Quantcast
why use studio monitors - Page 4 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
why use studio monitors
Old 26th January 2013 | Show parent
  #91
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by filipv ➡️
Would you paint a picture looking trough coloured glass?

HiFi spekaers deliberately colour the music so it sounds better. The trouble is, every hifi speker does this colouring differently. Make a good sounding mix on one set of hifi speakers and listen in horror how ****ty it sounds on another.

Monitor speakers deliberately do exactly the opposite. They reveal. They are NOT intended to sound "good", "fat" or whatever. But make the mix sound good on them - it will sound good on everything.

and, of course, this is not always the case. But the probability to nail the mix on monitors is considerably greater compared to mixing od flattering hifi speakers.
You're repeating a lot of the myths that have lead people to mix on ****ty speakers WAY past the era that the NS-10 was a HIFI design used to mix on.

Let's not forget that fact. Hi fi speaker.

Speakers are in their infancy compared to amps.

Facts: A midrange dominant speaker like the Avantone or NS10 is VERY useful. Most of music is mids. I prefer the Avantone, no crossover, no highs or lows, no port. Great for bulk work and great for fine tuning vocals and bass/kick.

But you ALSO need a truly full range speaker. Back in the day the in-wall mains plus a mid-dom like the NS10 were a good pair. Today you can use the Avantone and a small 2 way full range like the ... hmmm, I can't recall the name of it ... lol

Most "studio monitors" are very colored and not in a revealing way ... they mask. The NS10 or Avantone reveal ONLY because they are flawed. Distortion and a lack of linearity and dynamics is all coloring.

Fact: 99% of the new "studio monitors" are a compromise ... between power (tracking) and linearity (mixing). They try to do both things, and save you money. In so doing, they fail.

The myth that ****ty speakers reveal is just as flawed as the premise that hi-fi speakers color. You can't make blanket statements like that.

EVERY speaker is a compromise. EVERY speaker is limited in it's abilities. EVERY speaker is not linear and is distorted. It's a matter of degrees and combinations of qualities.

A great mix speaker is one where the results sounds great.

This can happen because of a lucky marriage of user, room and speaker. Or it can happen because of education. Or it can happen because of the design simply working for most people. Or a combo.
Old 26th January 2013 | Show parent
  #92
Gear Guru
 
Sqye's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
.

Great posts, Brian - as always.

I have to say - in this era of such killer hi fi speaker availability - I simply have no idea why any professional would limit themselves to pure midrange, etc. - unless that person is more experienced - and looking for something very specific.

I typically choose to work on detailed midrange and upper frequency hi fi speakers during tracking and much of my production work, and then I move to full range speakers for mixing and "mastering".

Unless I'm producing music requiring deeper sounds - like orchestral music, club music, film music, etc. - then it's full-range from the get-go. But I still have to switch from my full-range speakers for larger chunks of time in order to get the mixing and imaging done properly.

It's like anything else in life. I find having the option of full-range hi fidelity monitoring to be imperative, and simply have no idea how professionals would ever choose to live and work without this option. It's crucial. It's critical.

I can't think of one professional I know - even those that produce and mix on NS10s - who doesn't have a KILLER set of higher fidelity mains for full-range high fidelity QC.

Those mains are not ONLY there to impress clients. They are there to actually HEAR the freeking music in all it's full-range and high fidelity glory - just the way it should be - and will be heard in the end - hopefully!


After working with both midrange and rull-range hi-fi speakers in the studio for years now, I also cannot imagine limiting myself to a narrower frequency range for most professional work.

Of course, YMMV.

.
Old 26th January 2013 | Show parent
  #93
Gear Guru
 
Sqye's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson ➡️
Nobody actually used NS-10s alone that I'm aware of! It's comparing a range-finder to a ground glass focusing screen. Each has its place.

My experience has been that some speakers translate well and most simply don't. I don't think anybody really knows why or most monitors would translate well. You just have to go by experience with them. A good place to start is other peoples' experience.

I also don't buy the idea that one can simply learn any speaker. When the information is missing, you can't act on it. Certainly there is missing information with every speaker. The difference lies in which information is missing.
.

EXACTLY!

.
Old 27th January 2013 | Show parent
  #94
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq ➡️
Baloney. They are studio monitors. Made to be such, marketed as such.

The only way that they are "not studio monitors in the classic definition" would be if the classic definition of studio monitors was: "Speakers that Verve111 doesn't like"!

Is that your definition? If you like a speaker then it's "Not Really" a studio monitor? How convenient for your philosophy. This is what has been bugging me about this whole thread and now it crystallizes in these hypocritical "exceptions" to your thread premise.

You say:

Well then, what IS the most common denominator? It's not ATCs! Is it earbuds? the car? laptop speakers? consumer bookshelf speakers? boom box? Try choosing ONLY ONE of those and see how your mix translates.

