x
sdevino 1 January 2004

I know that on occaission I tend to push for very expensive monitors when the topic comes up, so I thought I might list some reasons to consider going for the very best you can.

  • 1. The most important reason to get great monitors is you will spend an amazing amount of time listening to them. Whether you do audio as a profession or as a hobby, you probably love music. Having monitors that do not cause ear fatigue will add to your productivity and your enjoyment.
  • 2. How can you make microphone and preamp selections if you can't hear what they really sound like? In a good set of monitors it is very easy to hear very fine details that differentiate mic and preamp combinations.
  • 3. Your mic placement will be better because you will hear subtle differences between one location or another.
  • 4. You will make better use of the acoustics in your tracking environment, because you will actually hear subtle reflection and resonance issues. Then you can solve them before hitting record. Or even better you can take advantage of them to use natural acoustics to place instruments in a mix. (reducing the need for excess EQ and panning)
  • 5. Mixing will need less EQ and you will really hear just how muddy that excess reverb makes the vocals etc. Having an accurate sound stage is 100% dependent on the accuracy of your monitors.
  • 6. Your monitors will probably outlast you in the industry. Speakers are probably the cheapest and easiest thing to refurb when they get old. Any competent speaker reconing tech can rebuild a speaker to "like new" condition for $100 or even less. (I just had a 35 year old Altec driver for a Urei 813c repaired for $35). try that with any other piece of vintage gear!
    A good rule of thumb when starting out is to spend at least 40% of your total budget on the monitoring chain (amp + speakers). If you can spend more, then do it. You are better off with a great set of monitors and an SM57 then your are with a perfect U47 and a crappy pair of monitors. The reason is that with the good monitors you will clearly hear exactly what your current gear can do and you will know when it's good and when it sucks. You also be able to hear small differences in future mic and mic preamp gear that you evaluate and make better buying decisions.

    Some of you might say "Oh but what about all the pro's out there using NS-10s?". You should note that most pro studios power NS-10s with an amp like the Bryston 4B per speaker. Thats $3000 of amplifier per channel! Oh and they also get to listen to the reference monitors that are probably $30,000 custom Westlakes or equivalents. The NS-10's are used for mix reference and not generally for tracking.

    By the way this advice holds for home stereo speakers as well.

    Good Luck and Have Fun!

    Steve

    • Topic Tags

    Comments

    anonymous Sun, 03/28/2004 - 23:40

    Hello to all of you!

    I´m quite new in this site, but I´ve been reading to your forums for some time, and it is nice to see that pro-guys are sharing their know-how generously.

    I´d like to ask an opinion on KRK E 8 monitors, I just recently had a chance to do a mix on them and it was awsome! I´ve been working on Genelecs (1029 and 1030) for some time, and I must say that on Genelecs the result sounds "ready" a bit too early (compared to E 8s).

    anonymous Tue, 05/04/2004 - 19:19

    For all those who are considering purchasing monitors, perhaps for the first time, I think the best advice anyone can give you is to listen to as many as you can get your hands on. If you have a good relationship with an audio dealer they may even let you bring them to your home studio to try them out in the space you will be working in. It really is the only way to find "The Ones". Spec sheets don't do it, listening to the opinions of others is okay to give you some ideas, but it's your own ears that will make the difference. I purchased my first pair of monitors for my home studio just a few months ago. I had previously worked as an engineer in a post production environment and mixed on Genelec S30A's which sounded pretty good and laso mixed on Mackie HR824s which sounded pretty good considering the price range. But in my home studio I set a budget for the monitors and the ones I found in my price range that sounded good in my home studio were the Tannoy Reveal Actives. Many people may not like the sound of these, and honestly, I didn't think I did either when I heard them at the audio dealer's studio, but when I took them home and gave a listen, I was comfortable with them. The midrange was clear and accurate which in post production work involving a lot of dialogue that was a key for me. The low end is tight to a point and then disappears but that's okay. If I need to hear that low, I can get a matching subwoofer for the system. The point is, had I strictly gone by other's suggestions I would still be looking because I would be so confused. But people's experience can help you narrow down the options and many people were helpful when I was searching. Just make sure your ears make the final decision.

