studio monitors vs. stereo speakers

M

mattdee1

New member
I currently have a very basic recording set up and am looking at what I really should be spending my limited budget on to improve capabilities.

Currently for listening back to my work I just run out of my Presonus Firebox to a stereo amplifier which drives 2 desktop speakers.

The speakers are very decent (Paradigm Atoms) and it sounds good to me but there must be a reason why so many people invest in powered studio monitors. Bearing in mind that anything over, say, $350 is pretty much out of the question, what would powered studio monitors bring to the table for me that the stereo does not?

Thanks
Matt Dee
 
Put simply, monitor speakers provide a flat response to the input signal. They do not "colour" the signal by making certain frequencies louder than others - at least that's the idea. Hi-fi speakers can colour the sound by making the sound "warmer" and more attractive to listen to.
So called "active" speakers have the amplifier built into the speaker so close coupling the speaker and amp. The amp is usually better matched to the speakers.
The bookshelf speakers are often known as "nearfield" as you can locate them directly in front of you and hear what the speakers are outputting without too much reflection from the room.
A decent set of monitor speakers will let you hear your recorded sound more accurately and are a good investment. I have a set of Edirol MA-15D speakers and am very pleased with them. They have an optical input and are driven directly from my multi tracker.
 
Some home/pc/etc speakers are designed to sound 'good'. If they sound a little scooped, ie heavier on the bass and highs, people perceive that as a 'better' sound. Studio monitors are designed to sound 'real'. Flat frequency response across the whole spectrum. Tighter more detailed sound - You'll hear things in them you won't catch in some other speakers.
 
Terfyn said:
Put simply, monitor speakers provide a flat response to the input signal. They do not "colour" the signal by making certain frequencies louder than others - at least that's the idea. Hi-fi speakers can colour the sound by making the sound "warmer" and more attractive to listen to.
So called "active" speakers have the amplifier built into the speaker so close coupling the speaker and amp. The amp is usually better matched to the speakers.
The bookshelf speakers are often known as "nearfield" as you can locate them directly in front of you and hear what the speakers are outputting without too much reflection from the room.
A decent set of monitor speakers will let you hear your recorded sound more accurately and are a good investment. I have a set of Edirol MA-15D speakers and am very pleased with them. They have an optical input and are driven directly from my multi tracker.
Click to expand...

I should have mentioned that I understand the "theory" of the flat frequency response and all that, I was just wondering if a fairly decent set of stereo speakers might be "flat enough" to do the job, and therefore free up that money to buy other things.

However, I must say that one of the most frustrating things about this hobby is spending so much time mixing the tunes, only to have them sound way different in the car, at a friend's house, etc. :mad:

Sometimes I'll bring a mix over to my bandmate's house andtplay it on his big stereo and at certain points in the song I'll wince and find myself apologizing "dude, it didn't sound like that at my house, I swear....".

So as a point of reference, what did you pay for your monitors if you don't mind me asking? I know you can get some really cheap ones for like $100, but I guess I just find it hard to believe that something that cheap would give me any incremental benefit.
 
However, I must say that one of the most frustrating things about this hobby is spending so much time mixing the tunes, only to have them sound way different in the car, at a friend's house, etc.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I spent $300 or so on a pair of behringer truth 2031A's. People like to badmouth behry stuff, it's cheap, not high end, but Im no pro, so they sound good enough to me...
 
The Edirol speakers cost £147 for the pair. These days with the weak pound, I suppose that $150 would be OK.

One advantage of the Edirol speakers is that they have two sets of inputs, one of which will accept the TosLink optical signal and another which will accept digital signals as well as the normal analogue inputs.
 
mattdee1 said:
I should have mentioned that I understand the "theory" of the flat frequency response and all that, I was just wondering if a fairly decent set of stereo speakers might be "flat enough" to do the job, and therefore free up that money to buy other things.

However, I must say that one of the most frustrating things about this hobby is spending so much time mixing the tunes, only to have them sound way different in the car, at a friend's house, etc. :mad:

Sometimes I'll bring a mix over to my bandmate's house andtplay it on his big stereo and at certain points in the song I'll wince and find myself apologizing "dude, it didn't sound like that at my house, I swear....".

So as a point of reference, what did you pay for your monitors if you don't mind me asking? I know you can get some really cheap ones for like $100, but I guess I just find it hard to believe that something that cheap would give me any incremental benefit.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, I responded to a question very similar to this a couple of days ago elsewhere. This was my response (in part) then:

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.
Click to expand...
 
Just a quick question MattDee...

Is your room treated?

If not, I think you'd get a better bang for the buck by treating it (bass traps etc) than buying monitors/speakers.

imho......
Kel
 
mattdee1 said:
I currently have a very basic recording set up and am looking at what I really should be spending my limited budget on to improve capabilities.

Currently for listening back to my work I just run out of my Presonus Firebox to a stereo amplifier which drives 2 desktop speakers.

The speakers are very decent (Paradigm Atoms) and it sounds good to me but there must be a reason why so many people invest in powered studio monitors. Bearing in mind that anything over, say, $350 is pretty much out of the question, what would powered studio monitors bring to the table for me that the stereo does not?

Thanks
Matt Dee
Click to expand...
Point: No matter what, your monitoring chain is the absolute most important part of any recording chain.

Point: Just because a speaker has a sticker on it that says "Studio Monitor" doesn't mean that it sounds "flat" or "accurate" or "consistent" in any way.

Point: Paradigm Atoms aren't really bad speakers... Probably better than most anything that says "studio monitor" on it in a similar price range.

No doubt - Next chance you have, I'd upgrade your chain and I'd most definitely add some reasonable amount of room treatment to that. But if your speakers are reasonably flat, reasonably accurate, reasonably consistent at varying levels and pressures, then go for it if you can get them to translate reasonably well.

If it helps - personally, I'd go with decent HiFi (as in, true "High Fidelity") speakers over most nearfields pretty much any day. That said, I'd strive for something more than the Atoms - THAT said, if you're doing well with what you have currently, wait until you can make a significant upgrade before making a lateral move.
 
Dogbreath said:
Just a quick question MattDee...

Is your room treated?

If not, I think you'd get a better bang for the buck by treating it (bass traps etc) than buying monitors/speakers.

imho......
Kel
Click to expand...

I second that, if the room is not treated correctly and is not set up correctly you are wasting your money on the monitors. Average monitors in a good room will sound better than top of the range monitors in a bad room.

Cheers

Alan.
 
Use both

I find that there is no substitute for nice studio monitors. It really allows you to hear evertything clearly. But I like to hear what it would sound like on regular speakers, so I just have both set up and will A/B them to hear differences.
 
The most popular small studio monitors have, for the last 25 years been the Yamaha NS-10M's. Tons of hits were mixed on them.

They were designed, and originally sold, for home stereos. They were not designed for recording studios. They are home stereo speakers, and they aren't even really that great.

That should tell you something.
 
dintymoore said:
and they aren't even really that great.
Click to expand...

They make my ears want to die...


The thing about them was that if you could make your mix sound good on them,
chances are that it'd sound good on any other system.

Horrible sound though.
 
Well, people are always saying they sound like shit, but to me they sound absolutely beautiful!

I've been using them since 1984 or '85. I fought with them for several years, but I love them now.

I wish you were in my room right now, I don't think anyone could hear the horns I recorded (with top NYC players) and say it sounds anything but great.

I made a speaker selector switch box, the speaker selector to end all speaker selector switch boxes. It will cost you about $20 and that's what I would recommend so you can A/B several speaker pairs.

Your monitors are ultra-important, but I don't think it's crazy to consider using high end home speakers. I would do that before I'd spend money on the cheap ones from Kia and Hyundai!
 
The Paradigms are probably about as flat as any of the cheap moniors you're gonna get.

As gekko and Massive have pointed out ..... it's simply not true that quality home speakers are designed to hype the sound.
Note the emphasis on quality ...... those Paradigms certainly qualify.

For the cheap monitors most of us use ..... the word 'monitor' is more a marketing term than anything else.
 
dintymoore said:
I wish you were in my room right now
Click to expand...

:confused: :eek: :confused: :eek:

:D

I believe they're great as alternative monitors, especially for checking your mids.

I've mixed in a few rooms where the main speakers have been Quested, Genelec
etc. and the NS-10's were there, barely being touched.

An acquired taste, hate em or love em I guess.
 
This is what I saw :confused:

dintymoore said:
Well, people are always saying they sound like shit, but to me they sound absolutely beautiful!

I've been using them since 1984 or '85. I fought with them for several years, but I love them now.

I wish you were in my room right now, I don't think anyone could hear the horns I recorded (with top NYC players) and say it sounds anything but great.

I made a speaker selector switch box, the speaker selector to end all speaker selector switch boxes. It will cost you about $20 and that's what I would recommend so you can A/B several speaker pairs.

Your monitors are ultra-important, but I don't think it's crazy to consider using high end home speakers. I would do that before I'd spend money on the cheap ones from Kia and Hyundai!
Click to expand...




:D :D :D :D :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top