Do you really need "monitors" vs "regular" speakers...

[Pinky]

Anyhow, I'm sure everyone here would love to have $1000+ monitors (and, in a way, I suppose I do--except mine are around 30 years old and not even made any more). However, this is a home recording forum, not an industry forum so the real trick is working out what works okay at a price the enthusiast can afford.

I have to post something similar from time to time, as the members here with deep pockets essentially build studios in their homes but call it a 'home' studio because their bedroom is somewhere under the same roof. Or those who actually run small studios that are involved here, who sometimes forget the financial realities of our largest user base.

I'm doing very well with modest equipment. When I first arrived here I had very limited money but managed to learn a lot and produce adequate recordings with what I had. As time went on my financial situation improved and so did my equipment. Technology has done most of the work on my mixes for me though, the explosion and quality of VSTs has elevated my abilities with nominal expense. Prior to that, I literally couldn't afford to sound 'good'.

 

[Farview]

The reason I was listing all my monitors was to make the point about active vs. Passive. Someone earlier was under the impression that the difference between hi-fi speakers and studio monitors was studio monitors were active and hifi were not.

The Equator d4 and d5's are good at a cheap.price point. The Mackie monitors are pretty good too. Most everything else is overhyped junk.

 

[Bobbsy]

Indeed.

My monitors mentioned above are passive (Rogers Studio 1) and, although I don't use them any more, I have a pair of BBC LS 3/5A nearfields, also passive.

At work (before I retired) we had a mix of powered and passive depending on the use and how long ago. For example, our most recent suites had powered Genelecs which I loved.

Basically, good monitors can go either way.

 

[joey2000]

Most everything under 500 bucks is junk

Change that to about $250-300 and I'd agree. Based on what I've seen/heard/been told (ie by people who would know and who's judgment I trust), you can get some very nice (not gee-whiz, top-of-the-line amazing) smaller monitors starting around $300ish/pair.

Anyway, appreciate all the replies. I'm a rank amateur but not an idiot (well most of the time anyway). I don't need pro-level, diminishing return type upgrades which 99%+ of the people out there couldn't hear anyway, just a reasonable quality.

 

[Farview]

Which monitors around 250-300 are good?

 

[Pinky]

Yamaha, KRK, and M-Audio make decent home recording caliber* monitors in the 300-600 range/pair. I find the 5" driver monitors lack enough bass response for most music, but the 8" models are improved enough most people wouldn't want or need a sub. I still have a sub with my 8" monitors though.

* the issue is what people deem worthy of home recording setups.

 

[mjbphotos]

The reason I was listing all my monitors was to make the point about active vs. Passive. Someone earlier was under the impression that the difference between hi-fi speakers and studio monitors was studio monitors were active and hifi were not.

No, actually my point was that Best Buy had virtually nothing worth looking at that didn't need a power amp to drive them. Apples and oranges. A pair of "hifi" speakers costing $250/pr plus a power amp costing $150 is likely no better than a pair of 'studio monitors' in the same price range, and most likely not as good. Back in the 80s I worked at a hifi store, and there were very few speakers that didn't color the music in some way.

As others have pointed out, this is a forum for home studio folks. 90% of them (me included) have a limited budget for all gear. Figuring out what works best for our music and mixing/tracking rooms is what most people want to know. No matter what speakers are used, its a matter of learning them.

Interesting "audiophile" review of hte JBL LSR305 here.

 

[joey2000]

No, actually my point was that Best Buy had virtually nothing worth looking at that didn't need a power amp to drive them.

Best Buy and the like have almost nothing, period. The days of anything but specialty stores having more than the tiniest bit of audio equipment (never mind quality stuff) are about over.

I miss that.

 

[Farview]

I guess I shouldn't have mentioned Best Buy, since I haven't actually walked into one in over a decade. I was using it as a generic term for "the place you go buy reasonably priced stereo equipment"... Pawn shop. maybe.

 

[Farview]

No, actually my point was that Best Buy had virtually nothing worth looking at that didn't need a power amp to drive them. Apples and oranges. A pair of "hifi" speakers costing $250/pr plus a power amp costing $150 is likely no better than a pair of 'studio monitors' in the same price range, and most likely not as good. Back in the 80s I worked at a hifi store, and there were very few speakers that didn't color the music in some way.

Did I read this wrong?

Have you been to BB lately? They've got almost nothing on the shelves for 'bookshelf speakers'. Even on line, there less than a handful of powered speakers available from them. Home stereo speakers tend to be unpowered, and that's the biggest differnece between speakers marketed as 'studio monitors' vs home audio (stereo) speakers

 

[John Willett]

However, this is a home recording forum, not an industry forum.

But .....

Many amateurs I know have better equipment than a lot of professionals - and take better care of it as well.

I know many amateurs that think nothing of spending thousands on microphones, let alone monitors.

A friend of mine spent £12,000 or so on a pair of professional monitors for his room that was smaller than most bedrooms.

My own monitors were about £8,000 for the large nearfields and £2,000 for my small portable monitors.

So - saying "home studio" doesn't (or shouldn't) imply "cheap and nasty".