    Todzilla Thu, 05/27/2004 - 05:05

    Shouldn't it be said that the most important thing is the listening environment? By this I mean the combination of the monitors, the amplification and the all-too-overlooked acoustic character of the listening space?

    I've seen plenty of folks hemorhage(sp?) money on high-end monitors and then stick them in a room with little more than some chunks of undulating foam on the walls.

    anonymous Tue, 06/29/2004 - 22:26

    DO NOT go with Event. They are the worst company I have ever dealt with. They are quite literally the most unfriendly, unprofessional, lousiest excuses for business people I have ever had the distinct displeasure to deal with. And that is only when I was able to actually get a hold of them because, you see, they have a habit of ignoring emails and not picking up their phones and of not calling you back even when you leave nice messages. I own a pair of TR8s and was thoroughly unimpressed. They aren't all that flat as they hype them to be. "Tuned"...HA! Yeah right. And one of my pair went kaput after only a year of moderate use. In fact, in my experience with the company, I would go so far as to say they are cheap toys by a fly-by-night scam company with a wretched customer support dept who seem to have the same manufacturing strategy as most car companies...planned obsolesence. Do your research people! A good way to find out about a company is to get ahold of their service dept before buying their product. It's easy to do and you may just walk away with a better idea of whether or not you want to do business with the company. I didn't do this and now I regret it. I am out $500 dollars and I can't seem to get anyone at the company to answer their phones or their emails about a return authorization number. HORRIBLE company! BUYER BEWARE!!! :evil: :cry:

    anonymous Fri, 07/16/2004 - 13:43

    on tip you can think of is when you choose monitors you might consider "point scource" monitors like tannoy build them, you solve a hughe phase problem just by letting the entire frequency spectrum comming form one point only that means not only saving a chunk electronics wich correct the problem you create by placing the multiple components at different places in a cabinet ,the only phase diffenrence left with "point scource"are the two cabinets in respect of eachother (moving left with your head and right out of centre) and instead of going for new "modern" monitors why not look at monitors wich have proven themselves over the years maybe over decennia.
    i wouldn't go too small either , larger monitors work like a magnifieing glass they can give you a better view of you stereo image, bigger does not mean go louder btw.

    anonymous Mon, 07/19/2004 - 17:46

    Reference vs. Mix tool & AR18

    Does anyone else here use Acoustic Research AR18s? I find them to be a great compromise between a 'proper' monitor and a mix tool like the NS-10. And I can afford them, and they work in my tiny room.

    The discussion happening here seems to largely consist of people talking at cross-purposes. Surely there are two types of 'monitor'.

    1. A reference monitor for giving you maximum info on mic placement, source quality etc.

    2. A mix monitor to allow you to produce mixes that work on a range of playback systems.

    Let's face it, most people building project or home studios need their monitors to do both jobs, and often within the confines of a small space which limits useful frequency range anyway.

    Whether you choose ATCs, Dynaudios or Yamaha NS-10s you are making a compromise between recording accuracy and the ability to create a successful mix. I have completed recording projects working purely with either 'reference' or 'mix' monitors, and ultimately the results depend on what kind of system the mix is played on by its consumer. That is, what kind of stereo I play it on when I get home!

    Some (commercial) albums sound great in my car but awful when I get home. The same visa-versa. This is no accident! Your mix monitor should give you an idea of what the music will sound like to it's target audience. Fans of different genres are likely to use different kinds of playback system.

    There's no doubt that working with a quality reference monitor is more enjoyable (and easier), but it's not always a guarantee of the 'right' mix. Mixing rock on NS-10s is hard work, and your ears will not thank you, but these speakers have unique qualities that can give you great results.

    The problem with a speaker as 'bad' as the NS-10 (I'm talking in terms of having an accurate/flat frequency response) is that it is often almost useless when placing mics, checking a source for distortion, etc. You get the feeling it may be lying to you!