Then you say

Is that your idea of "Most Common Denominator?" CM8s? Is that what all "the Kids" are listening to these days? Is it because the CM8s are made in China, and sold in Best Buy? Or is it because they not flat and roll off below 69 Hz?

So this is what this thread boils down to? This is your advice to the rest of us? It's OK to mix on consumer junk systems and it is OK to mix on My First Audiophile speakers, OK to mix on pretty much anything. But god forbid anyone should try to mix on speakers that were designed to used for mixing. That would somehow be bad.

The only coherent concept I see in your premise is some kind of Reverse Snobbery about "Studio Monitors". It is just as bad or worse than the snobbery you complain about. As soon as a monitor comes along that you like, then it's "not really" a monitor so you can keep on dissing all other monitors as a class.

In the political sense, you have lost all credibility for your 'cause', like a "pro-family" politician caught with a mistress.
Woah. Easy now. I think you need to read back through the thread. I'm just posting my own observations man, and I directly state that I'm not suggesting anything to anyone so if you perceived it that way then I'm sorry, twas not my intention. I'm not sure why you're getting so bent outta shape over this.

Just because it is a studio monitor doesn't mean its a good, translatable speaker, and just because its a hi-fi speaker doesn't mean you can't use it as a recording studio monitor.

Conversations evolve and develop and this has been a fun one to discuss, so....relax. I'll buy you a beer sometime.
Old 27th January 2013 | Show parent
  #95
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq ➡️
There is nothing "blind" or "uncritical" about MY acceptance of speakers designed to be studio monitors as my primary mixing platform.
You probably have killer studio monitors, no one is doubting that. But if I have a better speaker that isn't a "studio monitor" I would just assume use that one instead. Some of the "studio monitors" that are competitively priced I'm not impressed with. Other "studio monitors" that are very expensive that I've heard are great, and ironically they sound very simliar to high end hifi speakers. In fact, I would go so far as to say that my middle of the road hifi speakers sound closer to those high end "studio monitors" than my middle of the road "studio monitors" do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq ➡️
Baloney. They are studio monitors. Made to be such, marketed as such.
You ever heard em? If I could afford them I would have them. But since I can't, I'll use speakers that translate well for my uses. I'm not saying you should do the same. I for one just don't adhere to a ridged definition of "it's a studio monitor and therefor it is better than this hifi speaker".

If we did a speaker comparison (price to price equivalent) would this be true for every studio monitor/hifi comparison? Of course not. Am I saying that? No.

My experience, and I feel most others' in this conversation, is that it is highly subjective.

Here's a little food for thought:

http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Discov...bbey-Road.html
Old 28th January 2013 | Show parent
  #96
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip Parker ➡️
Woah. Easy now. I think you need to read back through the thread. I'm just posting my own observations...
One of which is that people should stop drinking the "Studio Monitor Kool-Aid"!

Quote:
Just because it is a studio monitor doesn't mean its a good, translatable speaker, and just because its a hi-fi speaker doesn't mean you can't use it as a recording studio monitor
Fair enough. And just because it is a studio monitor also doesn't mean it is NOT a good translatable speaker.

Quote:
Conversations evolve and develop and this has been a fun one to discuss, so....relax. I'll buy you a beer sometime.
Old 29th January 2013 | Show parent
  #97
Lives for gear
 
twentyhertz's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip Parker ➡️

Here's a little food for thought:

Abbey Road Studios - Bowers & Wilkins | B&W Speakers
Dude. 800Ds+tens of thousands of dollars worth of amps != CM8s or really most midrange hi-fi speakers....
Old 29th January 2013
  #98
Gear Head
 
Mattm07's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Why choose one or the other?

Old 29th January 2013
  #99
Gear Addict
 
AdamB420's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I have Dynaudio BM15a's, NS-10's with a big Crown amp, and a consumer 5.1 system that is only setup in 2.1 and actually uses the rear speakers as the L & R (they sounded flatter).

I would never turn on the hifi sub system during tracking.

During mixing it great - it gives me a sense of a hyped playback system. I actually make some mix EQ adjustments through the hifi. But I would never stay on that system for much longer than a few minutes and go back to the monitors. Towards the latter stages of a mix I am switching between all my monitors often, getting it sounding impressive across all speakers.

I found I was mixing in too much subs until I got a hifi with a sub as another mix check, now I know my other monitors even better.
Old 29th January 2013
  #100
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
If you have the most bad ass speakers on the planet ( whatever it's origins ) if you don't measure some sine sweeps at your listening position you may not even be aware of the resulting lumps in the response curve that the room is imposing .

