I'm pretty sure that everyone here agrees that cables make a difference. If there is anyone else that doesn't think so, lets hear it.

I think cables make a difference, but it's more along the lines of 'suitable or not.' than expensive vs. cheap. Speaker and mic cables seem to make more of a difference to my ear than one good quality line cable vs. a second. Good speaker cable, for example, is not expensive to make- lots of fairly pure copper, and you're there.

I think it was Masterfonics that uses single strand copper welding cable thick enough that they have to strip off some of the copper just to get it in the speaker jacks. That stuff's not expensive.

Originally posted by Michael Fossenkemper:
I'm pretty sure that everyone here agrees that cables make a difference. If there is anyone else that doesn't think so, lets hear it.

Well,
I have never tried any of the esoteric cable so I should really shut up. Anyway I think here is definitely a difference between bad and good cable, but the esoteric stuff is probably BS. On the other hand I would put that single stand speaker cable in the bad category, because (without resorting to calculating the actual numbers) skin effect would give an impedance with a stronger frequency dependency than necessary.
(It might be that the effect is ridiculously small in which case I would immediately upgrade the cable to 'good')

From what I understand, the actual theory behind skin effect means that you'd need miles of cable for it to be an issue.

What about the BM5a? Has anyone used them? I love my BM6a but I thought about
buying a pair of 5s for my second reoom:
Thanks!

I have a pair of Dynaudio passive BM15's connected to 2 Denon monoblock amps (2x 300W). I compared them with the active BM15A's and guess what? The passive ones sound better then the active ones. I first put pink noise thru both systems and calibrated them to put out identical power. No eq was used. The passive set sounded more dynamic and had better and tighter lowend.
I think the slewrate and damping factor of the Denon amps are better then the amps in the BM15A's. Just my observation. Ymmv.

has anyone used the BM5´s?
Skin effect inside the recording studio?lol

Just to chime in on the chatter, I recently purchased a pair of BM6A's for my mastering suite and I'm really impressed with many aspects of these speakers. I also own an NHT Pro System (in the main studio control room) with the A20 speakers and a pair of the C-20 monoblock amps. Prior to purchasing the BM6A's I was fortunate enough to audition a few different speakers including the new Yamaha MSP10s and the Genelec 1030As. To my suprise, I actually preferred the overall sound of the Yamaha's over the Genelecs. But the BM6s won the contest hands down.

I picked up a pair of these for $1499 from a local boutique recording shop (there were very clean demo units). In my opinion, there is nothing comparable in that price range.

Jeff

Hi!

i just replied to a similar thread about Dynes.

Thanks to AudioWkstation for the insight into the components of Dynes and your intersting experience with the 'guts' of these speakers...really interesting stuff !!

i've been using the BM15a's for about two years now. I've happily mixed on many brands & many models within those brands, incl the largest and smallest Genelec (yes, the soffited mains and also those little metal jobs) and JBL's, Alesis, adam, Tannoy and KRK.

The best provider of 'easiness on the ears' and the most 'accurate provider of mixes' that translate extremely well (even with little to no 'learning' and an average room) are the dynes.

Out of the above manufacturers, I chose the Dyne BM15a's due to those reasons and various others, inculding cost, build, appearance, reputation, reviews etc etc....

They are well respected and you cannot go wrong with them!

I've heard many repetitions of the 15a's being wooly on the bottom end dept...but they are no more 'wooly' than Genelecs, Quested, NHT, ADAM, JBL, Tannoy, Mackie or any of the others main manufacturters.....

I haven't heard Westlake or Krell, or any of those really high end brands..they are a new league....so can;t compare these to the Dynes...but you may be looking at tighter bass if you went up there...

Wooly bass? I don;t think so...check your room treatment! you traps have fallen down if you think this...

They exhibit some of the tightest low end transient response I've yet heard come from a monitor in their class..

hope that helps at least a bit.... and everyones ears & rooms are different....so as always, never take one persons word for it (or even ten people...millions have been known to be wrong before...see nazi germany).

(edited) I've just noticed above that the Dynes sounded better with Denon mono block amps...interesting. I haven't had the pleasure of trialing the passives, but of course it's possible the Dynes could sound tighter with a different amp to drive them... good news, as wouldn't the the combo of Passives and the Den amps be a more affordable option?

Hey guys - great multi-purpose topic!!!

First, as to the high-end cables. Yes, cables can play a huge role. True there are only a few aspects in which cable can differ, but even slight differences make for noticeable sound difference. Much moreso than even different power amps or D/As!

Personally, I just purchased a pair of the BM15 Passives. These things are beasts. I'm used to mainly B&W's, Paradigms, NHT's and Genelecs and frankly, none of these compete against the BM15 (Hafler P3000 powering them). They have usable frequency content all the way down into the low 30s and they are oh-so-smooth on the top end. Imaging with these is terribly easy and minute EQ adjustments come through just as you would expect them to.