    What I decided was I needed a speaker with the immediacy and dynamics of the NS-10, but a more even, accurate (and listenable) frequency response. But nothing too over-engineered. I think its sometimes a mistake to believe that high-tech materials and complicated design are the answer. Look at how simple the old Ureis, Tannoys and Altecs are - paper cones, relatively simple crossovers - nothing weird to confuse your brain, but well-designed.

    The AR18s to me are a more accurate, nicer-sounding NS-10. They give me a great idea of what mixes will sound like on a shitty transistor radio, but I'm not left scratching my head when moving a mic around an acoustic guitar.

    x

    iznogood Thu, 07/29/2004 - 17:17

    Whether you choose ATCs, Dynaudios or Yamaha NS-10s you are making a compromise between recording accuracy and the ability to create a successful mix.

    but let's get something straight....

    it's not impossible to get such monitors....

    i work on a set of monitors that has both "recording accuracy and the ability to create a successful mix".... and that i can trust for mastering.

    then in the final stages of a mix or mastering i can check the levels and overall feel on ns10's and genelecs

    the problem (i think) is that the pro audio scene is far off when they produce "professional" monitors....

    i've been listening to all kinds of speakers since the age of 12 (i'm 33) and it seems to me that pro audio monitor developers are caught in between making speakers that play insanely loud..... and sound "great" to an untrained ear.... and that is completely idiotproof to use.... and most important... doesn't cost a dime ...... because people today don't wanna spend anything on anything..... even the thing that they live and breathe for..... music/audio

    sure sometimes the hifi-geeks drift into a parallel universe of insanely expensive gear..... but maybe the "pro" world should stop and take a listen.... and learn....

    btw these are the monitors that i love...

    http://www.danskaudioteknik.dk/sites/icon.htm

    i use them with a sub that unfortunately is a bit maladjusted at the time.... but nothing that i can't "listen around"

    they cost about $1500!!!!

    then of course you need a sub.... a 250 watt amp and some good cables (actually ours could be better.... but they always can..... argh :? i'm becoming a hifi-geek again!!!)

    my best advice would be to try and steer away from these endless masses of "aluminum dome and a 6 1/2 inch woofer with 2x80 watts" and fancy words like : "Directivity Control Waveguide™" or "logarithmic wave guide" etc. etc..... and take a look at some desent hifi/hiend speakers and maybe go on ebay and find a krell amp for 2k

    far to many musicians/mixers/mastering people are relying on bad monitors every day..... haven't y'all at some point wondered "why my mixes doesn't sound exactly like i want them to on the radio" ????

    i think that i have a talent for mixing..... but i'm useless with bad monitors...... and i think ..... so are y'all

    anonymous Wed, 08/25/2004 - 12:07

    Thank you to "iznogood" -- I think the pro audio folks can learn a bit from the hi-fi components and speakers.

    I've been happy with my Dynaudio BM6a (purchased with the advice of a pro engineer), but I liked the ProAc Studio 100s as well. Only thing is, the 100s *need* more lower bass extension below 70 cycles.

    Has anyone on here used B&W in their mix rooms? What about ATC bookshelves?

    anonymous Sun, 08/29/2004 - 06:05

    Hey michael,,

    I have the ATC scm 20 pro, neerfield monitors,,,, I can't personally compare them to any other name brand monitors, but I have had a few recording engineers give them a listen, who have tried most brands in their work experience, and would love a pair,,

    the one guy, who visited from Sweden ( i'm in Toronto, he plans to move here) was all set to buy Adam's and thought ATC were more musical and could listen to them longer,,

