In case it wasn't mentioned before, there's a pretty good article (at least I liked it) on monitors in this months Electronic Musician. No specific recomendations, just basic info. It focuses mostly on near-field monitors, but goes into some interesting topics like types of distortion, accuracy vs translation, etc. It's was refreshing to hear that someone the author looks up to was doing most of their work on Radio Shack monitors.
Good Article on Monitors In Electronic Musician
- Thread starter Kaydis
- Start date
darrin_h2000
Banned
linuim lx5
alot of guys dont know about these but they are very accurate and inexpensive at 59.00 each right now.
and before anyone puts thier nose up at these check out the soundchaser studios website and you will find a pair on top of thier console. not bad for radio shack huh. by the way its the only piece of equipment by them i use.
like it or not big studios are using them. check out equiopment lists for some of the studios on the web and you will find lx5 pro's on them.
alot of guys dont know about these but they are very accurate and inexpensive at 59.00 each right now.
and before anyone puts thier nose up at these check out the soundchaser studios website and you will find a pair on top of thier console. not bad for radio shack huh. by the way its the only piece of equipment by them i use.
like it or not big studios are using them. check out equiopment lists for some of the studios on the web and you will find lx5 pro's on them.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
A bit naive about studio techniques Darrin_h2000?!?
I have a Radio Shack speaker in my control room too... it is used the same way as Auratones were - a cheap crap-ass speaker to check mixes against as a third reference, representing the sound one might hear on cheap consumer (Walmart!) oriented stereos....
So yeah, studios are gonna have crappy speakers lying around in the control room... but realize WHY they're there - only as a checkpoint, they're sure not going to be used as primary nearfields!!!
Bruce
PS, and at $59, they are hardly going to be "very accurate!" now, will they???
seriously...
I have a Radio Shack speaker in my control room too... it is used the same way as Auratones were - a cheap crap-ass speaker to check mixes against as a third reference, representing the sound one might hear on cheap consumer (Walmart!) oriented stereos....
So yeah, studios are gonna have crappy speakers lying around in the control room... but realize WHY they're there - only as a checkpoint, they're sure not going to be used as primary nearfields!!!
Bruce
PS, and at $59, they are hardly going to be "very accurate!" now, will they???
seriously...
Dolemite
New member
Bruce,
The Optimus LX-5's are actually said to be quite good at least from a normal home stereo system (non-monitor) standpoint. The have lineaum ribbon tweeters that are supposed to provide a highly-detailed high end. I can't vouch for them personally but I have heard their big brother the LX-8 (now out of production) with the same tweeter, and I'd say it was excellent.
http://www.audioreview.com/reviews/Speaker/product_8845.shtml
The Optimus LX-5's are actually said to be quite good at least from a normal home stereo system (non-monitor) standpoint. The have lineaum ribbon tweeters that are supposed to provide a highly-detailed high end. I can't vouch for them personally but I have heard their big brother the LX-8 (now out of production) with the same tweeter, and I'd say it was excellent.
http://www.audioreview.com/reviews/Speaker/product_8845.shtml
tubedude
New member
Calling Sjoko and all the bigwigs...
How about we put the call out and see if one of our "good eared" friends will pick up a pair, check em out, and perhaps return them. For $120, I doubt if it would kill anyone for 3 days, and it might be most useful to many of us! Don't lose your reciept!!!
Any takers?
Paul
editing in... Oh yeah, maybe someone would like to pick up an NT1000 and give it a run through and review also!
How about we put the call out and see if one of our "good eared" friends will pick up a pair, check em out, and perhaps return them. For $120, I doubt if it would kill anyone for 3 days, and it might be most useful to many of us! Don't lose your reciept!!!
Any takers?
Paul
editing in... Oh yeah, maybe someone would like to pick up an NT1000 and give it a run through and review also!
Blue Bear Sound
New member
What, MY ears aren't good enough????
Ok... to be fair, Darrin_h2000 didn't specify his intended use, so Darrin if you are not using them as your main points of reference, then please take my comments in stride... but again.... for $59, you're NOT going to get "accurate". Period.
Usable, maybe - hell, NS-10s are usable, but hardly "accurate"........
And if you are on a budget, for $200 you can get yourself some Yorkville YSM-1s. At least they are a "real" monitor.... and I guarantee they'll outperform *anything* Radio Shack has to offer.... you need wire or oddball connectors, go to Radio Shack... you need studio gear, Radio Shack *IS NOT* the place to be.
Bruce
Ok... to be fair, Darrin_h2000 didn't specify his intended use, so Darrin if you are not using them as your main points of reference, then please take my comments in stride... but again.... for $59, you're NOT going to get "accurate". Period.
