Good Monitors = Good Mixes

  • Thread starter Thread starter zallen25
  • Start date Start date
jfreeman373 said:
I work on commercials and run camera for the news at 5:00 5:30 and 6:00.

He's a VIDEO guy. No wonder he thinks he knows everything, but dosn't. I spend two twenty hour days lighting a stage and making a room look prety, dressing and gaff taping my cables, and these news twerps come in with there ugly ass orange cables, run them to a wall, crossing right over the main asile, just to set up an ugly ass umbrella reflector in the middle of the room, right where it blocks the view of half the audience.

And don't even get me started on what video trucks do to audio when they don't get a seperate audio truck!!! Can you say snap crackle buzzzzzzzz, hummmmmmmmmm!!

Just remember the motto of every camera man in the world. "if it ain't on the screen, it ain't important." And if you think they look at audio as anything more than a nucience, you have never worked with most video guys.

Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Light, that statement is so accurate, I spilled my coffee I was laughing so hard after I read it. :D Over the past 20 years I've worked with lots of them in video studios and audio is not their strong point. The know all about IRE units and which line the VITS are on but not squat about audio.
 
I enter this discussion looking for some honest opinions on monitors. I've read the whole thread and there seems to be a lot of knowledge here. My question is what would be your pick in purchasing a pair of monitors in the following price ranges (price per pair)? I'm not looking for something like Mr. Freeman was talking about. I'm looking for a pair that I could learn to get good mixes on.
$100-$200
$200-$300
$300-$400
 
Mackie HR824 vs Adam p22a vs Dynaudio BM6a

Hello bodies,

I am about to spend about 1500$ on a new pair of nearfield monitors to "decorate" my homestudio but I need your advices about the followings:
- Mackie HR824 (1200$)
- Adam p22a (1800$ from europe)
- Dynaudio BM6a (1600$ from europe)
The style of music am going to mix with them is between moby, radiohead, the red hot chili pepers and NIN. But I guess good monitors will always be good whichever style you play, true ?? (sorry: my spelling betrayed my frenchness).
I heard some of you saying that choosing the right monitors is something subjective...but I suppose there are also some objective good criteria to rank them...isn't it???...any of your comments about these 3 is likely to be helpful for me: thx in advance and happy us to have this excellent site....I don't have to bother my girlfriend with monitors specs any more!!

Also: Is there a way to listen to some of you people mixes on this site by the way???

God, allah or buddha bless our ears!!!!!
 
Track Rat said:
Light, that statement is so accurate, I spilled my coffee I was laughing so hard after I read it. :D Over the past 20 years I've worked with lots of them in video studios and audio is not their strong point. The know all about IRE units and which line the VITS are on but not squat about audio.

I didn't even get into booms. Could those things be any uglier, or block any more sightlines?

AHGGGGG!!!

It could be worse. He could be a set designer. Don't get me started.

But on todays show the TD is a lighting/audio guy, so the vidiots have to keep things neat.

And there's going to be naked women. On some days, in some ways, I love my job.

Sorry for venting, it has been a very busy month.

Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
jfreeman373 said:
I run camera for the news at 5:00 5:30 and 6:00.

What kinda punny ass tiny little market are you working in, anyways? Even minor market stations use robo cams for the evening news. Why the hell would you want to pay for a camera op when you only have about seven shots you need to cover?

Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
whoooeee! light just opened about a six-pack of whoop-ass on jfreeman!

the scary part is the jfreeman373.... does that mean there are 372 others???:eek:
 
First off, I'm an audio guy. I hate video! It pays the bills. We are a CBS network station in chicago, and I do many more things there than just camera. Camera man is nothing. During the rest of the time I engineer, just not during the news. I make commercials and news open on an AVID system and I also programme the satellite feeds and transmitters. It pays the bills, but it sucks.The people are pushy and rude and like to argue about anything... kind of like you people. The only reason I ever got condescending is because of Blue Bears know it all comments that said what i said was Bullshit. Maybe my opening statement sounded that way to him, I didn't mean it to.

I still believe I am right. When we do a DNA analysis do we try to analyze it to get the results that WE want, or do we analyze it to find out who's it is. I guess we should use the equipment that pins the murder on the guy we are trying to convict or the child suppport payments to the guy that has the money.

I sure hope not.

So why should we do the same when analyzing or "monitoring" our music? I don't think we should, and I think it is a mistake if you do. I guess the term "good mix" is subjective also. But I think if a person has the ability to hear without some defect, most people would agree on what is "good". Where it may get difficult is the difference between "excellent" and "good". But I think if you had a system in which everything was clear, you could easly tell the difference.