    Also, a mojor cross cananda radio station did 3 months of sound tests with genelecs, adams, ATC,, Klipsh ,,

    they even tried the ATC 20 consumer version ( hi fi) whicj is a couple grand less then the pro monitors, and bigger prettier case,,, basically, the radio stations even tried consumer high end monitors,,

    they did go with ATC 150 on mains, and " wanted " the scm 20 pro neerfield ) but chose Dynaudio Bm6a's for 2 reasons,,,, weight and cost, ( cost cause they needed mutilple sets )

    not sure if this is what type of info you wnated to hear,,

    peace

    SI

    anonymous Fri, 09/10/2004 - 18:00

    hi guys i m Shezan this is my first day in this forum so trying to read msot of the topics and also giving my opinions also and asking too i would like to ask you guys also... i have a pair of Genelac 1030A and KRK K-Rok
    i have digi002 rack... can you guys tell me how can i setup my 5.1 Surround setup by utilizing my current setup... and should these monitors be used for this purpose or i should go for other brands or products...i have been doing music for three years but now i wanna go for background scoring so wanna put some hand in surround world can you guys give me some tips and advices plz...

    anonymous Mon, 09/13/2004 - 19:58

    Thank you, Sanity Inn!! I was able to take the plunge after taking out a new mortgage on these babies,

    I bought the hi-fi version (non-powered) of the SCM-20 SL and am powering them with Bryston 4B-ST amplifier. I got them as a demo model and they sound amazing.

    I want to find another dealer in NY who has a pair so I can get one for the studio *and* for home listening. What's incredible besides the detail is the great bottom end for their size. This is where the ProAc's fall apart (but they are great, too).

    anonymous Fri, 10/01/2004 - 21:09

    I used a pair of Genelec 1029's for years and fought them constantly before finally I cheaply remedied the problem. I strapped a cheap graphic eq across them and started flattening them out with a spectrum anaylizer at several different volumes particularily on low volumes to take the room out of the eqaution, but I only used it as a general guideline, I didn't fully flatten them to the spectrum analyzer because the spectrum anaylizer doesn't take into consideration time quantities. The final tweaking I did with my favorite mix that I know plays well universally. Moderation was really the key because a cheap graphic eq can destroy the sound quickly, but anyway it worked great and my mixes are consistently better. I'm fairly sure I could use this technique on just about any pair of monitors with in reason, and save lots of money.

    iznogood Sun, 10/17/2004 - 17:47

    brokemusician2 wrote: I used a pair of Genelec 1029's for years and fought them constantly before finally I cheaply remedied the problem. I strapped a cheap graphic eq across them and started flattening them out with a spectrum anaylizer at several different volumes particularily on low volumes to take the room out of the eqaution, but I only used it as a general guideline, I didn't fully flatten them to the spectrum analyzer because the spectrum anaylizer doesn't take into consideration time quantities. The final tweaking I did with my favorite mix that I know plays well universally. Moderation was really the key because a cheap graphic eq can destroy the sound quickly, but anyway it worked great and my mixes are consistently better. I'm fairly sure I could use this technique on just about any pair of monitors with in reason, and save lots of money.

    i know that you're probably broke :lol:

    but you're the path that leads to the dark side!!! :evil: :evil:

    taking a pair of .... well .... less than desent monitors ... and strapping an eq with so much phase distortion that you can get without a phaser...... :?

    you MUST listen to and buy another monitoring system or you'll be forever DOOMED!! :lol:

    no seriously.... you will.... if i had money i would lend it to you .... because you are the worst case i've ever seen!!!! almost worse than people owning behringer monitors!!!!

    anonymous Wed, 12/22/2004 - 09:00

    BUT WAIT the monitoring system described by 'brokemusician2' is technically "flat" to ??Hz.
    )(*&^%$#@!

    No, that is the craziest thing I've heard a recording engineer attempt. If it's the money, it is time to start a charitable Christmas pool. Or just $ave up for something better in the used market.

    Just the other day on audiogon I saw a pair of ATC passive 12s for $1,200 what a steal! http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrmoni&1108058202

    I'm sure those G1029s cost you a pretty penny maybe $1,000 per pair back when you purchased them.

    wsiler Fri, 01/07/2005 - 14:01

    Holy Frijole, them is some expensive monitors out there!!!

    Yep. I would have to say my little ole $230 KRK ST8 monitors will have to do for now. I mixed Kashmir on them. Yeah! So there... No wait..... OK, so it was not as good as Kashmir but it ain't bad.

