Event 20/20 vs. Tannoy Reveal vs. NS 10m

  • Thread starter Thread starter twonky
  • Start date Start date

Which monitors do you prefer

  • Tannoy Reveal

    Votes: 18 45.0%

  • Event 20/20

    Votes: 15 37.5%

  • Yamaha NS 10M

    Votes: 6 15.0%

  • Alesis Monitor One

    Votes: 1 2.5%
  • Total voters
    40
Yeah dude, I just ummmm guessed at that bump in the low end.

:rolleyes:


When I was shopping for new nearfields a year ago, the reveals were the hottest speakers around in the nonbiamped market (I assume we're talking about the passive reveals here),,Before I settled on the PS5s for my control room (the 6's and 8's were muddy here) I checked out every speaker in the under $700 range and the reveals were great sounding. Im sure once you learn them your mixes transalate nicely but there was a definite bump at the bottom and the midrange was not up front and clear as it is on the PS5's. If I were buying speakers for my living room Id buy the reveals with a sub maybe. The 5's have their flaws (imaging isnt the best) but the midrange is clear as day, vocals are right there and completely transparent. The highs are not harsh at all and the bass is tight and punchy, a drop thin but very present in the right room. I just didnt get the transparency I was looking for with the reveals. If they work for you, keep on keepin on.
 
Thanks for the reply.
I was originally looking at the PS series but between a few questionable comments on them and the decision to go "passive", I decided to run with the Reveals. I haven't noticed any pronounced "bumps", etc., in their sound here though.

Have a good New Year.

ChrisO :cool:
 
Other peoples comments have be taken with a grain of salt especially regarding nearfields. Speakers sound very dif depending on the room youre in, etc
I heard the reveals in a control room that was built from ground up.
 
"the key is to get a decent monitor and learn them....."

Well said Gidge. I just purchased a pair of actives in that ballpark. Went in to the store with my heart set on the JBL25P's. Listened to a similar pair of Yamahas', KRK's and Event PS5's as well as the JBL's...

Walked home with the Events. To MY EARS they were more balanced than the JBL's - which seemed a bit bassy and the Yamahas' - which seemed a bit tinny.

The only drawback with a 51/4 woofer is sticking the low end. Takes some getting used to.

But then again...ALL monitors take some getting used to. A/B THEM!!!

zip >>
 
I hear you loud and clear, Zip... I feel the learning factor is inevitable; so it makes sense to become friendly with a quality pair first thing. I went with a bargain, the Hafler M5's, and they are disappointing... I have a Hafler TA1100 power amp (package deal), and would like to upgrade my monitors. Do all of you feel the same models discussed in this thread are equally impressive in their passive versions? I'd like to A/B between a set of Tannoy's or Event's and the Haflers (used sort of like an Auratone reference...). I just need to get your angles on the passive vs. the active versions of the monitors discussed here.
Thank you for sharing your expertise.
-caretaker9...
 
Well...

Again a preference thing but...

I have a close friend who is a pro engineer and his opinion is to go ACTIVE. Why? Amplifiers which are matched to the speaker and have set crossover frequencies. He also believes not to skimp on the monitors. Buy the best you can even if you have to skimp somewhere else...

I WANTED the active Mackie 824's but since I also was buying my MOTU / software etc... etc... I got the Event PS5's. The only minor issue is calibrating to the low end - since the woofer is a bit small.

His OPINION is if you have passives they will sound different with different amplifiers...

Of course since it's all about calibration you can "adjust" to anything with good references and enough time. I'm still doing this...

My PREFERENCE was actives since I didn't want more amplifiers sitting around.

Let the Monitor Force be with you....

zip >>
 
ZIP

Was the decision to get the Events financially based? If not what made the Events more desirable than the Makies?
 
Financial all the way!!

The Mackie 824's IMHO are far better monitors. But at the same time I bought the monitors I bought a MOTU 828, LA Platinum software, monster cables etc...

I was getting to the point where I had to make some choices. In the @500 price range I liked the Events best. They work very well for me and I can get by...

...the next pair...

...Mackies or better yet... Genelecs... :)

One step at a time.... :D

If you can afford it...get the BEST monitors you can.

zip >>
 
I do reccomend the passives because you may have to replace one sometime and theres no guarantee that the amp designs in the actives will remain intact from model year to model year.

My monitor chain consists of a Phase linear model 400 series 2 and a pair of ns10s, the same combination used by Alan Parsons.
 
