Everyone join me here for a test of YOUR monitors...

  • Thread starter Thread starter tubedude
  • Start date Start date
tubedude

tubedude

New member
Everyone gather 'round...
Is anyone interested in a little test to help open our eyes about our indivdual monitoring systems?
It may require a little work, and this is open to any and all suggestions.
Some of the things that make monitors good are reproduction, translation, fatigue-factor, PRICE, and pretty importantly, how well they respond to EQ.
I want to find out which monitors are most responsive to EQ, for starters, and I am devising a simple test that we can all do and observe others findings.
To start off, everyone participating needs monitors! List here 1st which monitors you have, how well they translate to other systems and fatigue level. List your amplification too. Lets get a numbering system, 1 being bad, 10 being cant-get-any-better.
So, translation is 5, they do ok, 1 they suck, 8 they are pretty damn good. Fatigue, 1 is terrible, 10 is almost not fatigue EVER.
Have at it, we'll get this started soon.
 
Ok, this is very subjective but having listened to several different monitors I think I can make a pretty good judgement.
I mostly use:
JBL 4406 studiomonitors.
Usually i power them with an Inter M r300 amp.
Sometimes i use a custom made amp, both sound good with little coloration.
The Jbl´s translate pretty well, at least as good as genelec 1031´s (or was it 1029?) and they have a good solid stereo imaging. My mixes almost never sounds bad on other systems, sometimes a bit bass heavy perhaps but that happens with almost any nearfield. (they were actually voted the best overall monitors commonly used in studios (mod:ed though, mine are unmoded)
translation: 8
I get tired of the music long before the sound, which in my boog gets them a pretty good grade...
Fatigue: 8
you can find them pretty cheap used nowadays if anyone wants to sell, and since theyre pretty common Jbl still supports them which is good. One of my woofers just blew and i got a new one within a week from jbl.
So overall id give them an 8 which is higher than i would rate the other monitors i heard. Mind I could be a bit biased since these are my babies ;)
 
Tannoy ProtoJ's powered by a Hafler TA1100.....works for me......

id give the monitors a 7 and the amp a 8.5
 
I'd help you out (I've got Alesis M1s) but I don't know what any of that stuff means. :) If you wanna explain it to me then I can tell you when I get home.

Christopher
 
For home use at the moment I have a pair of KRK rokits that are powered by a REXX Acoustics poweramp. (Its an old, old, old amp that I am sure is doing more harm than good to the sound of the KRKs)

TRANSLATION = 6 FATIGUE = 6
It took a while to set them up right but I think that I have found the sweet spot in my space. I think that I also tend to get tired of the song itself before I get tired of the sound.

But all in all overall I have to say that the KRKs are great for their price and performance and I am sure that once an investment into a new poweramp takes place the above numbers will jump a notch :)

SAUNAVATION AUDIO PRODUCTIONS
 
Cool, cool, I'm working on a way to develop a test that isnt too subjective... I'm thinking white or pink noise, but I'd almost rather find something more "enjoyable" to tweak the EQ with. Some monitors have enough sensitivity to show a level change in eq freq of only 1 or 2 db, whereas some will need a 6db boost to be heard in certain ranges. A 6db boost may sound like HELL on other systems. See what I'm saying? I have a plan, let me get it together and get some more people involved.
 
How about a pair of Yorkville YSM-1's driven with 100 watts RMS?
 
From my experience, anytime I get my mix back home from the studio, there and then, the inadequacies are highlighted. So really, I think that yoy can use just about any speakers just as long as you know how they respond.

I ask myself why I come out of an expensive studio and into my budget bedroom and find problems with my mixes. Truth is that I know those home speakers so well and those studio speakers are so good quality that they tend to compensate for inadequacies at times.

My suggestion is get one and only one set of monitors and learn them by listening to everything through them.
 
Yeah yeah yeah, good but old advice, and thats not what this is about... this is going to be about revealing those inadequate features in your own particular monitors, by sort of a double blind testing, trying to elimiate the subjectivity (hard) and making it easier for us, after compiling the data somehow, to make our next selection, or help make it, and to help those of you that have mixing problems perhaps find the source of those problems. Maybe. :) Yeah, did that make any sense?
Anyway, if you dont have ideas, that I said were welocome, or a list of your equipment and the ratings, then lets keep the other banter to a minimum. :)
Thanks.
By the way... the more people we have with the same monitors, the better this will be.
 
Yamaha NS10s
Phase Linear Model 400

Translation 10 amp 10 fatigue 8
 
Event PS-6's, powered monitors. Can't remember the power rating.

(I have no basis for the numbers below- these are my first monitors and I haven't had them but 9 months. Haven't bandied the mix about on tons of systems, yet.)

Translation: 6 Fatigue: 9 (I can go for days on these things as long as I can keep my head out of the cans.)