    All joking aside, the previous statements are true but you forgot one factor.

    Most people starting out will need to train their ear in the first place. So while having those $6200 monitors might work for you, you may not have the skills to tell anyway. Also, you idea that your monitors are about what you hear is right too. Your ear combined with your equipment will decide your final outcome. Not the equipment.

    Now if I just had $6200...

    Great information guys. Thanks for the comments.

    anonymous Fri, 03/04/2005 - 02:15

    Oh so glad you mentioned people are better off with a great monitoring system than heaps of hot gear and cheap crappy mons. (if you can't hear it, how can you mix it? guess work! or learning the systems flaws inside out..still innacurate way to do it for me!). My monitors are worth 50% of my studio easily

    Quested are well respected and they do quite a few larger custom monitoring systems for some of the studio's here in Australia.

    There are some advocates of them that's for sure and I've only met one, but he was a dealer of them. Still, he had the option to stock many others like Dynes etc but he chose these. A die hard you could say.

    Personally, I know he's your mate, but I'd check the retail price very carefully! I'd never go by retail...

    Sometimes items can be had for a lot less than even bargain price due to many factors like undersales, discont or about to be discontinued etc etc. Qith Quested it's not as likely, but it's worth checking on google extensivlee.

    You may be getting a great deal, you may not...worth checking!

    8)

    anonymous Sun, 03/06/2005 - 13:16

    i believe the most important aspect when it comes to feeling out a mix and what monitors to use is the natural human ability to adapt....every brand of speaker and model will have different response characteristics, it's the ability to adapt to your specific system . you have to know where your mix stands on your monitors in your controll room and how it translates on a variety of different systems and how you can manipulate that response by adapting to your "known" monitoring. bear in mind im not saying to just go out and buy a pair of "my first" aiwa speakers and a sanyo amp for your monitoring. I say instead of trying to change monitors or think more expensive monitors are gonna be a night and day difference spend a little more time researching and getting to know the charastics of your mixing environment, and how that translates to different "consumer" systems.

    kingfrog Tue, 03/08/2005 - 15:29

    Although I agree monitors are important, I think the use of a reference CD can make any monitor system valid.

    For those who do not have the big time cash and maybe even have Berhinger stuff (oh no!) I suggest you find a CD of the artist who comes closest to the tracks you are working on and play that CD on some tracks and A/B your mix and make adjustments to get you r work as close in sound and balance high and low to the reference CD using all the tools you have. If you like the Bass on a Sting song pop it in and EQ and tweek your bass track to sound alike to your ear on the same set of speakers.

    Same with high end..match the real pros and you wont have to worry about what it will sound like in the car or boom box unless you dont like the reference CD in those places either.

    This can work on any set of speakers and you wont have to guess since the reference CD was most likely recorded by those who have the bucks for the big tools.

    anonymous Wed, 03/09/2005 - 11:55

    Great piece on the importance of monitor speakers.

    Now...my question. Some people advocate getting speakers with a very flat response curve so you can hear exactly what you've recorded instead of what your monitor speakers are able to color up. Is there any truth in that? If so, what are some quality flat monitor speakers you recommend.

    anonymous Sat, 04/02/2005 - 23:33

    As far as flat (eq response) monitors are concerned, consider this:

    The most neutral monitor is only as flat as the room. One monitor that has actively addressed this problem is the JBL LSR6328P. They come with a remote/software to accurately analyze (and adjust to) the room.

    I know of some great engineers who prefered these to other more expensive brands (ie double the cost).

    zerosin Thu, 04/07/2005 - 11:35

    I wrote my current album using Alesis Monitor One MK2s with an Alesis RA150 amp. It was tracked through an Apogee PSX 100 clocked to an Aard Sync II and preamped through Avalon VT-737SPs. We monitored through Mackie HR828s during tracking and mastering.

