Dear Edward...

S

Sonic Valley

New member
I stuck this in this thread cause there's a geek here who goes by the name...sonusman? I'm not sure...all I know is he's a lynch'n no good cowboy luv'n pecker...that being said...I've been testing a few monitors latley. I've got it wittled to the Roland 24bit DS90A's, Not bad, it's taking a while to get used to them. I have the Mackie HR624's as well, Smaller in power although more wattage. Unfortunetly when I tested the Mackies one woofer was pooched right out of the box. I did do a mono test with one Mackie and one Roland. I found the Mackies sound great but really colored in the top end, silky...but not accurate. I think the Rolands are more true and can handle more poop driven to them. The digital input sounds fancy and may be useful but I'm running control room out balanced so the digital optical/spdif is not all that handy when you think about it.
So there's where I'm at. I've only got less than a week to pick a set of boxes before I start my next session in full swing. Anyone own either set of these powered boxes and what's your opinion? Cheers!
 
I have Mackies too, and i am very happy with them. Very accurate monitors, great low end. All my mixes translate perfectly.
 
Hey Vance,

You didn't ask me, but can I suggest you also check out KRK V8s... IMO they blow the Mackies WAY out of the water......

I haven't heard the Roland ones, but I suspect they'll outperform them too!


Bruce
 
Last edited:
I don't know KRK very good. I have seen passive models, but i have not mixed with them. I work with Genelec surround system, 1 pair of Mackies in studio, 1 pair in OB Van, and 1 pair at home ( only last pair is mine :) )
I think that very good thing about Mackies is that they sound same in different spaces, which is not case with Genelec, Yamaha, Tannoy - they are not so sensitive to placement because of low bass driver construction - mass coupled calibrated piston on rear side.
 
Igormeister....

Actually that message was intended for Sonic Valley, it's just that your posts wasn't there when I started responding!

I'm not suggesting the Mackies aren't good - they are, but in MY A/B comparison testing I preferred the KRK V8s, so I was suggesting Sonic add them to his comparison shopping list too!

Bruce
 
Igormeister said:
I have Mackies too, and i am very happy with them. Very accurate monitors, great low end. All my mixes translate perfectly.
Click to expand...

hey,

where can I hear one of your mixes? I am looking at the hr824s
 
Vance, you are a VERY adverturing soul to be wanting to change monitors RIGHT BEFORE a big mixdown session!!! I would never think of it, and if the session was REALLY important, I wouldn't even go with JUST the studios NS-10's. I would have my 20/20's in there in a second!!!

I have never heard the Roland monitors (well, I did, but in a noisy Guitar Center store....), and I have heard the Mackies. I didn't care for the sound of the Mackies. I suppose I could learn on them and all (like I could most monitors that are halfway decent....) but I was listening to a mix I did on the Events that translated quite well to home stereo systems. It didn't sound too bad on the Mackies, but I wouldn't have liked having to do the mix on them either. There was detail I didn't hear on the Mackies (possible room problems....) and the extra low end drove me nuts (another possible room problem). But I DID preview some of my mixes on Mackies in two different rooms, and consistently, I just didn't like what I was hearing. I am VERY used to my 20/20's, so it could just be that.

I have no suggestion except that you should stay with whatever you have been using. Your work sounds very good, and you know from moving from studio to studio over the years that you have at LEAST a 6 month learning curve on your new monitors (this is taking into account that you can learn them much faster having them side by side with what you are already using in the studio). So, pick what you like and get on with it. But again, don't abandon what you have been using yet!

Eddie
 
Monitors...

I agree Ed....I have monitors here, hooked up to an Ashly FTX2001 THX approved poweramp...but we're building the wife an editing suite upstairs and the plan was to move the boxes and amp up there and I'd get new monitors...

After all Ed it's only a country album....lol
 
Bruce

Thanx for the heads up on the KRK's. I've been leary of them for some strange reason but when I was in Toronto last week I heard a pair and was impressed. Also a freind of mine is headed out on the road today doing FOH for Rita MacNiell and he's using them on the console and swears by them. I think they may be doing a show in Ottawa Bruce so you can go check her out. She's still a babe...:D
 
Sonic Valley said:
I've been testing a few monitors latley. I've got it wittled to the Roland 24bit DS90A's, Not bad, it's taking a while to get used to them.
Anyone own either set of these powered boxes and what's your opinion? Cheers!
Click to expand...

Roland "24-bit monitors"?
Is that some sort of joke from Roland? :confused:

Dude, monitors don't know "bits" from "tits", so anybody who claims their monitors are "24-bit monitors" is using that as a marketing ploy.
That, in itself, makes me suspicious of those boxes.

