What to buy Adam a7x or focal alpha 80

The A7X is a bit more monitor than the Alpha 80...and the prices reflect that.

That said, I went for the Focal Twin6 Be...but then, they are a lot more monitor than either of them and a lot more cost.
If you really want to compare some Focal monitors to the Adam A7X...you should take a look at the Solo6 Be. They are a bit more than the A7X, but for a smaller room they are going to sound great.

I love my Twin6 monitors...and the Solo6 are very similar, just more compact.
 
I've been mixing with A7X's for a few years now. They are very honest, I'm not tempted to try any other speakers. I also have a set of Mackie HR824's and Equator D5's. The A7X's are my main mixing speakers.
 
Hi. What to buy for my home studio Adam a7x or focal alpha 80? My mixing room is not to large.

Adams all the way.

I have Focal Sm9's. I feel you don't really get the essence of Focal engineering until you get above the Twin 6's, however, there are a good number of studios turning out commercial records using Twin 6's. I would say that if you go Focal the twin 6's should be the bottom of your starting point in their line.

I think for a speaker under $1k, the Adams are one of the best options on the market.
 
...there are a good number of studios turning out commercial records using Twin 6's. I would say that if you go Focal the twin 6's should be the bottom of your starting point in their line.

I think for a speaker under $1k, the Adams are one of the best options on the market.

You certainly make it sound like the Twins are somehow not that great..."the bottom starting point of their line"... :D ...even though you acknowledged that many studios use to do commercial records.

IMO...the Twins will beat anything in the lower price ranges...and that's the thing, talking about $1k monitors and $4k monitors is apples and oranges...not to mention the rooms each or used in.
I did a lot of comparison/review checking and reading...which is why I went with the Twins.
I think most home rec folks just make their choices based on budget alone.
 
You certainly make it sound like the Twins are somehow not that great..."the bottom starting point of their line"... :D ...even though you acknowledged that many studios use to do commercial records.

I never recommend them to anyone unless they are unable to afford Barefoots or SM9's, but if price is an issue, then I would much rather work with them than Genelecs. And yes, I stand by the notion that you don't really start to get the features of what makes Focal a great speaker company until you have the Twin 6's or higher. Regarding the Twin 6's vs the SM9's, I don't like how they setup the crossover in the twins and there's nothing you can do about it. They lack headroom, and they're not capable of forming the low end image that the Sm9 is. They don't reach that low, if you have twins and you need the range, you need a dedicated sub.

IMO...the Twins will beat anything in the lower price ranges...
I agree with this.

and that's the thing, talking about $1k monitors and $4k monitors is apples and oranges...not to mention the rooms each or used in.

Agree with you again on this. There are some drastic differences between an inexpensive pair of HS8's and KRK's, but I'm hesitant to say one is better than the other. The differences broaden as you get closer to the $10K mark, and beyond that, headroom and range are your key factors in the $30-60K range the flexibility to tune them to highly specialized rooms starts to become a factor for monitoring systems in the $100K - $500K range.
I did a lot of comparison/review checking and reading...which is why I went with the Twins.
I think most home rec folks just make their choices based on budget alone.
It depends on the focus of the home studio. A quick browse through peoples rigs on the UAD forum or on Pinterest will remind people there are some home studios with some pretty hefty setups.
 
I never recommend them to anyone unless they are unable to afford Barefoots or SM9's, but if price is an issue, then I would much rather work with them than Genelecs. And yes, I stand by the notion that you don't really start to get the features of what makes Focal a great speaker company until you have the Twin 6's or higher. Regarding the Twin 6's vs the SM9's, I don't like how they setup the crossover in the twins and there's nothing you can do about it. They lack headroom, and they're not capable of forming the low end image that the Sm9 is. They don't reach that low, if you have twins and you need the range, you need a dedicated sub.

Yeah, some folks feel that way about the Twins...also many do not....but I think it depends if you're doing a lot of bass-heavy music or not.
Other than that, IMO it's mostly about the high-mids, mids and low-mids...and the Twins nail that...plus their high-end is super-accurate.
If you consider that so many studios used NS10M's to mix on... :D ... and they had no low end, and a nasty high end...I certainly don't find any low-end problem with the Twin's low end. It's certainly not big-n-fat and thumpy....but it's tight-n-punchy, and for Pop/Rock, they're just right and sound really good, IMO.