    I'm about to start writing the next album and am a bit concerned about my monitors. I have added an Ego Systems SW-8000 sub to make my monitor setup 2.1. Since I engineer my sounds as I write, I was adding too much bass to compensate for the lack of bass produced by the Monitor One MK2s alone, which needed to be corrected during tracking and mastering. Now my setup sounds extremely close to the HR828s and is no longer bass deficient. I listened to the test masters of each song through about 3 dozen sound systems to make sure the material I felt was most important carried through in all or most systems; I feel it did.

    My question is, would anyone humor me and listen to my album through "pro" monitors and give an opinion? I would gladly provide the disc free of charge. I have heard it though many systems and would like to hear what some users of the pro monitor systems have to say so I can compare your monitors. Also to reveal any limitations of the HR828s that may have effected the recording.

    This is my first post here, so please be gentile. :wink:

    I can also post uncompressed tracks on my website for download if need be.

    kingfrog Thu, 04/07/2005 - 11:43

    I use the Alesis Monitor Ones as well. What I did was buy a Sub for them and purchased a pair of Mackie HR824. I A/B them using a variety of musical content and adjusted the EQ for the Monitor Ones until they sounded to my ear exactly like the Mackies. I then returned the Mackies and am comfortable with the Monitor Ones now.

    zerosin Fri, 04/08/2005 - 06:26

    kingfrog wrote: I use the Alesis Monitor Ones as well. What I did was buy a Sub for them and purchased a pair of Mackie HR824. I A/B them using a variety of musical content and adjusted the EQ for the Monitor Ones until they sounded to my ear exactly like the Mackies. I then returned the Mackies and am comfortable with the Monitor Ones now.

    Exactly!

    I have the crossover set so the sub and the M1MK2s reproduce about 10Hz of the same bass range so the bass is present in the stereo field too; this works pretty good. The sub has a phase adjustment too, which results in a pretty tight signal.

    anonymous Sun, 04/10/2005 - 18:25

    would it not make sense then to get some decent monitors solely for recording, so mic-placing mishaps etc can be resolved..and then run your recording through your bog standard home stereo for the mix down?? or am i insane..haha.

    i would like to buy some cheap monitors that will let me hear exactly what's going on - but not give me an untrue representation of the sound..any suggestions . by cheap i'm talking £250 for the pair.

    AFTER ALL! what is the point of recording something that will only sound good on fantastically expensive speakers?

    anonymous Sun, 04/17/2005 - 05:03

    You aren't mixing it to sound great on fantastic speakers! Wel, you are, but also great on anything, or at least as many systems as humanly possible!

    you are mxing it ideally on a pair of speakers designed if anything NOT to sound fantastic. They are designed and engineered to sound 'As It Is' in relation to the recorded material.

    If you listen to an average recording on an accurate monitor...it should ideally sound just that: average. A fantastic recording will sound fantastic...

    You are after something that reveals the truth as clearly as possible.

    i like to think of it as 'downwards compatibility'. though it's not a perfectly accurate analogy...

    Some very very expensive HI FI systems are designed to be musically flattering. Monitors are designed as much as possible and as much as the budget will allow to sound as accurate and 'flat' as possible, and to represent the transients and stereo field as much as possible:

    Accurate: true to original soundwave
    Flat: in relation to frequency response: few dips and/or peaks in the response....meaning bass, mid, treble and everything in between varies as little as possible in decibels...good monitors usually vary +/- 1.5 db to 3db max at any given frequency. The less the better.
    transients: the ability to reproduce the attack and decya of a soundwave...a monitor will have very natural and tight transients for accurate reproduction of natural att/dec characterisitcs of a sound...synthetic or acoustic. This is where words like "tight" or "flabby" come into play at extreme ends of the spectrum
    stereo field: is all about the 'soundstage' in which the soundwaves are placed. On a great monitor, not only can you tell that the flute is far back, you can tell how many feet and inches back it is :) and that it's four feet to the left of that singer... basically you can accurately place a sound source at its intended destination.

