Monitors for final mixing

[pinkieandtherev]

OK, so I'm still a relative newbie to recording. I don't have a LOT of extra cash right now...I'm presently unemployed. I'm trying to get my album done while I have the time to work on it.

I don't own a pair of studio monitors. Probably the best sounding speakers I have are my Technics 3-way home stereo speakers. I could do most of the final mix on headphones, but even there...

Any suggestions for inexpensive monitoring solutions, either speakers or headphones? Also suggestions for amplifiers. I know that most commercial PA gear is said to "color" the sound, so I'd be looking for a more transparent amp for monitors.

[mikeeb]

I have heard a few people say that you should not do mixing in headphones because it will not come out the right way. While it is possible, it will most likely make what you thought sound perfect sound off.

[gecko zzed]

If you are on a budget and you are unemployed, then headphones are probably what you need to settle for. It is true that mixing with high quality monitors will get you better results than mixing through headphones, but there is every likelihood that mixing through headphones will get you better results than through poor speakers.

Wander down to your local headphone shop, try out a few and check out the price of those that sound best for you.

Look also at sets of powered monitors. Have a listen to them and see what you think. Take along one of your favourite CDs to check them out.

[pinkieandtherev]

What defines poor speakers, though? What is the primary difference between a pair of studio monitors and a pair of commercial speakers? I have several pairs of PA-type speakers available, ranging from the humongous Peavey SP-2s down to the little Peavey Tri-Flexes that are roughly the SIZE of typical studio monitors (1" tweeter, 6.5" woofer), and a couple of pairs of nice home speakers (the Technics 3-ways I mentioned earlier being my primary stereo listening pair.)

I'm not trying to argue; I'm really curious as to the difference.

[gecko zzed]

Originally Posted by pinkieandtherev

What defines poor speakers, though? What is the primary difference between a pair of studio monitors and a pair of commercial speakers? I have several pairs of PA-type speakers available, ranging from the humongous Peavey SP-2s down to the little Peavey Tri-Flexes that are roughly the SIZE of typical studio monitors (1" tweeter, 6.5" woofer), and a couple of pairs of nice home speakers (the Technics 3-ways I mentioned earlier being my primary stereo listening pair.)

I'm not trying to argue; I'm really curious as to the difference.

The aim of a studio reference monitor is to reproduce as accurately as possible the sound that you've recorded. The high quality ones do that.

Curiously, the aim of commercial speakers is exactly the same: to reproduce the recorded sound accurately, and unsurprisingly, the high quality ones do that as well.

The significance of this is that there is little to differentiate between high quality monitors and high quality commercial speakers. The main difference is probably in how they are presented; monitors to fit in with a studio environment, hi fi speakers to fit in the a domestic listening environment.

However, if we are looking at budget, then there are variations in quality in both types, and one is not necessarily superior to the other.

The same applies to PA speakers: the higher the quality the better they are at delivering a first class sound.

Do you have a sub with your Tri-flexes? If not, you will find that they are short on the lower frequencies, because they are intended to operate with a sub. The SP-2s might be okay, but I've never heard them.

I would be inclined to give your Technics a run and see how you go.

As I suggested before, try speakers out with your favourite CD and see which ones give the most satisfactory sound. Let your ear be the judge.

When you come to doing mixes, you can compare your results with CDs of your choice. In that way you can compensate for any deficiencies your speakers may have.

[mixsit]

I agree mostly here. Decent HiFi is servicable, and in the end almost any speaker you have to learn it's quirks regardless. -really accurate systems just throw you fewer curves. Use 'phones for a cross check and for closer checks for details, the speakers for tone, balances, sound stage and panning (typically.
Compare their tones with your mixes against CD's and against how they sound in other rooms, other speakers.
If your room is untreated the low end is going to be lumpy' in any one spot so an edge there is to listen from different places in your room to get more of an average' veiw on the bass levels.

[pinkieandtherev]

Thanks guys! I've been around the pro audio game long enough to know that in most cases, you get what you pay for; there are some el cheapo speakers being marketed on eBay as "studio monitors" that aren't really.

I've got my eye on a pair of JBL Control 1x (i think that's the model #) that would be nice.

What it looks like I'll do, based on advice I've gotten here (thanks again, btw) is do a basic mix with my JBL Reference 220 headphones, then do a comparison with the Technics, the TriFlexes (I don't have the original TriFlex sub...wish I did, but I DO have a Peavey 215C Precision Transducer with high-pass outs, designed to do the same thing), the SP-2s, and anything else I can drag up. Given flat EQ, if I can design a mix that sounds good on all of the above, I'd be pretty sure it was a decent mix.

[Adam P]

I'm currently monitoring on a pair of Technics 3-ways with 12" woofers myself. I wouldn't consider upgrading them for anything less than a pair of B&W 685s. The Technics sound as good as any budget "monitor" that I'm going to find for $500 or less, and I have a good amp (Yamaha P-2200).

I check my mix on my Sony MDR-7506 headphones, car stereo, home stereo, TV speakers, cheap iPod earphones, built-in iPhone speaker, small computer speakers, etc. The Technics translate well enough for me.