thats garbage what you just said I can learn any speakers doing that
That's right, you can. That is exactly why it's not garbage.
what would be the point in having a flat set of monitors then?
Many studio monitors - including your Yamahas - are far from flat. But that's not the main issue here. The issue is, there's no way to tell what something sounds like or what it does to the sound of something if you have no idea what that something is
supposed to sound like.
"Aja" and DSOM (just for two examples already mentioned) are great sounding albums that, quite frankly, sound great on just about anything even halfway decent. But if you have never heard those albums before, or at least don't have a good and detailed "sonic memory" of what those productions sound like on other quality playback systems, you have no reference to tell just what your monitors are or are not doing to the sound.
It's just like video monitors; video engineers need to use calibrated and standardized color bars in order to determine just how tuned in or not the color reproduction is on the monitor. If you just show a video - one that the engineer is not intimately familiar with as to how it's "supposed to" look, there's now way of knowing whether that color balance he's seeing is from the monitor or is the actual color coming from the source. Is that high contrast or that red shift because of the type of film stock used or the age of the print or the choice of the director/cinematographer, or is it because of an inaccuracy in the monitor? There's no way of knowing without having a reference to to work from.
in audio, the sound version of color bars would be (depending on what you're checking for) either a 1kHz tone or pink noise. The difference is there's no good way to adjust or calibrate the audio monitor for true flatness, and that the ear cannot relate to test tones or pink noise the way the eye can a bit more easily relate to color bars.
So what is needed is audio program material that the listener can use as a reference; that is material they are intimately familiar with and have a good "sonic memory" or mental impression of just how, on average, the material "should" sound.
there should be a compromise. find songs that are mixed by the best and hearing them on a refrence set a good home stereo or in the car etc. Then compare that to the same song or songs on the new monitors.
There's nothing wrong with that, in fact I'd highly recommend that. My point is that the more familiar you are with the material, the better you'll be able to do this. With unfamiliar material, it will not only be a harder and longer process, but it will be far more difficult to know how much of the difference between your car stereo and your Yammies is because of the car stereo and how much is because of the monitors.
If it's mixed like trash and cheap monitor make them sound pretty that's not what I'm after!
If it's mixed like trash it'll sound like trash everywhere. If a mix is colored by the mixing monitors/environment (not to mention the ears), you'll be bale to tell when you try to play it elsewhere on multiple systems.
I can learn a pair of behringer truths but why would I want to?
Why are many of the commercial albums you listen to mixed or mix-checked on NS10Ms or Auratones? It's not because those speakers are anywhere near flat in their response (the Truths are flatter than either of those). It's because they have learned that if they make theor mixes sound like "X" in those monitors, that it will sound like "Y" almost everywhere else. They are easy for those engineers to translate what they are hearing in the studio to what sounds good outside. That doesn't mean it will actually sound good in the studio; I think very few of those engineers would actually prefer to listen to music on NS10s or Auratones, they just now how to use them to make stuff that translates better in "the real world".
You may very well find that what sounds perfect in your studio is not what sounds best elsewhere, because of coloration in your monitors, your room or your ears. That is not unusual, especially in home studio setups with economical monitors. You'll need to learn that difference - that "translation", as it's called. Obviously we'd all like the amount of that translation to be minimal, which is why we strive for better monitors and room acoustics whenever we can. But flat or bumpy, either way you'll have to learn what your monitors are doing to what you hear, and the easiest way to do that without creating a mountain of CD-R drink coasters that just wind up filling the local landfill for a thousand years is to run some programming through your monitors that you are the most familiar with and let you ears work out the details.
G.
. Not to mention whether your monitors will allow you to pick out just what the almost subliminal accompanying vocals in the second half of the track are actually saying. The better your monitors and the more you listen, the more this mix sucks you in and the more you hear.