At the lower end of true professional monitors, the Neumann KH120A is excellent value at around the £1,000 mark.

Slightly lower, the AE22 were also excellent value before they were discontinued - the last ones being sold off for under £500 a pair and superb value (there may still be some left, it was a few weeks ago I last looked).

At the bottom end, the Equator D5 is probably the only one I would trust - about £400 / $400 (see- much better value in the USA).

 

[Farview]

And don't think that your only option is to buy new. Those Urei 813c's I had were bought used in 1998 for (I believe) $1500. I sold them for $900 a year and a half ago. I believe they were around $10,000/pr new in the 80's.

You should be able to get a pair of Mackie HR824's used for around $400-$500. Those are perfectly workable speakers that retail around $1000.

 

[Bobbsy]

But .....

Many amateurs I know have better equipment than a lot of professionals - and take better care of it as well.

I know many amateurs that think nothing of spending thousands on microphones, let alone monitors.

A friend of mine spent £12,000 or so on a pair of professional monitors for his room that was smaller than most bedrooms.

My own monitors were about £8,000 for the large nearfields and £2,000 for my small portable monitors.

So - saying "home studio" doesn't (or shouldn't) imply "cheap and nasty".

At the lower end of true professional monitors, the Neumann KH120A is excellent value at around the £1,000 mark.

Slightly lower, the AE22 were also excellent value before they were discontinued - the last ones being sold off for under £500 a pair and superb value (there may still be some left, it was a few weeks ago I last looked).

At the bottom end, the Equator D5 is probably the only one I would trust - about £400 / $400 (see- much better value in the USA).

All I can say is that you must mix with (pun intended) some very wealthy people. Even when designing professional studios (admittedly broadcast) we didn't spend money like that on monitors. Small rooms tended to have Genelecs or LS 3/5As and larger control rooms had things like Rogers Studio 1, Kef 104ab or similar. Of course what helped was having Sandy Brown come in and make sure the acoustics were right.

...and if you notice that I've mentioned owning Studio 1 and LS3/5a for home use, it's not a coincidence. When we moved to a new, much larger building we had to stay continuously on air so everything was replaced then we sold the old stuff...most of the speakers went to staff (like me).

 

[Pinky]

But .....

Many amateurs I know have better equipment than a lot of professionals - and take better care of it as well.

I know many amateurs that think nothing of spending thousands on microphones, let alone monitors.

You must have missed (or ignored) my post.

Building a studio in your home/using all studio grade equipment does not make it "home recording".

There's a lot of "pro" engineers that mix like amateurs, so the only consistent defining element of home versus studio is the gear.

 

[gecko zzed]

You must have missed (or ignored) my post.

Building a studio in your home/using all studio grade equipment does not make it "home recording".

There's a lot of "pro" engineers that mix like amateurs, so the only consistent defining element of home versus studio is the gear.

I think that identifying the definitive difference between home and non-home recording is problematic. But I think it is more than just gear.

I also think that trying to figure out a difference is probably not that important. I think there is a broad continuum between rank amateur using a plastic karaoke mike plugged into a laptop with cracked software, and the most professional outfit using the best gear in the best way possible. Somewhere along this continuum is the transition . . . but it is gradual, not abrupt.

 

[joey2000]

I guess I shouldn't have mentioned Best Buy, since I haven't actually walked into one in over a decade. I was using it as a generic term for "the place you go buy reasonably priced stereo equipment"... Pawn shop. maybe.

I wouldn't buy a stick of gum at a pawn shop. Really music stores are about it now.

All I can say is that you must mix with (pun intended) some very wealthy people.

lol no kidding. I about fell out of my chair at spending that kind of money and it's not even one's profession. Must be nice.

 

[Bobbsy]

I wouldn't buy a stick of gum at a pawn shop. Really music stores are about it now.

Don't discount them--if you know audio you often know more than the pawn shop people.

I have to walk by one that happens to be near a regular appointment every couple of months. Usually I walk out empty handed but just occasionally I've found some real bargains--a couple of SM58s (real ones...I checked) at $15 each, some perfectly good speaker stands for live work at $10 each, that sort of thing.

Right now I'm trying to convince myself I don't need the Allen and Heath mixer they have in there for about $100...mainly because I don't need it.

 

[Massive Master]

The problem with pawn / resale shops these days is: The internet.

Back in the day, you could find great deals on stuff. Now, between ebay and Google, everyone knows what everything sells for.

 

[RFR]

Yup. Even ten years ago.
I knew a guy who owned a pawn shop. When someone came in to sell something, the first thing that he'd do was to check ebay completed auctions.

Even if 2 minutes before he had no idea what it was, or what it was worth, now he did.

No spectacular deals in pawn shops anymore.

 

[Chris lawton]

My quick 2 cents

I have monitors and speakers and it's just all about knowing your speakers . You could mix on a crappy pair of headphones if you knew them headphones inside out and what frequencies they exaggerate or don't exaggerate. Monitors are easy to mix on because they have quite a flat response . But asking as you know your speakers well I don't believe there is a need to purchase monitors for a small home studio set up.