For instance , how many home recordist have their monitors on a desk against the wall ?? Frequencies above the baffle step are fine , but below they wrap around the cabinets and bounce of the wall 180 degrees out of phase and can cause a suck out at the listening position . ( google the Allison effect )
Ask a few speaker designers if they would recommend having their speakers a ways from any wall ; especially rear ported ones !!


This article covers a subject that is vital yet rarely discussed ; accuse me of being pedantic if you must , but how often is the devil in the details ??


Dispersion: A Show and Tell | Sound and Vision Magazine



Quote:
Interestingly, some monitor speakers designed for recording studio control rooms have relatively narrow dispersion. In that application, broad dispersion generally isn’t necessary because the most important listener — the engineer at the mixing board — usually sits very close to the speakers, and much of the control room’s wall surface is covered with absorptive material. Thus, most ( but not all !!)of what the engineer hears is the direct sound from the speakers.
This part is paramount
Quote:
and much of the control room’s wall surface is covered with absorptive material.
will your wifey let you cover the walls in treatments ????? ( mine won't)
Old 30th January 2013 | Show parent
  #101
Lives for gear
 
rocksure's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip Parker ➡️
One of the reasons I bring this up is strikingly similar to that article. I built myself some decent bookshelf speakers that I started mixing on a couple years back. After a while my friend lent me his event 2020s which I've been mixing on for a year or so now.

I've probably spent equal time on both speakers, nothing in my monitoring chain has changed between the two speaker setups. I went back to the book-shelfs I built for a month and BAM my mixes transfer SO much better to car stereos, headphones, other people's systems in their homes etc.

Maybe it's the 2020s, not sure. I get the benefit of a super flat monitor in finding problematic things, but even I myself when listening to music dont listen on super flat monitors.

Maybe I would miss problematic things if mixing on consumer speakers, or maybe if I'm missing them, they aren't very problematic to begin with.

I will say this - my high end listening speakers are WAY more detailed than these 2020s. The ATCs a mentioned in the OP are glorious. Maybe its time to bite the bullet on something decent for monitoring.

I have been using Event 20/20's for more than a decade as my main mixing monitors. I'm so used to them and the way they sound in my room that I have no problem mixing on them and getting the mixes to translate well. However, I still always like to check mixes on a small mono speaker, some hi-fi speakers (a pair 1990's Kenwoods, and also some lousy modern Sony speakers) as well as taking them to a friend's larger studio with Tannoy monitor gold speakers where I sometimes work.
Because I am so used to the 20/20s the mixes are usually fine on the other systems.
Old 7th February 2013 | Show parent
  #102
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by twentyhertz ➡️
Dude. 800Ds+tens of thousands of dollars worth of amps != CM8s or really most midrange hi-fi speakers....

I agree, absurd. But some of us apparently need a rigid definition of studio monitor. These are not studio monitors, as they are not entirely marketed as such. Alas, what do the people at Abby Road know that we dont?

After a little research I would be very interested to hear the B&W PM1s with a sub.
Old 7th February 2013 | Show parent
  #103
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocksure ➡️
I have been using Event 20/20's for more than a decade as my main mixing monitors. I'm so used to them and the way they sound in my room that I have no problem mixing on them and getting the mixes to translate well. However, I still always like to check mixes on a small mono speaker, some hi-fi speakers (a pair 1990's Kenwoods, and also some lousy modern Sony speakers) as well as taking them to a friend's larger studio with Tannoy monitor gold speakers where I sometimes work.
Because I am so used to the 20/20s the mixes are usually fine on the other systems.

I've recently set up my 20/20s along side a pair of NS10s and large floor standing home hifi speakers. I was surprised at the difference. I cannot say that I find the 2020s to be very flat, but if you know how to mix on them I can imagine they would be very useful.
Old 24th August 2014
  #104
Lives for gear
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
I've actually read articles where engineers/producers say that when they have heard their mixes on high end hifi systems, that they hear stuff they never knew was there, which tells me that the pro audio monitors they were using were not revealing everything they should and that the hifi speakers would have served then better.

To me, no matter what you mix on, this will translate well on some playback systems and pants on others. We really need some sort of "standard" like what THX was trying to achieve in home theatre.
Old 24th August 2014
  #105
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Studio monitors are traditionally optimized for judging performances and balance as opposed to sound quality. Too much resolution can have a negative effect on mixes because being able to hear deeply into a mix often minimizes balance issues It's like comparing a range finder to a ground glass focusing screen on a camera. Ideally you want to have both tools available.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 698 views: 245939
Avatar for EffinPoop
EffinPoop 3 weeks ago
replies: 64 views: 15176
Avatar for akashpmp
akashpmp 22nd March 2021
replies: 3 views: 1844
Avatar for Ssamson
Ssamson 20th February 2021
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