    Can you do all this if you can't hear it? Heck no! So you need to be able to hear it. The more of the above criteria you can filfil, the better your mixes will 'translate'

    translation: The ability to get the massage across clearly and consisely. You need to be able to hear someone talk clearly in order to do this, just like you need to be able to do the above clearly in order for your message (mix) not to get : lost in translation

    :D

    iznogood Tue, 04/19/2005 - 11:49

    "Some very very expensive HI FI systems are designed to be musically flattering. Monitors are designed as much as possible and as much as the budget will allow to sound as accurate and 'flat' as possible, and to represent the transients and stereo field as much as possible: "

    that's the most common misconception among engineers....

    of course there are some " very very expensive HI FI systems are designed to be musically flattering."..... but in general expensive hi-fi and hi-end systems are MORE revealing than socalled monitors....

    the current trend in monitors is an excuse for taking bad drivers and putting them in enclosures with BAD amp's at a rediculous price....

    the most perfect example is when dynaudio started making "pro monitors"..... i could buy a speaker with the exact same drivers and an amp way better than what was inside... FOR HALF THE PRICE!.... i still can....

    the notion that just because monitors sound awful they are revealing is plain wrong.... they're just sounding awful!!! and the most people are doing is to compensate for their awful unlinear and downright colored "monitors"......

    i think that is one of the reasons records are sounding so VERY poor today

    anonymous Wed, 04/20/2005 - 12:41

    hello... i will be visiting music gear shops in my town soon to listen to few monitors. i never did this so when i will listen to them there will be certainly some subjective like/dislike element in it as i will feel the sound but i dunno to what i have to listen on the technical side... freq. clarity, sound distrortion or cliping, ...?

    --resonant

    anonymous Thu, 04/21/2005 - 02:39

    iznogood.
    I was refferring to average lo end hifi systems... that most people of today consider HIFI...

    I would class exceptionally hi end HIFI's that are really clear and transparent as 'Audiophile' class not HIFI. Is this wrong ? Hi fidelity is the meaning of hi fi I know, but it seems these days we have LOFI HIFI & HIFI/Audiophile... Klipsch, B&W, NHT, ATC etc etc...

    If you think the Dynaudio's sound awful, I'm surprised! I find them a joy to work with & i've worked with a lot of the above mentioned Ausiophile brands. The translation is excellent as is everything else, and THAT is why I need monitors. They've seen a variety of studio's and spaces and they always give me a great translation to all types of systems. I've only owned them for two years and they translated mixes well out of the box pretty much, so it's not just a case of knowing them well...

    Do you really think powered Monitors are sounding that bad?

    >>>the notion that just because monitors sound awful they are revealing is plain wrong

    When did I ever say monitors should sound awful????? I said they should sound clear, transparent, accurate and have a good image and all the other factors..and even explained what each area means.... They should only sound awful if an awful mix is being played back on them!

    >>>"the most perfect example is when dynaudio started making "pro monitors"..... i could buy a speaker with the exact same drivers and an amp way better than what was inside... FOR HALF THE PRICE!.... i still can.... ,

    Well, you should be in business then, if you aren't already! Make me some for half the price and I will be a happy chappy. I will look at getting a loan and buy them.

    >>"i think that is one of the reasons records are sounding so VERY poor today"

    I think this has far more to do with CRAP music and the loudness war than anything else!!!!

    anonymous Thu, 04/21/2005 - 03:04

    Glad to read a lot of recommendations for ATC in this thread. I've always thought they tend to get ignored, perhaps because they don't have a big distribution chain yet they are absolutely cracking monitors.

    The minimum ATC to get IMO is the SCM50A.

    The 20s are good but don't really have the edge. They can sound a bit congested to me like they are having to work too hard.

    The thing with the 50 is that it is the lowest model which uses the SM75-150 mid range unit which IMO is ATC's secret weapon. You really need to hear it to understand why it is so good.

    If you are looking at some new monitors in the 5 to 7 grand range, it would be utter madness not to test the SCM50s.

    I am trying to work out a saving plan to get some SCM50As for my studio but it is going to be a while :(

    Mark

    x

    User login