You do want to make it sound good on cheep stuff, but you don't do that by buying cheep monitors.

Monitors allow you to hear more of what is going on in your mix. It will allow you to more quickly fix problems, and hear some that would not be audible on some cheep systems that are audible on other cheep systems.

So mix on nice monitors, and audition it through a variety of systems including ear buds and computer speakers with a 4inch "sub woofer".

I have a pair of Event TR8's that I got used for $250. Very smooth response and crystal clear. The only down side is that even with the 8" woofer, the usable bass only goes down to about 60Hz.

what???? cheap monitors???
it's only THE MOST IMPORTANT part of your gear!!!
oh...wait.. the most important part is your mics... eerrr... your pres... oh noo, its the ummmm... room...instrume... i mean your ears...
ummm, what was the question?

i had some tannoy passive reveals that seemed very truthful and did not fatigue my ears- so i liked them! however, due to mobility issues, i bought a pair of 'cheap' powered yorkville ysm2p monitors (smaller, no HEAVY amp!) that lie to me, but i've learned which lies they tell, so they don't fool me so often. i do have to ask other headphones and speakers what they think the truth is, but they seem to exaggerate things also. so i extrapolate and get pretty close to what the what is what. i think...
anyway, i made sure i did a major monitor 'shoot out' with a known cd at a music store, and these 'cheap' monitors came out on top (for the $$$). i thought i might buy some KRK, but they seemed REALLY colored (mid scoooop) in comparison...
anyway, long post short, i think one can do an ok job on well researched 'affordable' monitors if you are careful. that said, my reveals are waiting for me in Canada...

ok so m-audio makes a bx8a and a bx5a and I notice that the 8 has a higher wattage but I've been reading that you want to listen to it on the quieter side in order to get less reflections and room noise.

so why get the 8?

I think after what you said I should spend around $300 maybe but it goes on up into the thousands and I got to draw the line somewhere so I can stop using just my headphones asap

Hmm...

You want to make music. Do you enjoy listening to it?

How much is your home stereo worth?
Car stereo?

How much then are you will to spend on what you will use to create your music. Or are you just engineering for others?

Set the scene for me.

Moved?

did I put this in the wrong place?

OK, I'll save up for a couple more months

8" will give you better bass responce than a 5"

stupidfatandugly wrote: ...but I've been reading that you want to listen to it on the quieter side in order to get less reflections and room noise.

If your room is holding you hostage, then it is in your interest to address that.

Listening to music at a level so low that the room does not interact with it seems to me to be about the same as listening at a level so high that who can tell what is really going on in the mix.

Indeed, ymmv ;)

can you explain: better bass response?

Well, your speaker is only capable of moving a given amount of air for a given frequency at a given volume.
Now, if you change the room which that speaker is playing into, you change the characteristics of work load on the speaker. Meaning, if you make the room a speaker plays into a better place, a place without sonic energy buildup, then your speaker works better, sounds better and more fun is had.

Or so they say.

Who is they? Ask them.

stupidfatandugly wrote: can you explain: better bass response?

If you are talking about the 5" vs 8", then think about a when you were a kid playing in a kiddy pool. Are you going to be able to make a big low frequency wave with a spoon or a paddle? How about a high frequency wave?

The lower the frequency the longer the wave length. Long wave length means more air must move to make the wave audible. Big speakers have high mass, so they can't move fast enough to produce high notes efficiently, but they can move more air required to make bass tones.

Hello all.
I picked up a pair of Soundcraft Spirit Absolute Zero monitors a number of years ago used on ebay, not that I suggest using ebay all the time. They certainly sound great although they do fatigue the ears after a while. I really want to make a step up to Dynaudio some day!

Good luck in your decision!

GeckoMusic wrote: 8" will give you better bass responce than a 5"

That is true, and also the 8" have been updated to the Deluxe version. The better bass response also make them too bass heavy...

http://active-monitor.m-audio.en.audiofanzine.com/products/reviews/index,idproduit,137898,mao,studiophile_bx8a_deluxe.html

I actually own and use a pair of M-Audio BX8a monitors, and I have to say that they seem good to my ears. I really can't fault them, but then again, I haven't ever listened on any very nice monitors. 8) I still like to do panning in my headphones, and quite frankly, I use my headphones for almost the entire mixing and mastering process. If I really want to hear EXACTLY what something is doing, or maybe EXACTLY how the mix is sounding across the entire sound spectrum, I'll turn to the monitors. Btw, my headphones are Audio-Technica ATH-M40fs phones -- I also use them for monitoring and playing around on my edrum kit. But yeah, you want at least 8" speakers to get an idea of what your subs are doing, because small speakers aren't very good at that.

one of the greatest days of my life was the day i installed acoustic treatment to my room. i highly recommend treating your room. someone on his forum (i cant rmeember) told me to do that and it has made a HUGE diff.