Chris
 
Dude,

> Some of the things that make monitors good are reproduction, translation, fatigue-factor, PRICE, and pretty importantly, how well they respond to EQ. <

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Most of the things you talked about (maybe all of them) have to do with frequency response only.

Translation is how accurately you can assess the bass while mixing, which has more to do with the control room than the speakers, unless the speakers are really lame.

Ear fatigue is also a function of frequency response. If the speaker has a big peak in the upper midrange, you'll get fatigued.

I have never heard of "how well they respond to EQ" but that doesn't make sense to me. If you EQ your music and don't hear a difference, then the problem is in the EQ and not the speakers.

--Ethan
 
"I have never heard of "how well they respond to EQ" but that doesn't make sense to me. If you EQ your music and don't hear a difference, then the problem is in the EQ and not the speakers. "

I can guarantee you that different speakers with the same program material will respond differntly to different EQ adjustments because of the actual freq response that you speak of, and some just dont respond well at all. Some speakers will take a 2db boost and make it clear as day, whereas, say, a Tannoy Reveal can somehow mask the boost, and make you want to add 6db instead, and when you listen to mix elsewhere, it sticks out bad and ugly. The problem will be in the speaker in most cases, not the EQ.

The reproduction part... yeah, subjective I guess, but as we build a database on "things", gerneral opinion may come in to play. This will be to help people learn thier monitors and to help us choose monitors later. That is, if it works. Dont knock it yet. We'll see.
Fatigue factor can come in to play depending on things like tweeter material. Do some research on that. Yes, it has to do with some frequency peaks, but there is more, too. If you have fatiguing speakers, try to eq that very fatigue out of them. Yeah, good luck.
I'm tired and been up all night, its bed time, I hope that made sense. I dont even know why I'm defending it, since I havent really announced what we're gonna do yet, no one should be trying to strike it down.
G'nite.
Everyone keep posting.
 
Event PS5's...

Translation quality - Overall excellent with the exception of the lower frequencies. Having the small 5 1/4" woofer detracts from the low end reproduction and translation. Fortunately I have a dBX sub and Thiel studio monitors on my stereo I use to check final translation.

I'd rate them a 6 based on low freq translation issues.

Fatigue - Almost none. Nice crisp BALANCED sound with very little fatigue caused by the upper end stuff.

My rating = 9.

zip >>
 
JBL-Control-5 ,kind of old by the standards now,but with a pair of good qualilty radio shack monitors all together it gives you a commun sense of how its going to sound like outside....i use the radio shacks for compensation on the highs missing on JBL that will be heard on radio,car cd´s,supermarkets,whatever...

i think its more of a intuitive decision,cos it depends heavyly in the place where you will be listenning to and the music genre,i´ve heard nice mixes sound good on good monitors inside the studio and then some guy from the band complains that it is lacking or missing on something cos he only has a 30watts woofer in his car...then when he listens to it in a crowded bar full blast he says "its powerfull man!"
 
Last edited:
List here 1st which monitors you have
Click to expand...
KRK V8s - active, 200 watts (130/70)
Events PS6 - active, 100 watts (70/30)
Yorkville YSM1i - passive, powered by Hafler P3000
Tannoy Proto-Js (now sold!) - formerly powered by Hafler P3000 (150 Watts/channel @ 8 Ohms - 200 Watts/channel @ 4 Ohms)

how well they translate to other systems and fatigue level.
Click to expand...
KRK V8 - translate 9, fatigue 9
Events PS6 - translate 7, fatigue 10
Yorkville YSM1i- translate 7, fatigue 10
Tannoy Proto-J - translate 6, fatigue 7
 
TD,

> Some speakers will take a 2db boost and make it clear as day, whereas, say, a Tannoy Reveal can somehow mask the boost, and make you want to add 6db instead <

I've never experienced that, but I won't say it's not possible. Of course, if you apply a boost at 40 Hz. on a speaker that doesn't go down that low, I can see how the speaker is keeping you from hearing the EQ.

> and when you listen to mix elsewhere, it sticks out bad and ugly. The problem will be in the speaker in most cases, not the EQ. <

I have always owned very good loudspeakers, so my experience with problems in lesser brands is limited.

> Yes, it has to do with some frequency peaks, but there is more, too. If you have fatiguing speakers, try to eq that very fatigue out of them. <

More? What more? Distortion maybe. In fact, that's one of the things that cracks me up about all the interest in 24 bits and $5000 mike preamps. Loudspeakers typically have 10-100 times more distortion than all other components in a modern system combined.

--Ethan
 
"Loudspeakers typically have 10-100 times more distortion than all other components in a modern system combined. "

Probably right, but thats exactly what makes a vintage Celestion so nice on a guitar cab :)
 
What the hell...

Damn the distortion!!!;)

Let's do it anyway....................!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top