Take it for what it's worth, but Roland shit is waaaaay overpriced for what you get... most of the time.

Case in point:
I needed a tube-type bracket mount to put a dual-trigger snare on my e-drum kit. All they had in stock at the time was a plastic Roland bracket, which cost me $27.
I needed it immediately, so I forked over the money.
A few days ago, I broke that cheap-ass piece o' crap, so I went to replace it.
This time I got a bracket by a company called Sound Percussion that is 100% metal, much more adjustable, and totally unbreakable for $12.99
That's less than half the cost.
I paid more than twice as much to have the ROLAND name stamped on a piece of plastic, which broke quite easily.

Did I mention the Sound Percussion bracket is metal, unbreakable, more adjustable, and less than half the cost?

Yeah, Roland does make some decent stuff, but you're gonna pay out the ass for it.

"Twenty-four bit monitors".... yeah, right. :rolleyes:
 
as I understand it, the DS90As offer a complete digital sound chain up into the loudspeakers. So the DA conversion happens right there as opposed to somewhere outside the speakers. The big question is, how good are the DA converters in those units?!

If I had a crap soundcard to start with, then even the greatest DA conversion is not going to make my music rock the momma.
And if I had the dough for Apogee converters, I don't see why I would want some dubious Roland DA converters to mess with my music.

I think this 24bit mumbo-jumbo is not more than a catchy marketing gimmick (... well, and cost devourer for that matter).
 
Once the sound goes from the amp & converters to the speaker itself, it then becomes analog.
So, what the heck is the difference?.... it's still analog when it gets to the speaker, and subsequently, your ears.

Anyway, here's a professional opinion of these Roland "24-bit" monitors.
http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/C10334FBDE54A76886256AE100139FE4
Look at the rating and read the last line of the review...

.....'nuf said.


BTW, here's the rating of the Mackie HR824's...
http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/1F51E9BEC181E26F86256AE100131216

Of course, this stuff is all subjective.
Bruce knows his shit, and he prefers the KRK V8's over the Mackie's. Yet, look at how ProRec rated the V8's...
http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articl...28903e8954a7b37a86256ae10011e556?OpenDocument

Just go out and listen to everything, that's all one can do!
 
All I can say is Rip must've been listening to some f*cked-up V8s when he did that review - because what he's describing doesn't jive to what I'm hearing!

But yeah -- monitor-selection IS pretty damn subjective....!


Bruce
 
Far out...a scuffle.

Hey I ain't saying these Rolands are the dream boxes, I'm just blow'n a few pairs thru fer testing and yes buddy they're digital. It takes spdif and optical with the converters on board...course that don't mean bubkus in some cases. And yes they're waaaaayyyyyyyyy over priced.....but show me a respectable set of powered boxes that aren't and don't get the Behringer Truths tossed in here. lol

Any how...I'm holding off till I get this album wrapped up and we'll see how the HR624's and the Mackie sub does in a few tests.
 
TexRoadkill said:
Buck, the Rolands have DIGITAL inputs. That is why they have DAC's.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that. But it is still converted to analog in order for you to hear the music, so what's the point?
You can't listen to "one's" and "zero's"... and that's exactly what digital is.

Once you convert those one's and zero's, and the sound itself goes to the wires that are connected to the cones of the speakers, it's analog.
Does it really matter if it's converted by the monitors, as opposed to your DAW itself?

And remember, what you hear is only as good as the converters themselves. Any DAW is going to have it's own converters, so why pay extra to get something you've already got?
That doesn't make any sense.

It's called a "marketing ploy".
 
But it is still converted to analog in order for you to hear the music, so what's the point?
Click to expand...

That's what DAC's are fer there dude. Any-hoo these Rolands are out so we can all save our breath....lol. There's no DAC's in DAW's. Say that 20 times fast. Only in gear that needs to convert analog to digital and vice versa.
 
Sorry Buck,

There are 2 advantages to using digital connectors right thru the monitor chain.

1) the lines will incur little transmission loss, and interference won't affect the actual audio signal

2) it's pretty easy to make good-sounding DACs, so D-to-A conversion is not a factor.


One potential negative is that you'd also want word clock on the monitors to really reduce any chance of jitter, but that may be overkill in this application.


But don't take this as an endorsement for the Roland monitors - I haven't heard them (and I still doubt they're better than my KRK's! ;) ) - I'm just pointing out that digital transmission does have certain advantages.


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