ONE NOTE----------

Break these speakers in first. Over the course of 1 week feeding pink noise through them over night, the sound changed dramatically. At first, I thought they were a bit etched and cold - after a week of 8 hour pink noise at increasing levels (Day 1 85dB @ 1 M - day 7, 95 dB @ 1M) they opened up and sang.

I can't imagine a better monitor for anywhere near the price.

J...

P.s. I tried most of the Adams and just didn't like them that much - maybe they benefit a great deal from a week's worth of pink noise too.

Cucco, post: 134952 wrote: Hey guys - great multi-purpose topic!!!

First, as to the high-end cables. Yes, cables can play a huge role. True there are only a few aspects in which cable can differ, but even slight differences make for noticeable sound difference. Much moreso than even different power amps or D/As!

Personally, I just purchased a pair of the BM15 Passives. These things are beasts. I'm used to mainly B&W's, Paradigms, NHT's and Genelecs and frankly, none of these compete against the BM15 (Hafler P3000 powering them). They have usable frequency content all the way down into the low 30s and they are oh-so-smooth on the top end. Imaging with these is terribly easy and minute EQ adjustments come through just as you would expect them to.

ONE NOTE----------

Break these speakers in first. Over the course of 1 week feeding pink noise through them over night, the sound changed dramatically. At first, I thought they were a bit etched and cold - after a week of 8 hour pink noise at increasing levels (Day 1 85dB @ 1 M - day 7, 95 dB @ 1M) they opened up and sang.

I can't imagine a better monitor for anywhere near the price.

J...

P.s. I tried most of the Adams and just didn't like them that much - maybe they benefit a great deal from a week's worth of pink noise too.

If you don't break your speakers in like this, does this mean they will "never open up" or be quite a good using a different method? I just played various music styles and levels over a course of a few weeks and I figured they were broken in? Is pink noise the right way to break in speakers?

I have a disc for break in (of almost anything). Pink, bandpassed noise sweeps, sine sweeps, bass warbles, jazz, classical, metal.

If we both have the exact speakers: Does this just help speed up breaking them in or does this make your speakers sound better than mine ( indefinitely)?

Just speeds up break-in.

Interesting, thanks John. Here is some added detail to the question. Pink noise would obviously break them in equal, correct?
Do tweeters need a break in?
Is there a point where the speaker is producing more or less certain frequencies more than others until fully broken in?

Typically, the tweeters break in first (although if they're silk-dome, non-metallic stuff, they 'mellow' some over a month or so). The woofers go up and down (down more when warm, then up when cold, then down more when warm, up less when cold, down even more when warm, etc., etc., etc.) for the first 2-400 hours. My Tylers could hardly handle 40Hz well when they first arrived. After a week of "exercise" 30Hz wasn't an issue. After a while, 25Hz was clear as -- well, clear as 25Hz can be I suppose...

I use some pink -- but I'm more of a fan of "use 'em like you'll use 'em" -- plus some pink. More band-passed pink sweeps than pure pink. Pure pink seems ---- excessive... Borderline "abusive" (for lack of a better term). Speakers never have to deal with that under normal use. Certainly shouldn't really hurt anything in the short term and it's obviously necessary for calibration and what not, but I just don't want to subject them to constant energy top to bottom without being able to cool off. I've had better luck (especially with woofers) using clean, high-impact, high-dynamic material at "working volume" -- And it's a whole lot more fun to listen to. Plus, you get a big head start on learning the speakers while you're breaking them in.

Thanks John.

Hey, those Tyler D1’s look pretty fine. One day I will get there. Kudo's.

I would not rely on either monitor solely for mastering work, I did work on BM6's for a while but had some floor standers to check the bottom end on.The BM6 is more accurate but probably does not have quite the same "in room" extension of the BM15 which is less accurate overall IMO.

I always hate putting new drivers in and trying to get them to the point where I can work on them. I don't use pink for the reasons john gave. I just grab a stack of CDs and play them for awhile. Its fun to listen to them bloom as they break in.

In saying this the Dynaudio Acoustic monitors offer just about the best value for money mixing speakers in the industry IMO.
When you compare component quality and build quality + sonic performance they really are very good indeed.

I have a new pair of Neumann's KM120 coming this month which I will be placing them beside the BM6A's. Mine are the Mosfet BM6A and I love them. +10 for Dynaudio.

have you got the speakers in yet? would be curious as to your thoughts on them.

Yup, they arrived a few days ago. They are awesome. I can't image what the big boys sound like.

Obviously way too early for me to say much on them, Michael, but my initial impression was wow, awesome mid range. The dynaudio now seem to be missing so much in the mids compared. This difference is huge. Is this a good thing or bad thing, I don't know, but they do sound great.

I still love my BM6A.

Well thats the issue isn't it. Is it better or not? I would bear in mind that there is not
such thing as a perfect speaker, well at least that I have heard so far.

Let me put is this way when I installed my IB1's I kept the BM6P's
and I will not be moving them out of the room and for good reason.

You need to understand the deficiancies of any given speaker to make sense of it all.