It also depends on the space...too much low end in a typical small home studio space often ends up being more of a problem than a benefit....never mind when there's also a sub involved.
I had also considered the Trios, because I use to use Mackie 824's which have the big speaker and passive radiator, so I thought I should stay with a big speaker monitor...but I am glad I went with the Twins. AFA the SM9's...I wanted to get away with anything that had a "radiator"...it just didn't work well in my space with the Mackies...plus, I wasn't going to drop that much $$$ on monitors.
AFA their headroom...I don't notice any issues with that, and I've had both Classical and Dance/Techno running through them pretty loud when I was breaking them in.

It depends on the focus of the home studio. A quick browse through peoples rigs on the UAD forum or on Pinterest will remind people there are some home studios with some pretty hefty setups.

Oh for sure...I've seen some million dollar "home" studios...but on the whole, when you talk about "home recording", I think the bulk of them are in small/unflattering spaces and set up with very limited budgets...so talking about things like Barefoot or Focal SM9 monitors as some very acceptable quality target...I think is going to be lost on the bulk of home rec folks. I mean, even what you consider the lower end of the high Q spectrum...with like the Twins or some of the Adam monitors, etc...is already well over most home rec budgets.
I remember when I got the Mackies...people use to say they were kinda the bottom of the "acceptable" range...and the Twins are just so much better.
In the pro studio world...I think it's just a lot of upgrade madness. An time something new and much more expensive comes out...it seems everyone feels they need to upgrade to satisfy client perspectives.

Anyway....after about a year and a half with the Twins...I am even happier now that I got them, than I was when I first got them. :)
I find them about 10 times easier to listen to and mix on than my Mackie 824's...which often gave me problems in the low-mids and lows, even though they can cover those frequencies with ease. Compared to the Twins...the Mackies make the low-end murky and very thick-n-syrupy. With the Twins, I am actually hearing the low-end much better now...so go figure.
 
With all due respect to the "high end" aficionados, may I point out this 'is' a home recording forum.
The vast majority are running very modest studios.

Shitting on the Focal Twins, which happen to be a speaker that might be out of the price range for a lot of people here seems a bit elitist and snobbish.

Let's not focus so much on the philosophy of having the best gear to be worthy.
There are plenty doing good music with a laotop, a 2 channel interface and a set of 'subpar' monitors.

Many professionals are doing records with 'subpar' monitors as well.

A forum such as this should have the emphasis on how to utilize what one has to it's best potential.

Sometimes gearlust and gear envy overahadows the important. Learning the basics. And the basics start with good songs, good production, good recording.
The most expensive monitors will never fix a shitty song.
 
With all due respect to the "high end" aficionados, may I point out this 'is' a home recording forum.
The vast majority are running very modest studios.

Shitting on the Focal Twins, which happen to be a speaker that might be out of the price range for a lot of people here seems a bit elitist and snobbish.

Let's not focus so much on the philosophy of having the best gear to be worthy.
There are plenty doing good music with a laotop, a 2 channel interface and a set of 'subpar' monitors.

Many professionals are doing records with 'subpar' monitors as well.

A forum such as this should have the emphasis on how to utilize what one has to it's best potential.

Sometimes gearlust and gear envy overahadows the important. Learning the basics. And the basics start with good songs, good production, good recording.
The most expensive monitors will never fix a shitty song.

I think it's good to know what the next 1-2 steps up in quality are, relative to where your rig is currently at, because every little bit helps...though it's kinda pointless to talk about monitors (or any one piece of gear) that cost substantially more than many home studios have spent on all their gear.
On the high-end pro/commercial studio side...it's a completely different thing, and there are expectations that have to be met, regardless of what that gear actually brings.
Also...you have to look at the complete signal chain in whatever level of studio you have. Yeah, monitors are certainly much more important than most any other single piece of gear...but I can't see how a $6k-$8k set of monitors would benefit someone with a barebones home studio in a less than perfect space.
 
Shitting on the Focal Twins, which happen to be a speaker that might be out of the price range for a lot of people here seems a bit elitist and snobbish.

RFR, I didn't not shit on the Twins.

Here's what I said "And yes, I stand by the notion that you don't really start to get the features of what makes Focal a great speaker company until you have the Twin 6's or higher."

I did not say they are not good. I said that the Twins, 9's, Trios, and 11's are the models that really utilize what is unique and proprietary to their engineering designs.

The trios and 9's have a distinct advantage over the twins, which may or may not be applicable to some people. They have more headroom. That is not an opinion. That is a documented fact. They have different crossovers. That is also documented fact. When I said low end, I was talking about frequencies. Not quality. Furthermore, I acknowledged they have are used in many successful studios. I also stated that I would choose them over Genelecs in the same price range if given the choice.

This needs to be taken in context of the original post. His question was low end focal or Adam A7. I think the A7's are a better choice because the Focal name starts to mean when you drop below the Twin 6 model.
 