I can easily tell the difference in sound cards AND CD players now. On my old system, there was no recognizable difference. I can hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit. Can you guys do that on your system? I can hear the difference between my DC300, my Power Tech, and my Macroreference amplifiers. If you can EASILY tell the difference on your systems, than you probably have a descent monitor.

All I ever tried to say was that I had an excellent pair of speakers and I tried to let other people know about them. I was going to go away, but you guys are like begging me to respond to your childish statements. If Blue Bear hadn't called my mother a bitch, none of the negativity would have ever happened. But I guess since I don't have 6000 posts like some people that live on the net, I don't know anything and my points are invalid.The truth is usually unpopular.

I came to this forum cause it was the first one that poped up in Google that had to do with recording. I was hoping it would have a few people that were professionals as opposed to want-a-bees. I make money in Audio, I make money in Video, and I make money in acoustics. If no one wants to take advantage of those resources or has any questions for me, quit talking about me or to me. I am only responding now to practice my typing and be entertained before band practice.

why have I gotten so many peoples attention to the fact that they keep posting negative comments towards me. SO I spent some money on good equipment. So what. Is that bad? I have good speakers so..... I'm an evil-rotten-know-it-all-bastard. Oh well, I can live with that if it's true. I guess I'm a terrible person for sticking up for my opinions that I believe to be FACTS. Does anyone hear actually belong to AES. CHANGE THE SUBJECT FOR GOD'S SAKE, or is that the only topic you people know anything about. People usually slam what they are afraid of or are jealous of, and that is a fact also. You all act like gossiping women (no offense to the women of course). Just drop it please and be nice. I will try myself...Geeez.
 
jfreeman:

i certainly don't know your work, nor probably do you know mine.

so here's the bottom line: if your mixes please your clients, and sound good to the buying public, then that's all that matters. if you feel that you could not get the same results on any other monitors, then chances are you're right. no argument from me.

but it doesn't mean that other engineers, including the top pros in the field both past and present, haven't made mixes that are at least as good as yours. so it's kind of arrogant to imply that your methods (and speakers) are the only valid ones.

i think that's why you've become the local whipping boy, not because you happen to like your own monitors.

i'll keep my eye out for you at the next AES show...
 
NS10M's

Ok guys, lets get this straight once and for all. The Yamaha NS10m's were never considered to be the creme de la creme of nearfields, having a slightly harsh 1k presence to them - everyone knows they sound a little harsh. The NS10's were used ( and this has been mentioned earlier ) because EVERYONE could go into nearly any studio and use the same speaker's for reference. Thats why they were called reference speakers !
This monitoring thing DOES require the ears to "learn" their environment ( why do good engineers carry a set of trusty speakers with them at all times for reference ??! ), and where NS10's were widely used, it meant any engineer could enter a strange studio and instantly be comfortable knowing they were using a "familiar" set of speakers ( regardless of whether they had a flat or even for that matter - a nice frequency response ).
The same still applies to monitor's in that a flat response is NOT necessary provided the engineer understands the workings of the speaker itself and is used to the shortcomings of the speaker ( or presence areas, phase probs etc ) and the environment into which it is placed ( dont get me wrong though - the flatter the better ! )
Obviously a truly flat response would be nice too, but thats not what the NS10's did. They were there to provide a speaker "staple" ... and thats why engineers used to check their mixes on them ( this had NOTHING to do with them trying to match consumer gear - thats the most idiotic thing Ive ever heard Freeman !! - why would they spend so much money trying to match bad consumer speakers when they could just BUY some bad consumer speakers for a tenth of the price !!!??? ).
Plainly and simply it's up to the engineer/producer to get "intimate" with their monitor's, and understand their shortcomings and plusses, and then to mix bearing these factors in mind when doing so.
Consumer speakers and amplifiers are "loaded" to appear more full on certain frequencies and to "colour" the sound coming out to make it sound more pleasureable. Given that monitor speakers are designed NOT to colour the sound, THAT is what you are looking for - a flat frequency response, so that you can mix in an uncoloured environement, and let the consumer gear do the colouring later once the album is finished. ( Watch out also for doubling of the lower frequencies, and odd X-over frequencies amongst other things ).
Im afraid I agree with all the posters here that disagree with Mr Freeman ! Mr Freeman, it is up to the engineer ( as it always has been ) to use a speaker that best resmbles a flat response for the budget. Then it is again up to the very same person to understand the misgivings of their reference monitors, and to mix accordingly.
The NS10M's were never flat. Please explain then Mr Freeman why, after years of successful NS10 mixes, I wouldnt be able to do the same on some Yamaha MSP5's once I understood their characteristics and how this translates to the recorded energy on my multitrack.
I believe the NS10m is possibly the best example of how a not so clever speaker can be used as a great monitor, provided the engineer is up to the task of doing their job and using their brain to compare what they are hearing with what they know about the translation of the speaker.
If ONE MONITOR speaker was the be all and end all, why would anyone bother inventing another one ????
Rest assured, monitor's are a personal choice ( with some rather fanatical giudelines of course ! ) and it's up to the engineer to understand their monitoring environment and translate the mixes accordingly.
If you are looking for some active monitors, then consider the following cheapies :
KRKv6 and 8's
genelec 1029A's
Behringer Truths
Yamaha MSP5
HHB Circle 3
KRK V6
Yorkville YSM1P
Alesis M1
Tannoy Reveal Active.
And let your EARS do the critical listening for you - most shops will allow you to test bench htem if you look like a buyer, so just ask at your local, set em up and let your ears decide ( dopnt forget to bring various CD's to test them on ).
There is another new one on the market, I havent had a chance to test yet - the Samson Resolv series. I have no idea what these are like ... anyone tried them yet ?
 