Usable, maybe - hell, NS-10s are usable, but hardly "accurate"........
And if you are on a budget, for $200 you can get yourself some Yorkville YSM-1s. At least they are a "real" monitor.... and I guarantee they'll outperform *anything* Radio Shack has to offer.... you need wire or oddball connectors, go to Radio Shack... you need studio gear, Radio Shack *IS NOT* the place to be.
Bruce
Dolemite
New member
Bruce,
Take a minute of your day and just consider that someday you might be wrong about something.
Maybe these aren't "accurate" in terms of [insert high-dollar monitor brand here] but I'm betting this guy isn't using them as "a cheap crap-ass speaker to check mixes against as a third reference." Granted I don't know terribly much about monitors, but from what I understand, their main characteristics are detail, accuracy, and neutrality. Lineaum speakers are considered quite blessed in the detail area, and while I doubt they're terribly neutral, I've heard it said that actual monitors (especially in the sub $500 level) can be quite tonally colored themselves.
The fun of being an idiot like myself is that you wouldn't dismiss using these things as monitors. Now I don't advise anyone to rush out to RS and buy these things to replace your Yorkvilles, but isn't it nice to know that consumer-level speakers from Radio Shack might compete with real monitors in terms of sonic detail?
Take a minute of your day and just consider that someday you might be wrong about something.
Maybe these aren't "accurate" in terms of [insert high-dollar monitor brand here] but I'm betting this guy isn't using them as "a cheap crap-ass speaker to check mixes against as a third reference." Granted I don't know terribly much about monitors, but from what I understand, their main characteristics are detail, accuracy, and neutrality. Lineaum speakers are considered quite blessed in the detail area, and while I doubt they're terribly neutral, I've heard it said that actual monitors (especially in the sub $500 level) can be quite tonally colored themselves.
The fun of being an idiot like myself is that you wouldn't dismiss using these things as monitors. Now I don't advise anyone to rush out to RS and buy these things to replace your Yorkvilles, but isn't it nice to know that consumer-level speakers from Radio Shack might compete with real monitors in terms of sonic detail?
Blue Bear Sound
New member
From the looks of that picture, it is my impression that he's using the RS speakers for EXACTLY the purpose I described... cheap-ass 3rd reference... my control room monitor layout is very similar - 2 pairs of nearfields, plus 2 single crap-ass speakers, all mounted on the console.... only difference is, he's got a pair of mid-fields....
So what does that picture prove???????? I've got the same picture on MY studio site and yet you tell me I'm wrong??? And what is it exactly that I'm wrong about???????? That $59 monitors are NOT going to be accurate???????
This is getting ridiculous..........
Bruce
So what does that picture prove???????? I've got the same picture on MY studio site and yet you tell me I'm wrong??? And what is it exactly that I'm wrong about???????? That $59 monitors are NOT going to be accurate???????
This is getting ridiculous..........
Bruce
Dolemite
New member
Looks to me from that picture and his equipment list that his suck-ass speakers are the minimus 0.3's, (another RS goodie) 3-inch full range speakers:
Minimus-0.3 Cube (400-1250B) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 14000
Speaker System
Frequency Response:........................................240 - 20,000 Hz
Power Handling Capacity:...........................................7 Watts
Impedance:..........................................................8 Ohms
Speaker Complement:............................3" (8cm) full-range speaker
Enclosure:................................Sealed walnut-grain vinyl veneer
Dimensions:...........................................4" x 4" x 3-3/8" HWD
(10 x 10 x 8.5 cm HWD)
Shipping Weight:.........................................1.5 lbs. (0.7 kg)
Looks decidedly shitty to me. But I don't know WTF he uses his equipment for. My point was, the LX5's are simply too good to be used as a "bad reference." I never claimed they were "accurate" by the true studio monitor definition and I seriously doubt that they are, but they are good speakers. Maybe even decent monitors if you're limited to a $120 budget. If the plague that is RS has spread to the Great White North then I'd advise you to go look at a pair. I think you'd be surprised.
Minimus-0.3 Cube (400-1250B) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 14000
Speaker System
Frequency Response:........................................240 - 20,000 Hz
Power Handling Capacity:...........................................7 Watts
Impedance:..........................................................8 Ohms
Speaker Complement:............................3" (8cm) full-range speaker
Enclosure:................................Sealed walnut-grain vinyl veneer
Dimensions:...........................................4" x 4" x 3-3/8" HWD
(10 x 10 x 8.5 cm HWD)
Shipping Weight:.........................................1.5 lbs. (0.7 kg)
Looks decidedly shitty to me. But I don't know WTF he uses his equipment for. My point was, the LX5's are simply too good to be used as a "bad reference." I never claimed they were "accurate" by the true studio monitor definition and I seriously doubt that they are, but they are good speakers. Maybe even decent monitors if you're limited to a $120 budget. If the plague that is RS has spread to the Great White North then I'd advise you to go look at a pair. I think you'd be surprised.
