studio. They are more expensive than the Focal Alpha 80, but less expensive than those in the more expensive range..

The important thing to note is that Yamaha' have ports (holes) at the back, while the Focal Alpha's are front ported.

This means that if you choose the Yamaha's you will need more distance between the monitor and the rear wall.

c) Acoustics

This is such a complex area, that it is almost impossible for anyone to provide extensive valuable information to you without going into a lengthy discussion about your specific room, and ideally after you have already started using your monitors/or at least decided what type of monitors you wish to use.

I regret I do not have the time to engage with this, as in my experience an acoustic consultant needs to be able to visit your room and hear things for themselves..... and where possible measure the room response with tools, Otherwise its like attempting to get help from a doctor, who is unable to take a look at you in person, or take your temperature - I'd be suspicious of any recommendations such a doctor would make, and how reliable these would be.

Hope all this helps......
Old 2nd February 2017 | Show parent
  #71
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodebode ➡️
Hope all this helps......
Thank you for all the information. Appreciated.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 186 views: 48011
Avatar for kaem
kaem 23rd December 2016
replies: 70 views: 15309
Avatar for kawooya
kawooya 5th December 2020
replies: 88 views: 20334
Avatar for monitorlove
monitorlove 17th October 2015
replies: 73 views: 4369
Avatar for Derp
Derp 13th November 2018
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump