Alright what do ns10s sound like?

I'm glad you are happy. I'm still thinking that you've not quite experienced the difference between truthful and popular? I tend to agree on the auratones being worst. what I don't get is the concept that using less truthful, accurate or wide band products is better? If you are doing old 50s rock and roll, or tecno, or any of the drum and bass genres, then setting fader levels for the bass vs the rest of the mix is pretty critical. The problems with speakers that have less bottom is that the only way to set the bass content level is guesswork. With NS10s you tended to add the bass fader until you could just hear something there - even if indistinct yet know that on bassy replay systems, the bass would be much more prominent. My RCFs in the video studio start gently removing bass at about 60Hz, and by the time the bass is playing the bottom E it's well down, and on a 5 string - the bottom B string open or anywhere between B and D might be misheard. The phenomena I mean is where if there is bass in the intro, then the tune kicks in - it can be a whole tone away, and you don't notice. The bottom B and bottom C sharp lose the tuning.

Good you got a pair. You just need to get used to estimating levels at the bottom.
 
well i would ask are they just popular, or are they an industry standard with discernable ears to prove they work? and im no bob clearmountain fanboy even though i respect his work... i just like other people work better. but i can hear the low end fundamental ok with them... definitely not low/sub bass though but even then i dont really care about that, because it might get in the way of hearing the lower mids. wouldn't use them for extreme modern sub heavy music . but then again i dont really care about that right now at the moment. i think at the end of the day the midrange is where all the junk and gunk is at especially for rock/ instrument music which is mostly what i do. i think if you monitor/ clear out the midrange the bass will take care of its self leading to a deeper sounding mix with a nice clear sounding midrange. and the ns10s also give solid fundamental highs as well to me. and same things with the highs i dont worry about high highs because it would lead to a naturally airier sound anyways.
 
panax_27 said:
well i would ask are they just popular, or are they an industry standard with discernable ears to prove they work? and im no bob clearmountain fanboy even though i respect his work... i just like other people work better. but i can hear the low end fundamental ok with them... definitely not low/sub bass though but even then i dont really care about that, because it might get in the way of hearing the lower mids. wouldn't use them for extreme modern sub heavy music . but then again i dont really care about that right now at the moment. i think at the end of the day the midrange is where all the junk and gunk is at especially for rock/ instrument music which is mostly what i do. i think if you monitor/ clear out the midrange the bass will take care of its self leading to a deeper sounding mix with a nice clear sounding midrange. and the ns10s also give solid fundamental highs as well to me. and same things with the highs i dont worry about high highs because it would lead to a naturally airier sound anyways.
Click to expand...
Personally I think they are pretty deficient - the advantage you get from them is you know exactly what you are listening too.
 
They were an industry standard 35 years ago because common playback systems and the expected sound of music was different.

I mixed plenty of albums on them, but it was much easier and less fatiguing once I got the genelecs.

But, if you are happy with them, you are good to go.
 
Far view has it really. You can mix on anything, once you have spent the time learning their deficiencies and compensating. If you like them it’s really not a problem, but ask yourself why any commercial studio would spend VERY large amounts of money on monitors. If NS10 speakers were so good, why would anyone need to spend thousands. You just seem to be unwilling to even consider what monitor systems are for? Go back in time to when the BBC had a specification monitors had to meet. Those manufacturers who made them are gone, but their products still selling for huge sums on ebay. Some speakers are nice, some less so. Some are nice on your ears, some less so. We don’t have issues at all with anyone using any product when it does something for them, we’re just confused you are promoting them in this odd way?
 
rob aylestone said:
Go back in time to when the BBC had a specification monitors had to meet. Those manufacturers who made them are gone, but their products still selling for huge sums on ebay.
Click to expand...
After I replaced the NS10s with some BBC designed LS3/5as in our studio, the number of people coming back because they were unhappy with their mix reduced to pretty much zero. The LS3/5as were much easier to use than the NS10s and allowed you to hear far further into the mix. For many years the NS10s were relegated to being used as our kitchen speakers. I can understand why some pairs of LS3/5as have sold for nearly £2k while NS10 prices are far lower. (NB - I think the Neumann KH120 beats both of them).
 
jamesperrett said:
After I replaced the NS10s with some BBC designed LS3/5as in our studio, the number of people coming back because they were unhappy with their mix reduced to pretty much zero. The LS3/5as were much easier to use than the NS10s and allowed you to hear far further into the mix. For many years the NS10s were relegated to being used as our kitchen speakers. I can understand why some pairs of LS3/5as have sold for nearly £2k while NS10 prices are far lower. (NB - I think the Neumann KH120 beats both of them).
Click to expand...
rob aylestone said:
Far view has it really. You can mix on anything, once you have spent the time learning their deficiencies and compensating. If you like them it’s really not a problem, but ask yourself why any commercial studio would spend VERY large amounts of money on monitors. If NS10 speakers were so good, why would anyone need to spend thousands. You just seem to be unwilling to even consider what monitor systems are for? Go back in time to when the BBC had a specification monitors had to meet. Those manufacturers who made them are gone, but their products still selling for huge sums on ebay. Some speakers are nice, some less so. Some are nice on your ears, some less so. We don’t have issues at all with anyone using any product when it does something for them, we’re just confused you are promoting them in this odd way?
Click to expand...
im not promoting them... its just that they get so much hate online for awhile now and i thought id buy a pair because i was really curious and i found a great deal on ebay from japan (non studio original harsh tissue paper version) and a lot of good sounding records used them so i just thought id share how i thought they sounded. and they sound good but only if the recordings are good. certain records sound a little bit harsher then others on these guys. but i have reference tracks and records that i put through these and they sound great. i havent needed to use tissue paper on them yet.
 
jamesperrett said:
After I replaced the NS10s with some BBC designed LS3/5as in our studio, the number of people coming back because they were unhappy with their mix reduced to pretty much zero. The LS3/5as were much easier to use than the NS10s and allowed you to hear far further into the mix. For many years the NS10s were relegated to being used as our kitchen speakers. I can understand why some pairs of LS3/5as have sold for nearly £2k while NS10 prices are far lower. (NB - I think the Neumann KH120 beats both of them).
Click to expand...
ah i see what year were those speakers made/used?
 
The reason for the spec was so an engineer could mix and balance in any studio that had them, knowing their choices would be transferable. They had specs for big, medium and small studios that actually meant you could work in a small studio with small monitors and they would sound similar to the ones in the big studios, same sort of sound, but just lacking the bottom and power. A great idea.
 
The concept of speakers that emphasize some particular range that you think is important is flawed, unless the audio you're working on will consistently be played on speakers of similar response. The whole point of listening to what you're doing is to accurately predict the results when someone plays it back on their system. A secondary speaker system that lacks bass response is okay so you know what your mix sounds like on small speakers, but you need the primary speakers to be full range and flat response so you don't make something that is unlistenable on a good system and can only be played on small speakers.
 
rob aylestone said:
Look on ebay and gape at the prices they still fetch
Click to expand...
yeah i know thats why i bought a pair, i think its also because they were so mass produced there easy to come by because the casual listening people didnt care for them much, a lot of ebay listings come from japan.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
The concept of speakers that emphasize some particular range that you think is important is flawed, unless the audio you're working on will consistently be played on speakers of similar response. The whole point of listening to what you're doing is to accurately predict the results when someone plays it back on their system. A secondary speaker system that lacks bass response is okay so you know what your mix sounds like on small speakers, but you need the primary speakers to be full range and flat response so you don't make something that is unlistenable on a good system and can only be played on small speakers.
Click to expand...
ok well i completely disagree. like i said midrange is crucial for me i dont want flat response, unless im mastering. but i appreciate your opinion . the whole point in my opinion is if you clear out the midrange on these then the track will sound cleaner on other systems. thats why i think they work for me .auratones same things its a midrange dominant speaker. but im sure you know what your doing on your system though because your probably know it very well. i guess i just have a different goal then you thats all.
 
That’s fine, but your reasoning to me is completely flawed, especially as a one man band recordist. I master and mix in one process. My final mix, is it, done! I want all my mixes to sound ok on every system, and i still make mistakes. I was short of test tracks last week in the theatre and on my MacBook were some of my own music. One, three years old was horrendous. HUGE amounts of bass I wasn't aware of at the very bottom, and 12k of amps and flown subs revealed it when the building started to rattle! It was a quite gentle track with lots of synths, and I suspect I mixed it on the small speakers. For me, I need speakers that reveal things, not do any enhancing midrange or hiding things. You’ve got a different viewpoint, but are you not using your speakers response as some kind of effect? I’ve been reviewing mics. Are we also then saying that we should use a mic with a non flat response on everything, which a mix engineer can fix later? instead of wanting that U87, we should use a 57 on everything and fix it later? Surely that’s the same. You could use a 57 and eq it like mad, or just use a different mic that didn’t need eq so much?
.
 
my reasoning is flawed about what exactly? and what was the source of the bass rattle? and if your using subs then is it revealing or is it overexagerating the low end just how a speaker can exagerate the midrange??? i can hear a sub range through my tv speakers when i was listening the other day a sub will just enhance it not reveal it, its still there on other speakers and plus you want the low lows anyways because thats what creates depth and deep mix. theres a reason the top guys never use subs unless maybe some newer trap producers. but enhancing the lows it the same thing with enhancing mids on ns10s except the midrange is most of the frequencies and more important its the middle range where all the clarity and are mudiness resides... i respect your philosophy but yes im using it as an effect to balance the midrange which if theres another speaker on the market thats not thousands of dollars thatll do that same thing then im totally open minded because im still somewhat new to this thats why i came here. for example my bose speakers sound muddy and not very clear in the lower midrange and a lot of speakers these days are sounding muddier so if i mix on a flat accurate monitor system that sounds nice and clear on that system its still going to sound like mud on those terrible muddy playback systems these days. thats why i think ns10s and auratones are still a valuable tool and they dont cost too much there affordable for most people. but i agree on your last point you cannot get a 57 to sound like a u87 but i dont understand the flat mic part
 
People that like em, like em. People that don’t......well they don’t :-)

I once picked up a set of KRK rocket 8s. Ran a cd through a pair of faders going to the KRKs . Ran the same cd to another set of faders to the NS10s. No eq just flat.

I’d go back and forth between the Yamahas and the rockets.
All my mids diminished on the s KRK to the point of vocals almost disappearing.

Yeah, they had plenty of bass but were lacking everywhere else. I don’t see how people can use them..... but they’re quite popular.

I sold them the next day. :LOL:
 
The NS10 has very low group delay, which is good. The tradeoff is that the response is -10 at something like 65 Hz, and -20 at about 40 Hz. They may benefit from being placed against a wall to enhance their LF response, though I sort of suspect that boundary effect would extend too far up the frequency spectrum. Regardless, there's a distinct response bump around 1.5 kHz. It would be hard not to "under mix" that range and create a hole that made the mix sound dull on a flatter system, while also "over mixing" the bottom octave leading to rattling windows on a system with accurate LF response.

As a secondary set of speakers, they could be useful. I wouldn't want to rely on them alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top