Wallycleaver
New member
I seen money spent many times more than $59 and would not call the monitors accurate. I feel the "it's close enough for rock and roll" idea is well over done here. $59 each use them as nearfields, that I understand but accurate? Right........ I've used $20,000 monitors that I would refer to as "accurate" That's why they cost $19,884 more than those. Like wise there are many speakers out there that are 10 times better than those foe only 2-3 times the price
darrin_h2000
Banned
no. theres nothing 100% accurate
but my tannoy proto-j speakers went for about that much, bruce is somewhat right about something here, even i use lx5 pros as a second opinion speaker. as does the fellow at soundchaser and tic tock men, etc. i also use a sony boom box for finding out what things sound like on a boom box,(dont forget headphones).
i purchased my lx5 pro for 30.00 at a pawn shop.
but when not on sale they are 300 bucks a pair so they are not normally cheap either.
i also have 4 of the lx8 speakers on my theatre system. when glass breaks in a movie it sounds real and its tough to pinpoint the exact loction of the speakers because of 360 degree pattern
bruce, may i ask you have you heard these speakers? take one of your mixes in and try one out you may find out you like it and use it for your second opinion as well , it wont hurt. i just get the vibe that you havent tried them yet.
peace dude
but my tannoy proto-j speakers went for about that much, bruce is somewhat right about something here, even i use lx5 pros as a second opinion speaker. as does the fellow at soundchaser and tic tock men, etc. i also use a sony boom box for finding out what things sound like on a boom box,(dont forget headphones).
i purchased my lx5 pro for 30.00 at a pawn shop.
but when not on sale they are 300 bucks a pair so they are not normally cheap either.
i also have 4 of the lx8 speakers on my theatre system. when glass breaks in a movie it sounds real and its tough to pinpoint the exact loction of the speakers because of 360 degree pattern
bruce, may i ask you have you heard these speakers? take one of your mixes in and try one out you may find out you like it and use it for your second opinion as well , it wont hurt. i just get the vibe that you havent tried them yet.
peace dude
Chris Shaeffer
Peavey ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seems like this is a discussion of apples and oranges.
I have no doubt that the Radio Shack speakers are great speakers. I spent many happy years with optimus speakers for my stereo.
I'm also fairly sure that they aren't designed for use as nearfield monitors.
I used to mix with my best speakers (Klipsh- or however you spell it- book shelf speakers) and they sound great. I even figured out how to mix on them and have my mixes work OK on most other stereo systems.
But when I A/B them with the Event PS6 studio monitors that I use now there is simply no comparison. The PS6's don't really sound that good, but I can hear each instrument in exquisite detail. And I can hear them fighting for space in the mix.
When I switch back to the Klipsh, all those little details kind of blur together and the mix sounds "better." When I fix those problems on the PS6's, the song sounds more cohesive back on the Klipsh, which still sound great.
There is just a huge difference between a speaker designed for home listening and a speaker designed for reference monitoring. In my mind, you can't really compare them at all. Some home speakers work better as inexpensive monitors than others do, but I kinda doubt that any speakers designed for home steroes are going to give you the accuracy that monitors are designed for.
Like screw drivers and hammers- both made of metal and great for what they do, but they don't really do the same thing.
Incidently, when I was shopping for monitors I did listening tests to a bunch of them all side by side. You'd be amazed at how different they sound! Seems like monitors (or the speakers you are using as monitors) are a matter of getting something you like and learning how to accomodate its particular sound.
Take care,
Chris Shaeffer
I have no doubt that the Radio Shack speakers are great speakers. I spent many happy years with optimus speakers for my stereo.
I'm also fairly sure that they aren't designed for use as nearfield monitors.
I used to mix with my best speakers (Klipsh- or however you spell it- book shelf speakers) and they sound great. I even figured out how to mix on them and have my mixes work OK on most other stereo systems.
But when I A/B them with the Event PS6 studio monitors that I use now there is simply no comparison. The PS6's don't really sound that good, but I can hear each instrument in exquisite detail. And I can hear them fighting for space in the mix.