Well I would agrree with most of the things that you guys said except for the fact that I just absolutely HATE powered monitors. It is hard to acertaain, but powered monitors represent a problem in the fact that they also colour the sound, in exact opposite of what they where designed to do. The fact is that resonances from the speaker cabinet in which a powered cabinet is subject, cause modualtion within the said amplifier that is attached to that cabinet, and cause the amplifier on the back of the cabinet to change the next concurrent input signal that is going to go through the amplifier,... and then to the speaker cabinet. Which by default changes the sound. It can be measured!

( I don't know how to explain it properly tonight since I have been drinking quite alot... please trust me ).

The louder you play a powered cabinet, the more modulation distortion that occurs because more vibrations are present. I really only use passive monitors because of these facts. I'm sure there is someone out there that can dispute this some way and find some benefit of powered monitors... like more closely matched amplification or better tracking of the amplifier to the input signal, but whatever the response I would probably dissagree.. OK I'm biased. But I have a relatively large amount of research and expereience to back up my philosophies. I actually lean more towards the HI-Fi buffs than I do A recording engineer. That is because I have found the value in listening to other peoples excellent recordings... rather than my own mediocre ones. I used to love to play and record and mix.... Now I just love to listen to Excellent Jazz recordings. I still like to play and record, but i get more enjoyment out of listening to others music on my new system.

I didn't used to be like that. I will say this, please don't take it wrong.Most modern music is created with the idea of making a new song that sounds however the producer wants it to sound. Reproduction of reality isn't necessarilly taken into consideration. Production of an Idea IS. I have found that I enjoy getting a concert for free in my living room. But most of the time that means listening to music that I before hand hadn't counted as a particular favorite.
But now I just love to find excellent recordings, better than my own recordings. I don't live up to my OWN recording standards. My mixes and recordings are better than everyone else I personally know, and they better well be, since my name is on the line... but that is a limited group that is fairly uneducated and unwilling to take the time it takes to learn. BUT... even in that I can't stand my own recordings... I spend to much time with them. They annoy me. I guess I am more into HI-fi Audio, than I am recording these days. The speakers I was talking about are not that expensive in the world of Hi-Fi. I have seen speaker cabinets in the price range of $60,000. Compared to that... $2800 a pair ain't shit...maybe I'm biased but I think the speakers/monitors that I have now... even outperform those expensive B & W speakers. I will agree... like I have in the past... that you can successfullly trranslate a mix on " crappy monitors ", That is not a slam on anybody's equipment cause I truly unbderstand the idea of cost. But at the same time, good speakers have caused me to lean more towards listening, enjoying,and kicking back listening to music; which is a facet of my life that was lost many years ago except when I hit a phish concert or went to see Gerald Albright or Spyra Gyra. Now really I could care less about mixing. I want to hear something that was recorded well, with excellent equipment, in a decent space,... kick back in my living room and hear it sound like it did the day the engineer recorded it. I want to hear what the engineer was thinking.With good monitors you can have that experience even in your own studio that may very well bore you to death. I like being able to figure out what Mic a particular engineer used without being there the day he recorded the music.

