Thread: Monitors for classical and jazz mastering

You've got to think about the room and its treatments instead of trying to trick it out with EQ. That's really the last thing to do. Lipinski's are passive boxes (and for very good reason). Andrew Lipinski found that the presences of an amp inside the box compomises the sound. He could never get what he wanted out of them in terms of accuracy with an amp shoved inside. (I totally agree, which is one of many reasons why I bought them). With a few feet of heavy guage cable, there's no loss by putting the amps on the floor near the speakers instead of inside them.

Bass traps & sonex/auralex panels are always an option, so is placement itself. You just have to experiment and find what works. I had a JBL system back in the late 70s/early 80's that was all kinds of over EQ'd (with a graphic 30 band EQ!) and other manipuation. It was awful, but we didn't know any better at the time. Decades later, you'd never catch me putting an EQ in-circuit before my amp & speakers. If you need that kind of EQ, there's something else wrong somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Cucco

I found that tweeter to be so ruthless and forward (not brittle, just freightningly accurate) that even across a room, everything sounded as though it were etched in time. I couldn't imagine using that up close. The mid range though is the same between the units and that is where Focal's strengths are.

Cheers-
J

Hey Jeremy,

I love your interpretation "etched in time" . I'm guessing you mean it would be hard to sit this close and accurately mix with this tweeter because the sharp freq imprint almost blinds our ears? Love that "etched in time"! Could you please explain this for me?

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-aud...7x/description
I see your point with the A7. Tweeter helps solve this up close. I'm looking for three different sets. I see what the buzz is all about now.