When I switch back to the Klipsh, all those little details kind of blur together and the mix sounds "better." When I fix those problems on the PS6's, the song sounds more cohesive back on the Klipsh, which still sound great.
There is just a huge difference between a speaker designed for home listening and a speaker designed for reference monitoring. In my mind, you can't really compare them at all. Some home speakers work better as inexpensive monitors than others do, but I kinda doubt that any speakers designed for home steroes are going to give you the accuracy that monitors are designed for.
Like screw drivers and hammers- both made of metal and great for what they do, but they don't really do the same thing.
Incidently, when I was shopping for monitors I did listening tests to a bunch of them all side by side. You'd be amazed at how different they sound! Seems like monitors (or the speakers you are using as monitors) are a matter of getting something you like and learning how to accomodate its particular sound.
Take care,
Chris Shaeffer
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Hey... if they work out as stereo speakers for people, great! Whatever... but that doesn't make them good as monitors.... and I don't have to see (or hear) a Radio Shack product to to know that in all likelihood, it's a piece of crap... there is not a single piece of quality gear in their current catalogue.... period... the only time I've EVER seen a "good" piece of gear is the odd time they feature a brand-name product such as Panasonic or Hitachi....Dolemite said:
And they've not had ANY decent studio gear in recent years.... a couple of usable pieces (the sound meter - ok, but not "pro" -- the PZM, usable with mods, but there are far better, cheap larg dias available out there now...) And I've NEVER, EVER heard a single RS speaker that gave me any perception of quality in any way.... so no, I won't be picking up a pair anytime soon... I have all the monitoring I need... and should I require more, you can bet the first place I WON'T be looking to buy them from is at Radio Shack!
...as I said, this has quickly become a ridiculous thread... arguing about whether RS speakers are good or not... SHEESH!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's next -- how Radio Shack mics outperform Neumann's???
Yikes!Bruce
The article I was refering to was using the Radio Shack monitors as an example of a dilema you face when looking at near field monitors. Most people opt for accurate reproduction, but there is a segment out there that believes that's not the best approach. There are people out there who's main concern is that their mixes translate well to what most people use everyday.
At the risk of misquoting the article (I don't have it in front of me) I believe the guy who uses the Radio Shack speakers does use them as his primary monitors, but he checks his mixes against better near field monitors. His reasoning is that 95% of people listen to music in their car or on a cheap home sterio system. Only 1% have a system costing $1000 or more (his numbers not mine). He wants his mixes to translate well to those environments so he mixes on cheap speakers. He also knows those speakers well, their strengths and weaknesses and that may be a big factor. He uses more expensive speakers to check his mixes against, much in the same way people have been discussing the use of cheap speackers.
To parallel this the article points out that a standard in many studios are NS-10s, which aren't the most accurate speackers in the world. Why use them if their not the most accurate? People use them because they trust that they can produce mixes that will translate well on them.
The closing point the article made was that more important than which monitors you choose is that you know your monitors well. Experience with a set of monitors is more important that accuracy. There are certainly better monitors around today than there were 30 years ago, yet some people are still mixing on the same monitors they did 30 years ago. The reason is that those years of experience allow them to know exactly how mixes will translate, and in the end that's more important than accuracy.
At the risk of misquoting the article (I don't have it in front of me) I believe the guy who uses the Radio Shack speakers does use them as his primary monitors, but he checks his mixes against better near field monitors. His reasoning is that 95% of people listen to music in their car or on a cheap home sterio system. Only 1% have a system costing $1000 or more (his numbers not mine). He wants his mixes to translate well to those environments so he mixes on cheap speakers. He also knows those speakers well, their strengths and weaknesses and that may be a big factor. He uses more expensive speakers to check his mixes against, much in the same way people have been discussing the use of cheap speackers.
To parallel this the article points out that a standard in many studios are NS-10s, which aren't the most accurate speackers in the world. Why use them if their not the most accurate? People use them because they trust that they can produce mixes that will translate well on them.