Now many people have stated that the idea of mixing on crappy speakers is a joke and that my statement of engineers using them to simulte the sound they would get on the average Americans home stereo or jam box is ubsurd.

If it is so ubsurd( I question my spelling of that word) than why do so many engineers do their mixes on crappy ass car speakers? I know that they do it. Don't tell me that they don't. It is deliberate. I guess that is POP for ya, and that... is why I like jazz. Maybe I belong in another forum... one more dedicated to hi-fi. Bye now as I wait for my alchoholic buzz to dissapear. My ears are ringing. Has anyone investigated Thiel speakers? I really like Thiels, but I like my Timepieces much more.Bye now.
 
I just leave this thread a little while, and you guys turn it into another "How to turn your old strereo speakers into....". You guys really don't like newcommers with ability to think, do you?

jfreeman373, Your problem is that you said that BlueBear was wrong. He is the top dog around here and has manipulated everyone in beleiving he is a real pro that knows everything. (In reality he has a small project studio to record demos and he seems to lack a bit on logical thinking). When he attacks you - you are dead meat because everyone else will follow. This place is not a discussion board, it's a "I know everything and you are a moron" place for people with big egos.

About this discussion - If your ears has a dip at 500Hz, then you will be used to that. This is how you hear your reality. Having perfect monitors will reproduce the same thing.

A flat frequency response is what all monitor manufacturers are trying to achieve (as well as accurate detail etc...), mainly because this will produce mixes that sounds good on all speakers. If you mix on a pair of crappy speakers, then this mix WILL sound better on these particular crappy speakers than if mixed on real monitors, but it can sound like crap on another stereo. If you mix on good (and flat) monitors, the mix will sound okay on both crappy stereos.

So if you have mixed and are used to a pair of not-so-good monitors, and take this mix to test a pair of monitors that (unknowing to you) in fact IS the absolutely best monitors in the world. Then you will probably prefer the sound of the not-so-good monitors anyway, as the test music was mixed on them, and therefore custom made for them. That is pure logic (as long as the not-so-good speakers not are pure crap). And what does this tell you? It should tell you that technical measurements and specs should count more than listening tests when deciding which monitors to buy.

But as long as you get mixes that sounds okay on all systems, then why bother...? Then you probably have good enough monitors allready... And if you like the sound of them, then that's great. It's you who should live with them, then you should like them as well.

Here is a related thread:
http://www.vsplanet.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=013074

(This post will no doubt be followed by BlueBears standard comment "More Boray Bullshit").

/Anders
 
I don't need to say anything Anders - your crap speaks for itself.

And let's put Boray's attitude in perspective here...

...he's the kind of guy that advocates EQ'ing of monitors in a control room.

:rolleyes:
 
jfreeman373 said:
If it is so ubsurd( I question my spelling of that word) than why do so many engineers do their mixes on crappy ass car speakers? I know that they do it. Don't tell me that they don't.

They don't! ;) They don't mix on them, they just test the mixes on them.

Mix on the best monitors you have - Then test the mix on different systems... And if you have really great monitors, then the testing on other systems will be less important...

/Anders
 
Re: I don't need to say anything Anders - your crap speaks for itself.

Blue Bear Sound said:
And let's put Boray's attitude in perspective here...

...he's the kind of guy that advocates EQ'ing of monitors in a control room.

:rolleyes:

As long as the speakers are that crappy that it makes sense. You won't find that crappy speakers in any "control room" today btw...
 
Boray said:
And if you have really great monitors, then the testing on other systems will be less important...
I totally disagree....... other systems will still help you fine-tune your mixes...

Different sound environments will allow different aspects of the mix elements to be heard - a car stereo is always a good reference check. Many times, a rhythm element that isn't well-placed in the mix with either come out too strongly or disappear - even though in the studio or even on a boombox, it sounded fine.

Checking on multiple environments is ALWAYS a good idea, regardless of the calibre of your primary mixing monitors.
 
Re: Re: I don't need to say anything Anders - your crap speaks for itself.

Boray said:
As long as the speakers are that crappy that it makes sense. You won't find that crappy speakers in any "control room" today btw...
NS-10s are crappy monitors still found in many studio control rooms...
 
Re: Re: Re: I don't need to say anything Anders - your crap speaks for itself.

Blue Bear Sound said:
NS-10s are crappy monitors still found in many studio control rooms...

We have a different idea what is "crappy". I said "As long as the speakers are that crappy that it makes sense." For example a 25 years old stereo.
 
Back
Top