His OPINION is if you have passives they will sound different with different amplifiers...
Click to expand...

That is a justified opinion. The amp affects what you hear not only in the way it colors the sound going to your speakers, but also in the way it deals with resistence from the speakers. Passives also have the added variable of longer speaker cable runs.

-Shaz
 
Newbie/help

First off, I'm really new to mixing, and not having the luck I'd like. (Can't get a handle on the bass, midrange too 'nasal') I've been using my drummer's Alesis M1 MkII's, but I need to get my own monitors to finish mixing our project.

Second, I know this was kind of a budget monitor post, but everyone got to talking about the HR824's, etc, so I thought this wouldn't be too off-topic.

I totally understand where Buck62 came from, so I went and demo'd the KRK V8's, Mackie HR824's, and the JBL LSR28P's. First off, to my ears (not to argue with Blue Bear) the KRK's were WAY too bright (all switches flat). The JBL's definitely sounded the "best." But they seemed to have a veiled midrange compared with the HR824's (and ESPECIALLY the KRK's). Sjoko2's comments about the Mackies being really sensitive to position/level was dead-on. You could flip the faders on the JBL's and they always sounded the same. The Mackies seemed to accentuate Fletcher-Munson a lot more. Also, the JBL's had this incredible low-bass (those last few notes you can acutally 'hear,' and not 'feel') compared to the Mackies. Lastly, you could move all around the room and the JBL's sounded the same. You had to sit right in front of the Mackies for them to sound 'right'(?) The Mackies sounded more like a piece of test equipment, the JBL's sounded more like a musical instrument. Like Sjoko2 said, comparing the HR824's to the LSR28P's, you DO almost laugh.

Then someone (I don't remember who) posted those links to all those mastering articles, and I don't remember who it was, but one of them mentioned that, in mixing, you are using a 'microscope' (not his term, but I forgot what he really said) so you can zoom in on problems(especially midrange). But when you are mastering, you need a more 'musical' (still acurrate, but musical) speaker to have a better idea of what the end-listener will hear.

So now back to the LSR vs. HR824 issue. If I've understood correctly, Sjoko2 is building more a mastering setup vs. mixing? If I'm wrong I SINCERELY apologize, I'm just trying to rationalize my ears vs. Sjoko2's. So would it then make sense that he is more interested in a monitor's employability for mastering vs. mixing? So would then a slight midrange dip, with a more present low-bass (more like a home-listening system) be better for HIS application (mastering) but not mine (mixing)?

What all this boils down to is: If it's the difference between hearing what's REALLY in my mixesor not, the difference in price between the two is negligable. Even though the JBL's appear (to my ears) to hide some midrange "forwardness," do they have a benefit in increased transient response or something else (that my horrifically untrained ear cannot yet hear) that will aid me more later when I learn to compensate for the lack of mids?

Unless someone can persuade me (and I'm EASILY persuaded right now,) I'll likely get the Mackies (probably on Sunday). We all have our problems with midrange when we start, and it seems like the Mackies will be more helpful for that for now. Is that a mistake? Is it too short-sighted? Are the JBL's really all that and a bag of chilly-cheese-chips, and I'm too ham-eared to hear it? I guess I just don't want to find myself 6-months from now saying, "If I could have heard well then, I'd have gotten the JBL's."

Apologies for a rambling, overdone response to an already big thread. But I REALLY respect Sjoko2's opinions, and the fact that my ears disagree with his makes me want to know what's wrong with MY ears... And so many people have been snapping up the LSR25P's lately, I figured the 28's would be that much better.

Man am I lost. Please help an idiot newbie...
 
Johnny,

I confess I haven't heard those JBLs but as to the mixing/mastering issue you have, I guess my advice depends on your budget. Meaning to say, if you can only get one set of monitors (and based on your own impression of the "acuracy" of the speakers) I would think you'd get more out of the Mackies.

I was truly amazed how much more of my recordings I was actually hearing when I got my Mackies. If you want to hear how it would sound on and end user system just hit the 80Hz cut, tap in a 2-3dB boost at 11-15kHz and viola! Car stereo (with amazing transient response). Or only cut the low end at 45 and go for the "warm, airy" home stereo sound. (Or just burn a CD, lol.)

On the other hand, if you can get 2 sets, just get both :D

-Shaz
 
one other thing

I confess though - despite all the features on the Mackie, my favorite is still the auto power on/off. Awesome :p
 
Get Both - I wish...