The closing point the article made was that more important than which monitors you choose is that you know your monitors well. Experience with a set of monitors is more important that accuracy. There are certainly better monitors around today than there were 30 years ago, yet some people are still mixing on the same monitors they did 30 years ago. The reason is that those years of experience allow them to know exactly how mixes will translate, and in the end that's more important than accuracy.
darrin_h2000
Banned
good and to the point
for all i have read arround here I WANT YAMAHA NS10s
monitors are probubly better the more they are complained about. what other piece of equipment can help your sound by sounding like crap. they must give great results.
bruce: i appreciate your honesty in saying you have never heard them , but how do you base your opinion on something you havent heard. you liked the pzm microphone and its on some of the same lists at the 5 recording studio sites i found using the speakers. i dont normally endorse radio shack gear either but before i could afford a good kick drum mic i mounted a pzm on plexiglass 1 foot in front of the bass drum. and it worked .
dont be predjudice of where stuff comes from you will miss out on some real gems.
do you use something for a boom box mix?
this would be an interesting thread.
after all the experts do reccomend the boom box as a bad speaker monitor.
for all i have read arround here I WANT YAMAHA NS10s
monitors are probubly better the more they are complained about. what other piece of equipment can help your sound by sounding like crap. they must give great results.
bruce: i appreciate your honesty in saying you have never heard them , but how do you base your opinion on something you havent heard. you liked the pzm microphone and its on some of the same lists at the 5 recording studio sites i found using the speakers. i dont normally endorse radio shack gear either but before i could afford a good kick drum mic i mounted a pzm on plexiglass 1 foot in front of the bass drum. and it worked .
dont be predjudice of where stuff comes from you will miss out on some real gems.
do you use something for a boom box mix?
this would be an interesting thread.
after all the experts do reccomend the boom box as a bad speaker monitor.
Gidge
Lapdance Test Dummy
mixing with those cheap RS speakers will insure that anyone listening on cheap RS speakers will get a good sound....mixing on good, flat studio monitors insures that people listening on anything will get a good sound...end of argument....moderator please close the thread.....
BTW, Yorkville ysm-1's at 89.00 a piece...why buy crap for 69.00?.....
BTW, Yorkville ysm-1's at 89.00 a piece...why buy crap for 69.00?.....
Dolemite
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:
Hey... if they work out as stereo speakers for people, great! Whatever... but that doesn't make them good as monitors.... and I don't have to see (or hear) a Radio Shack product to to know that in all likelihood, it's a piece of crap... there is not a single piece of quality gear in their current catalogue.... period... the only time I've EVER seen a "good" piece of gear is the odd time they feature a brand-name product such as Panasonic or Hitachi....
And they've not had ANY decent studio gear in recent years.... a couple of usable pieces (the sound meter - ok, but not "pro" -- the PZM, usable with mods, but there are far better, cheap larg dias available out there now...) And I've NEVER, EVER heard a single RS speaker that gave me any perception of quality in any way.... so no, I won't be picking up a pair anytime soon... I have all the monitoring I need... and should I require more, you can bet the first place I WON'T be looking to buy them from is at Radio Shack!
...as I said, this has quickly become a ridiculous thread... arguing about whether RS speakers are good or not... SHEESH!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's next -- how Radio Shack mics outperform Neumann's???
Bruce
Bruce,
Believe it or not, there are people in this world that are as cocky, arrogant, and prejudiced about home stereo systems as you are about recording/mixing and these people regard the Optimus LX5's as a very good set of speakers for the money. The company that designed this speaker, Lineaum, makes speakers that cost more than a couple hundred hours at your studio and I would guess they're worth it.
The only point I was trying to make is that these ARE decent speakers. One of those "don't knock it 'til ya tried it" sort of things. Once again, I know that doesn't make them good monitors and I can't recommend them for that purpose.
By all means, if you're buying monitors go out and spend the extra $$ on the previously mentioned Yorkville YSM-1's, but if you're in the market for a cheap set of speakers for a basic home stereo (and your open-minded enough to try it) take a look at Optimus LX5's, especially while their on sale for $59 each.
darrin_h2000
Banned
yorkville ysm-1 for 89.00
where did you get the yorkville speakers at that price ill buy a pair dude (today if i can)
where did you get the yorkville speakers at that price ill buy a pair dude (today if i can)
Gidge, I tend to agree with you. I think theres a lot to your argument that if you mix on one particular set of bad speakers all you get is a mix that sounds good on that set of bad speakers. However, doesn't the same logic applies to accurate speakers. Why is it assumed that the more accurate the speaker the better your mixes will translate to all speakers. Why doesn't the same logic apply in reverse, that mixing on highly accurate speakers only means your mixes will translate well to other highly accurate speakers.
Let me put it another way. I'm not prepared to claim that all those people using NS-10s aren't getting the best results they could. Maybe it's just that they know their monitors very well, and that allows them to compensate. But isn't it possible that there is some other quality of NS-10s that makes mixes done on them translate better than expected?
Let me put it another way. I'm not prepared to claim that all those people using NS-10s aren't getting the best results they could. Maybe it's just that they know their monitors very well, and that allows them to compensate. But isn't it possible that there is some other quality of NS-10s that makes mixes done on them translate better than expected?