Other than that, IMO it's mostly about the high-mids, mids and low-mids...and the Twins nail that...plus their high-end is super-accurate.

I'm really glad they're working for you. Nothing against that. When I listened, I had a concerns about the 1-6k (hence the crossover) on the Twins, but I think the upper end of the hi's on the twins at 12+ was superb.

If you consider that so many studios used NS10M's to mix on... :D ... and they had no low end, and a nasty high end...
If you can make great music on an NS10 congratulations. Personally, I fucking hate those damn things. Doesn't make anyone who uses them any less of a human being, but I just can't stand them.

It also depends on the space...too much low end in a typical small home studio space often ends up being more of a problem than a benefit....never mind when there's also a sub involved.
I had also considered the Trios, because I use to use Mackie 824's which have the big speaker and passive radiator, so I thought I should stay with a big speaker monitor...but I am glad I went with the Twins. AFA the SM9's...I wanted to get away with anything that had a "radiator"...it just didn't work well in my space with the Mackies...plus, I wasn't going to drop that much $$$ on monitors.
AFA their headroom...I don't notice any issues with that, and I've had both Classical and Dance/Techno running through them pretty loud when I was breaking them in.
It sounds like these definitely were a good speaker for what you needed.


Oh for sure...I've seen some million dollar "home" studios...but on the whole, when you talk about "home recording", I think the bulk of them are in small/unflattering spaces and set up with very limited budgets...so talking about things like Barefoot or Focal SM9 monitors as some very acceptable quality target...I think is going to be lost on the bulk of home rec folks. I mean, even what you consider the lower end of the high Q spectrum...with like the Twins or some of the Adam monitors, etc...is already well over most home rec budgets.
I get that. The original discussion wasn't really over models in that price range. If someone just tells the guy to buy the Adam, the question is why? Doesn't Focal make super good speakers? Again, my answer is YES, but not until you hit the Twin or Higher. Below the Twin, I think the engineering and sonic advantages fall to other manufactures. That was the point I was trying to make here.
 
RFR, I didn't not shit on the Twins.

Here's what I said "And yes, I stand by the notion that you don't really start to get the features of what makes Focal a great speaker company until you have the Twin 6's or higher."

I did not say they are not good. I said that the Twins, 9's, Trios, and 11's are the models that really utilize what is unique and proprietary to their engineering designs.

The trios and 9's have a distinct advantage over the twins, which may or may not be applicable to some people. They have more headroom. That is not an opinion. That is a documented fact. They have different crossovers. That is also documented fact. When I said low end, I was talking about frequencies. Not quality. Furthermore, I acknowledged they have are used in many successful studios. I also stated that I would choose them over Genelecs in the same price range if given the choice.

This needs to be taken in context of the original post. His question was low end focal or Adam A7. I think the A7's are a better choice because the Focal name starts to mean when you drop below the Twin 6 model.

I understood what you meant...and I was kinda half joking when I said you made the Twins sound as not being that great... :D
...but stepping back and looking at the bigger picture, I agree, they are at the bottom of that Focal line compared to the Trios and SM9, and up...though TBH and fair, I hear a lot of folks praise the Solos, which are technically in that same Focal line, and would truly be the most bottom of that line, but I know they certainly don't find their way into big/pro studios too much...whereas the Twins have, as you noted.
That's why I did indirectly mention the Solos to the OP...and they would be the better/fairer comparison to the Adam A7 than the Focal alpha...and I agree that when you step out of that "Be" Focal range and go into their "inexpensive" line of monitors...it's just not the same Focal quality by the design and by the materials used.
I would take the Adam over the Focal alpha line...for sure. :thumbs up:

I also hear what you are saying about the headroom in the Trios and SM9s, etc....and in a big room pro studio, the Twins may not hold up as well....but I just don't monitor at loud levels. I'm hitting maybe 90 dB SPL when I'm monitoring "loud" most times...and the Twins still have plenty room left if I need that extra kick.
I still have the Mackies sitting next to the Twins if I want to feel the sub lows more...though TBH, I haven't powered them up in months, and while they can certainly deliver the sub lows well...I just like the sound of the Twins substantially more, including their low end, even if it's not as huge as it may be on the Trios or the SM9's.
I considered the Focal sub that would go with the Twins...just to have, but I didn't want to go there. I just didn't feel I was missing out on anything, because the Twins have a been a joy so far. :)
I never thought I would drop close to $4k for monitors (I also got the extended Focal warranty)...but I'm glad I got these and have zero regrets or doubts that I should have gone with something else.
 
RFR, I didn't not shit on the Twins.

Here's what I said "And yes, I stand by the notion that you don't really start to get the features of what makes Focal a great speaker company until you have the Twin 6's or higher."