I forgot about this thread

So it’s not possible to adjust the response curve of these monitors to adapt them to the room in which they’ll be used. Also you should be aware that there’s a vent at the rear of the enclosure: you will have to keep them a safe distance from the wall or it will affect the bass. This is a defect that was already present in the BX8a and which hasn’t been corrected in this version. In short, make sure you have enough space ...

this is what it said and I have a really small room so should I look at something else?

The biggest issue I have is monitors/room.

The thing about the rear port just means to make sure you're not sticking the monitors too close to a wall or corner.

I have cheap Alesis Ones (passive), a pair of the BX5s, and a sub. I know someone who uses the BX8s, and loves them.

I still have a major hole around 250Hz. Mixes sound great in the CR, but low-mid heavy (flubby, muddy, etc) elsewhere.
So you might want to look into room adjustments.
I've put up a host of auralex pads (behind, across from, at reflection points from the monitors), as well as some LERND bass traps under the pews in the CR (I record in a church, use the priest's chambers as the CR).
It's a small room (7x11' or so) w/ a high ceiling (easily 12ft or more).

It was suggested to me to make traps for the corners (fiberglass rolls w/ two 2x4s as a brace, covered in cloth). I think a cloud might also be a good idea. (for me)

Try reposting this somewhere in the section on acoustic treatment/studio building. Give specific dimensions, and include a drawing or photos if you can. See if there's any cheap fixes to your room before you go out and buy more monitors.

i don't have any monitors to begin with

If you can make your mix sound great on cheap speakers, it will only sound great to everyone else who has the same make/model of cheap speakers in a similar room. The rest of the world that hears your mix will wonder what you were going for.

I've used the Events and they are a very decent monitor at a reasonable price, I'd go with the 8" woofer.

Space wrote: [quote=stupidfatandugly]...but I've been reading that you want to listen to it on the quieter side in order to get less reflections and room noise.

If your room is holding you hostage, then it is in your interest to address that.

Listening to music at a level so low that the room does not interact with it seems to me to be about the same as listening at a level so high that who can tell what is really going on in the mix.

Indeed, ymmv ;)

I find this an interesting commentary. The response of a room is relative to the level of the sound input and the relative levels do not change by changing the overall volume. Otherwise either the amp./speaker combination or the room are non-linear and this is simply not the case unless you have a really bad amp! The only thing that does change with level is our ears response. Put another way, if a room causes a peak of 5 dB at whatever frequency, it will do that whatever volume you choose and whatever speakers you have.

Any room will not just suddenly stop interacting because you turned down the volume unless you turn it off completely, in which case there is nothing to interact with!

Having said that there is really no excuse for not having a well treated room as a priority. Beyond that, the mixing level you choose should be very much personal preference. Too high a level and you will go deaf (in time) and too low a level will impair you ability to discern problems at the frequency extremes.

Bottom line is that the frequency response of both the speakers and room is fixed, irrespective of level.

I'm perpetually disturbed by posts like these. Not the OP, just the whole direction of the posts in general... such as:

Use brand X monitor - they're awesome

speakers with a x" cone are better than a y" cone (Gecko - not aimed at your post - all things being equal or at least porportional, 8" cones will indeed move more air than 5" cones).

Put up some Auralex...

etc.

First and foremost -
MONITORING CHAIN IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT INGREDIENT IN QUALITY RECORDINGS (sorry for the mega emphasis...)

There are so many antecdotes as to why this statement is true, but the proof is in the pudding! When you mix on good monitors in a well-tuned room with trained ears, you will have a revalation that words simply cannot reveal.

Sadly, this is not cheap or easy to accomplish. Add to this, mixing on nearfields is an automatic compromise which adds a giant learning curve to the mixing process.

There are 3 components to the monitoring chain - the room, the monitors (amps are included in this whether it's an active pair of speakers or a passive plus external amps - in which case, power and speaker cables are factored in as well...), and your ears. If all three of these things aren't in top form, there will be problems with your mix. That being said, the area where (I believe) you can make the biggest compromise is in fact the monitors.

A good set of ears in a great room with a pair of M-Audio monitors will likely turn out a darn good mix with little problems.

A bad set of ears in an awesome room with an awesome set of monitors will turn out a bad mix. Similarly, a good set of ears with an awesome pair of monitors in a bad mixing environment will likely turn out a mediocre mix.