While it would be nice to get both, I'm not looking to do ANY mastering, so I don't need a "mastering speaker" (and room, ears, experience, etc.) What I was wondering was, are the JBL's better for mixing in a way that I simply can't hear. I know ANY monitor will make a difference. I started off on AKG headphones, then home speakers, then computer speakers, and finally these Aleseis M1's. Of all my mixes, this latest one is the best, but I missed a huge problem in the bass with them.

What happened was, I knew that the monitors couldn't help me above about 100Hz, so I tanked the bass and kick at 50Hz, just for safety. But on playback on my friend's uber-home-system, the bass and kick got buried by (can you guess) they keyboard!!! I didn't think the keys had any information down there, so I just left them full-range and they swamped my low-end. I do NOT want to repeat that, so I know I need some monitors that will let me hear the low end. I know both of these will do it, but again, my question to the more seasoned ears here (among which I'm sure yours count; too bad you haven't heard the JBL's, I'd love your opinion) is, "Is there something in the JBL's I can't hear that makes them better." And will I subsequently come to appreciate that later?

For now, though, I'm with you. The Mackies do not sound "nice," or "pleasant," or "seductive." They sound painfully accurate (I believe "brutally honest" was used earlier?) I guess that's my answer, then, though I'll definitely listen to any other comments.

Johnboy
 
It's all preference...

...and about how you calibrate to what you buy. If you need to calibrate to the "real word" burn a CD and play it in your car, a boombox, your home stereo, the cute girls down the street stereo...:p

I would imagine that most of the big mastering houses have REALLY expensive monitoring systems - not just a choice between 824's and 28Ps'...

So bottom line I think you are doing the correct thing. Listen to as many as possible and buy what you think will work for YOU. Keep in mind that when you get home they will sound different than in the music store due to a different acoustical environment.

You'll have to calibrate no matter what you buy.

Good Luck!

zip >>
 
The JBL's aren't better for mixing.........any more than Events, Tannoys, Mackies, etc, etc.,
Basically, monitors should be "painfully honest"........you need to hear what is recorded, as it was recorded, NOT enhanced or coloured as would happen if you were using "stereo" speakers.
The room/environment will be a major factor in how you "hear" any speakers, so obviously, to get the most benefit from near-fields, you need to have an appropriately tuned/treated room.
Ultimately, anything less is a compromise.

:cool:
 
Thank You

Okay, that's pretty much what I had hoped/expected to hear. My goal was to avoid a long-term mistake, but, as been said here time and time again, taste in monitors is incredibly individual. So I'll get the Mackies and do my best with room treatment. Thank you all for your help. Once I spin off a new version of that song I was talking about, I throw it up in the MP3 forum so you can pick it apart. But not before I can fix that keyboard problem and get the drums to come up a bit..

Again, thank you all for your patience and persistence.

Johnboy
 
Room Treatment

Actually, my room isn't THAT bad as it is. While it IS fairly square, it's got lots of irregular shapes, plus all of the corners are filled with bass-absorbent objects. Add my waterbed in the middle (can you guess where I'm working?) and I'm hoping for fairly flat response. I'm to the point where I can hear some flutter echos and such, so I'm going to start by taking my chances and seeing how my mixes translate. More important are going to be some stands to get the monitors off my workdesk (I use a computer, with my O1V off to the side, so it's not in the way of the speakers). Those will make sure I don't get any funky resonances/reflections off the desk.

My last mix was done on M1 MkII's in a big barn with no treatment and really poor monitor placement, and it's sounded remarkably simliar on most systems I've tried (I can hear the same mistakes everywhere :(
So I figure if I can learn the Mackies in my room, I'll be great (right up until I move...) But don't worry, the repeated warnings about room treatment have NOT been missed. But until now (I haven't actually bought the monitors yet, probably next weekend), I haven't had any speakers good enough to make treating the room an issue. But thanks for the link, looks like solid (CHEAP!) room treatment.

There's also an excellent article in the September 2000 issue of Recording Magazine. I don't know if they have a site or not, but it's worth checking a back issue. It's got some good background on the math to calculate room modes and a few inventive/cheap suggestions for room treatment for broadband absorbtion. The article is titled "Isolation Booth Design Techniques." He goes into some pretty hefty work to put in a double-paned window, but the rest of the treatment info is helpful.

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