I did not say they are not good. I said that the Twins, 9's, Trios, and 11's are the models that really utilize what is unique and proprietary to their engineering designs.

The trios and 9's have a distinct advantage over the twins, which may or may not be applicable to some people. They have more headroom. That is not an opinion. That is a documented fact. They have different crossovers. That is also documented fact. When I said low end, I was talking about frequencies. Not quality. Furthermore, I acknowledged they have are used in many successful studios. I also stated that I would choose them over Genelecs in the same price range if given the choice.

This needs to be taken in context of the original post. His question was low end focal or Adam A7. I think the A7's are a better choice because the Focal name starts to mean when you drop below the Twin 6 model.

Forgive me :D
It's just that a speaker that is currently completely out of my financial means (right now) being the bottom of their 'acceptable' offerings irked me. :D

Then again, I'm one of these lunatics that uses NS10s. Those, some Equator D5s and believe it or not, some KRK vxts.
The KRKs are just for tracking, cause it's no big deal should I blow a driver. Anything KRK other than the VXT line and the original models, which by the way used Focal drivers, are useless to me.
:D
 
Forgive me :D
It's just that a speaker that is currently completely out of my financial means (right now) being the bottom of their 'acceptable' offerings irked me. :D

Yeah...that's what made me initially respond...knowing how much I had to dig deep in my pocket for the Twins, and thinking all the time I was going WAY over the line with my monitor purchase.
I had a lot of guilt and buyer's remorse for a couple of days until they arrived...but then, like with all new audio gear, once it's in your hands, the cost of it tends to fade from thought. :p
At this point...I have no regrets, and I probably should have done it a few years ago...but I kept thinking the Mackies were "good enough".
 
though TBH and fair, I hear a lot of folks praise the Solos, which are technically in that same Focal line, and would truly be the most bottom of that line, but I know they certainly don't find their way into big/pro studios too much...whereas the Twins have, as you noted.

Here's why I don't completely agree:

Yes - They're made out of the same parts but one of two scenarios occurs when you step down to the solo 6's.

You either don't have the LF driver you get with the twins, or you have to buy a sub which raises your price point by $1800. You know from owning a pair of twins, that though the 2 speakers look alike, they're not doing the same thing. The one is sort of acting like a sub.

To anyone who's shopping and considering the Focal line, I would highly highly recommend buying twins over 2 solos and a sub. As I said...its similar components and guts, but the way the entire box is assembled makes a huge difference. You make a considerable step upward in the engineering design when you pay that extra $600 pr speaker to upgrade from the solo to the twins. I don't see how or why the Focal subwoofer itself is any kind of engineering marvel. I think the Sm9 (and arguably the Twin) are both ground breaking market defining products....as are the ATC's SCM 25s and SCM 45s, and same with the Barefoot (MM or MicroMain) series.
 
To anyone who's shopping and considering the Focal line, I would highly highly recommend buying twins over 2 solos and a sub.

There were "some" folks who mentioned they like the Solos w/sub over the Twins...but generally, and especially the first couple of years when the Twins came out, the majority were drooling over the Twins.
Of course...in the pro audio world, it's often about the next/new thing...so gear love affairs don't always last long, same as with people. :)

I'm often amused when initially there is all this crazy praise for a couple of years for some product...then things cool down...some new products come out...and suddenly the earlier praise has tuned almost into dislike and bashing...mostly because there's something new out, and everyone is keeping up with the Joneses.
Never mind that the original product is performing the same as it was when it initially came out, and the only think that's happened is new gear lust! :p
 
There were "some" folks who mentioned they like the Solos w/sub over the Twins...but generally, and especially the first couple of years when the Twins came out, the majority were drooling over the Twins.
Of course...in the pro audio world, it's often about the next/new thing...so gear love affairs don't always last long, same as with people. :)

I'm often amused when initially there is all this crazy praise for a couple of years for some product...then things cool down...some new products come out...and suddenly the earlier praise has tuned almost into dislike and bashing...mostly because there's something new out, and everyone is keeping up with the Joneses.
Never mind that the original product is performing the same as it was when it initially came out, and the only think that's happened is new gear lust! :p

All so true ^^^^^ Still use my NS10's LOL.

Alan.
 
All so true ^^^^^ Still use my NS10's LOL.

Alan.

Still use my NS10's as well. Also my Equator D5's Funny how when they came out, D5's were all the rage and praised to high heaven. Now no one knows about them except a few (mostly owners).
And the irony is they sounded great then, and they sound still just as great now.
But gearslutz gotta get that rush from the latest
:D
 
Back
Top