----End of rant 1----

----Beginning of rant 2----

It is possible to, for a very reasonable price, treat your room effectively and make it 1000x times better. However, this should be done carefully and with a great deal of research. That being said, we have a wonderful resource here in this forum in the Acoustics room - you can ask all sorts of questions and get amazing and detailed answers.

Simply slapping up some foam or similar (or much worse - carpet or egg crates on the walls!!!) treatments can quite possibly make the room sound worse. Auralex kits are great, but it's important that, if you use their kits, that you use their (free) service where they help you figure out how to place them properly.

----end of rant 2-----

----beginning of rant 3-------

Generalizations about loudspeakers are bad.

Generally, yes, larger woofers can put out more low frequency than smaller ones. However, it also has a LOT to do with the cabinet design and the room and the placement within the room.

Add to that, an 8" woofer coupled with a 1" tweeter can cause some serious problems if not done right. The 8" woofer is required to reach up in frequency to a point where the cone begins to break up or distort. At the very least, the frequencies will begin to "beam" past a certain point. If the tweeter is asked to reach down too low, it can heavily distort, overheat or even blow out with enough energy.

A LOT of speaker designers restrict the size difference between woofer/tweeter on 2-way designs to 6"/1". With nearfields, beaming isn't that much of an issue since you're plastered in the sweetspot anyway, but distortion and cone break-up can be a problem. (If you doubt this, try listening to a men's chorus or horn choir on a 8"/1" monitor and listen to the MASSIVE distortion you get when either ensemble puts out a decent amount of energy at their higher ranges).

Generalizations about price are bad as well. One of my favorite pairs of monitors (over MUCH more expensive ones) cost about $500 for a pair. The NHT M-00s are well-designed speakers that sound phenomenal at the expense of low bass (which can easily be supplemented with a well-paired subwoofer).

However, simply stating that "the new models don't work as well..." etc. are just bad generalizations. It may be true in your case, but by no means would companies put out inferior products to replace a previous, high-quality product. (That does happen in some cases, but it's very rare).

----end rant 3-----

Cheers all and happy mixing-
Jeremy

"(sorry for the mega emphasis...)"

NO PROBLEMS - CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL SO WE'RE ALL GOOD HERE.

ALSO, FWIW, I USE
(Shift, not caps lock)

...a $20 headset, HD280s, and some Creative computer speakers.
Why? Can't afford anything better and - DISREGARD THIS ADVICE - I want more/quality inputs before I worry about monitoring.

I also want a job >:|

If I might suggest an alternate route...
Buy a set of monitors with 8" speakers. Have a pair of nice headphones (which is something that most people have already, but if you don't, decent headphones will cost $80 to $100). The monitors will lie. The headphones will also lie. But between the two you can usually figure out an accurate picture of what is going on in the mix. I tend to do almost all my mixing in my headphones for multiple reasons, but I know that my headphones lie about the extended highs and the subs (I don't get enough of those frequencies with the headphones). I know that my monitors tend to be a bit sub heavy. I also have some cheap Behringer "studio headphones" I got for free when a company shipped the wrong headphones, and those by far tell the biggest lies: they have virtually no subs and the overall sound quality is sort of "dead." But, they are still a good reference point for how my mixes sound on less than stellar systems. Once you figure out how your different speakers lie, and have at least two different opinions (two different speakers), you can figure out what to do. I just don't think that anything less than $1,000 is gonna get you truly accurate monitors, and then there's the expense of acoustically treating your room. Just my two cents. :D

Thank goodness for this forum and the veterans (like Cucco, Remy, and many, many others) that take the time to post.

I know I'm as guilty as any to fall into generalizations.
If I mention a product, it's b/c I, or someone I trust has had *relative* experience and success w/ said product.
I've also learned to be more specific about things, and utilize the different sections of this forum (working on getting specs/drawings for my specific monitoring issues together for a post in the Acoustics one).

Whenever things get a little skewed, I know I can get my perspective righted here.

So Cucco:
Let's assume I have decent (and developing) ears, and my room is somewhat flawed.
I use AKG k240 cans, my monitors mentioned, and re-reference on car, home stereo, and laptop.
Please explain how nearfields are "an automatic compromise" and/or an alternative solution, assuming I can't install loudspeakers (or soffited) in my room?
I mention the specific gear only in hopes that you've used them and can offer some indication as to each's reliability and performance.

A lot of what I've read (relative, again) from pro mixers indicates they eschew the loudspeakers save for really sampling that bottom end, and that they mix on nearfields at lower volumes (primarily).

This post is about budget monitors, and I think your response will be topical.

Hey Soapfloats -

Your question is incredibly valid and a very crucial one that a LOT of people have but most never ask.

First, my thought to mixing on multiple speakers or doing "mix checks" on multiple speakers is a guarunteed way of wasting a persons time. Headphone checks are fine if your system has no capability for extreme LF - the headphones will help identify those issues (more about trucks passing by than how well the bass fits in the mix - headphones lie about that!)

If one were to spend all their time taking their mix to various systems to listen, what happens when they find something on one of their systems that they don't like? They go back to the main speakers and try to find/fix the problem(s). Now, that problem is fixed, but you take the mix around again and by fixing the first problem, you created 2 new problems.

The keys here are:
Every mix will have faults on some monitoring chain somewhere - which is usually due to a fault in the monitoring chain more than anything else.

If the main monitors are truthful and revealing (and this is MUCH more than just about frequency range - it's about depth and width (or soundstage), timing, neutrality, lack of distortion (or "color") and so many other factors) and play well within the room, then they should be the sole windows into your music.

I have a bunch of great sounding monitors - Dynaudio BM15s, Adam A7, NHT M-00, but never did my mixes work as well as when I finally bit the bullet and moved my mixing suite into my room that I usually dedicated to mastering (a 3500 cu/ft space that was built from the ground up for sound - floating walls and ceiling, 6" poured concrete floor, etc....). When I was mixing in my mixing suite - which is a much smaller room that is considerably more dead (due to its size and requisite acoustical treatments), I was getting a very nice, microscopic view of each mix, but it was hard to step back and hear the "big picture" so to speak.

However, there is validity to having that microscope, just as there is validity in having that large picture window into the music. In fact, in the work that *most* people on this board do (rock, hip-hop, country, etc.) the advantage tips towards the microscope. However, it's important to understand that, while you're working on the nearfields, that's precisely what they are - microscopes. That's why, I suspect, many people like to listen to their mixes on their car stereos - it gives that broader view that the near fields don't.

The trick here is to train the ear to accept the limitations of the near fields and adjust accordingly. Therefore, part of one's critical ear-training is listening on their near fields and then translating what that means when listening over their car stereos, etc. However, this can't be considered a second set of monitors - merely a glance at how you did your mixing and how it translated. Use this to LEARN the mixing process, not modify your mixes.

So, here's the kicker - this thread is about "budget monitors." How can I possibly be recommending or speaking of a room that cost me $17,000 with $4,000 loudspeakers and a $2,000 amplifier? That's absurd, right? Well, yes and no. Yes, it's not budget by the OPs definition, or for that matter, most "sane" people. However, in the grand scheme of things, I believe that anyone who is serious about the art of recording should strive for the best mastering chain they can afford - whether it be a $23,000 setup or a $230 setup. But, it's crucially important that the quality of this setup be routed in fact and science versus conjecture and generalizations.

Therefore, my advice is to learn as much about the acoustics of your room as possible. (This knowledge can come for free - your budget is an expense in time only. Or maybe $39.95 or whatever Rod charges for his book "build it like a pro...") Then, do a little research into loudspeakers. (Again, a free endeavor) Then apply those knowledges and your checkbook into an investment that makes fiscal and artistic sense.

Asking the question "What cheap monitors should I get" (paraphrased, of course) is fine, but it's important to understand that they answers that a question like this solicites will be as useless (in many cases) as tits on a bull.

A more logical question would be -
I have a budget of $xxxx and need to make my monitoring chain as good as I can for that amount...
would elicit far better responses
(BTW, not an attack on the OP, just an observation as to the human communication condition - make sure you're asking the question that will get you the answer you desire. If you truly desire to have people tell you what monitors to buy, ask "what's the best monitor for $$$" - otherwise, the answers you receive will do nothing but confuse you and whet your appetite for speakers to the point that you'll get a boner every time the Crutchfield catalog comes in the mail...)

Anyway -
By now, I've taken a noble soap box and turned it into a lecturn with a sacrificial virgin laid out before me. I'll stop before I turn the dead horse into Wendy's hamburger patties.

Cheers-
J
(y)

Cucco wrote: ...By now, I've taken a noble soap box and turned it into a lecturn with a sacrificial virgin laid out before me. I'll stop before I turn the dead horse into Wendy's hamburger patties...

I think we have a front runner for best collection of metaphors of 2009.

Sadly, it took me almost a year to get to reading this thread.

Jeremy, that is an excellent post, kudos to you sir!

This thread should be a sticky.

...Or I'll just bump it every once in a while, like now...
:wink: