I just got monitors, what you guys think?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sonicpaint
  • Start date Start date
Re: For real?

sonicpaint said:

Right now there's still no answer as to if, why or how one speaker/monitor is better. Right now everything is "hear-say".

sonicpaint
Click to expand...

why do you care? are you trying to feel better about your purchase of buying stereo's speakers and using them in a studio?you seem insecure...just use it and shut the fukk up...if it doesn't work sell it and get another pair...
 
:rolleyes:

I use my "hear with your ears, not your eyes" comment all the time. It may seem obvious but most people don't think about it at all - they look at the specs (or meters) thinking they're getting the picture....

Don't forget - specs are written by the marketing department, NOT the engineers -- and they can be spun to say anything the manufacturer wants.

As well... specs ARE meaningless once you place them in a room where the speakers are now interacting with the space they're in! (How you don't understand this is beyond me...!) And near-fields may have deisgn considerations making their optimal listening position closer, but they still exist and interact with the room.

I agree with "the teach"... you are seriously overanalyzing and making a lot of questionable assumptions in the process....

Just fucking listen to your monitors and start learning how to use what you got!
 
but...but....

geartechheads love to overanalyze...i think to a point it drives knowledge...still often leads to a "fhk it I LIKE MY SPEAKERS AND THEY TRANSFER WELL!!" :)

what I'm gettin' here is choices:

huge assortment of crap sht speakers- avoid

large assortment of decent speakers-cool

overkill-high priced speakers 14k gold emblems-useless waste

what is it you want from your speakers?
less ear fatiguie?
my mixes transfer great on the first CDRburn!!

salesmen once told me "never invite an engineer to a customer meeting....they always tell the truth"....kinda like "it don't fhkn matter just learn your fhkng speakers= you don't need to keep buying new ones...what kinda sales pitch is that?
 
I think that the combination of crossovers (1st order, 2nd order and so on ) and crossover points and driver choices and baffle designs affect the 'lobing' of the drivers (especially tweeters ) and thus affect where the speaker focuses. Thus, nearfields are theoretically designed to 'focus' or intergrate at a distance of 3-7 feet.
But, once again, all that matters is how they sound in your particular space.

For example, I use a pair of JBL 4208's which are not well liked by most of my friends here at Homerec.......but in my room where I've placed them, they are very balanced and, in fact, sound great and my mixes translate well to other systems. That doesn't mean that everyone else is wrong......I seem to have an unusual result. But the bottom line is that they work well for me in my room.
 
Like I said personal!!

Like I said, this is becoming personal to some people that are over using the word "fuck" to show their anger.

I don't know why or how you think that it's me that doesn't understand you BlueBear, when I think it's the opposite. Not that this matters. I don't know why your getting all bent out of shape about it.

In short all I have done was try to find out why there are differences between the two and what makes one better then the other in some peoples minds.

Teacher? I love my speakers, that's why I bought them! How is it that you got me being insecure about my speakers from that quote? Over analyzing? Me or you?

Listen guys, if you have some info as to what makes one speaker better then the other for what ever reason, (a side form personal feelings and hear-say) then post your thoughts. If you don't then don't post to this thread. What I thought would have been a learning experience turned out to be a bashing contest. I'm not going to start swearing back at anyone, I just want to know what the differences are. That's it!

Unbelievable
sonicpaint
:rolleyes:
 
would you use a mercedes s600 for a race or a porsche? they are both great cars but one is MADE for racing while the other is made for comfortable travel. not saying the benz wouldn't work but i'm pretty sure you'd have better lap times with the porsche (911 turbo of course:D )....now use that and relate it to speakers...
 
Lt comes thru

Lt. Bob said:
I think that the combination of crossovers (1st order, 2nd order and so on ) and crossover points and driver choices and baffle designs affect the 'lobing' of the drivers (especially tweeters ) and thus affect where the speaker focuses. Thus, nearfields are theoretically designed to 'focus' or intergrate at a distance of 3-7 feet.
Click to expand...

Lt. sounds like the kinda answer i was lookin for...
baffle designs, 'lobing', speaker focus at 3-7'.

i thought there was some engineering design intention to optimize a near field listening enviroment.

i thought this was a good fhkg thread IMO, there sonicpaint...alot of replies.

before I depart to the "how to fix you DRYWALL SOUND threads" does anyone know if double-ply toilet paper is better than single ply...my monitors have a trebly sound that causes slight ear bleed?
 
lol.....

lol......Coolcat I needed a good laugh.
Good one dude!!:D
 
Lt. Bob said:
I think that the combination of crossovers (1st order, 2nd order and so on ) and crossover points and driver choices and baffle designs affect the 'lobing' of the drivers (especially tweeters ) and thus affect where the speaker focuses. Thus, nearfields are theoretically designed to 'focus' or intergrate at a distance of 3-7 feet.
But, once again, all that matters is how they sound in your particular space.
Click to expand...

at least someone getting a clue, but first I think even close-field studio monitors need to be broken down into at least two diff. catagories 1) the ones that are, and, 2) the ones that just put on the badge, you know which ones I'm talking about,
but anyway you can add dynamics, thermal compression, quality of components (ie: crossovers), transient response, voicing...
as far as catagory 2 monitors go, I don't think they would fair any better than the polks, but I haven't compaired any cat. 2 monitors, why would I!

LT Bob, if you don't know about/what "power response" is, look into it, it kind of helps tie thing togather, also "directivity". think of microphones in reverse.
 
So what are you powering them with? The amp takes all your specs and flushes them down the toilet! Something that makes sense to my 3-year old:

If you are monitoring near the speakers, wouldn't you want speakers make for it?

sonic,
I know you are not as dumb as you are coming across... I think you have a bit of bonding to your new purchase... but what do you expect when the link you gave us leads to Polk's website which explains that the "speakers" are for home theatre systems? Also, the whole "hear with your ears, not your eyes" comment was in perfect taste. It was simply a realization about the specs. Now what about when you get a pair of HR824s and they have been scientifically matched... does that mean that the specs have been changed?
 
Hey 13th_Omen .

To be honest (and I've said this in previous posts) that I expected the responses that I got. What I didn't realize is how people can get so pissed off saying that my home speakers are not "Monitors". Then on top of that, accuse me of making "questionable assumptions" (I'd like to know what these are) when they can't tell me what the difference is between and near-field monitor and my regular speakers besides that near-field's are made for listening to at a distance of 3-7 feet. Now what I was going to ask was, How do they make a speaker for listening 3-7 feet? But I'm assuming here from some research I've done that it has a lot to do with the speaker baffle and construction, the way the materials react with the sound waves(resonance) and in all other aspects of the monitor.

It just seems that the more answers/opinions that have been mentioned, the more questions are created. You've brought up a good point that I think is worth mentioning. You said that you felt (or know) that there are some near-field monitors that "just wear the sticker", and this is exactly what I'm trying to understand. Is there a real difference between the two types of speakers or are they just being labeled or "wearing stickers"?

Again about the spec's, I don't know how many times I have to say it. It's not all about the spec's, though I think that they are a good reference.

Thanks for your reply,
sonicpaint
 
Re: Hey 13th_Omen .

sonicpaint said:
Again about the spec's, I don't know how many times I have to say it. It's not all about the spec's, though I think that they are a good reference.
Click to expand...
That - is an example of "questionable assumptions" -- like I mentioned already -- specs are written by the marketing department, NOT the engineer.

So no, they generally AREN'T a good reference at all....

I'd also like to point out that you've managed to take some of my tongue-in-cheek comments (such as the use of the word fuck) too seriously..... lighten the fuck up! (see - again.... tongue-in-cheek!)
 
sonicpaint said:
You said that you felt (or know) that there are some near-field monitors that "just wear the sticker", and this is exactly what I'm trying to understand. Is there a real difference between the two types of speakers or are they just being labeled or "wearing stickers"?

Again about the spec's, I don't know how many times I have to say it. It's not all about the spec's, though I think that they are a good reference.

Thanks for your reply,
sonicpaint
Click to expand...

I think your question has been answered as far as the diff. between "real" close-field monitors and hi-fi (unless your going to get into building and desinging your own).

and you have to look at more than the on-axis FR. to tell anything about what the speaker MIGHT be doing, plus you have to know what your looking at. It helps to have designed some of your own speakers with test equipment to see what's what. but belive me, after 15 years, it's not a cheap hobby. I find it rewarding and fun though.
 
About Power?

Does it matter at this point? I'm using a good amp but then again I'm sure some people would disagree with me no matter what my answer would be. Everyones' a critic.

So no offense to anyone but I like what I'm using, speaker and amp wise and to be honest, I've heard enough opinions from people to last me a lifetime. I've never been the type of person to follow what everyone else is doing because I like to cut my own path,but it's obvious that I'm in the minority. So be it.

I'd like to say thanks to everyone though for taking the time to post there thoughts and info, for or against. It's been definitely a learning experience as to where people's mindsets are.

Later
sonicpaint
 
I read through the thread. What were you hoping would happen?
 
Hmmm..... I knew this would get ugly.

While I agree that some of sonic's ideas could be interpreted as over-analytical, or maybe not addressing some of the specifically intended points, but I think he has raised some interesting things.

You hear with your ears - not your eyes. I'm sure we would all take that as a given truth. Okay, then.... one box has "monitors" printed on the box that you can see, and another box has "speakers" printed on the box that you can see. When we choose the box that says "monitors" and ignore the box that says "speakers," is it not fair to say that we're listening with our eyes before we give our ears a chance? We're not giving a chance for our ears to determine this, as we make decisions based on rhetoric from sales staff and chat forums, and based on marketing and packaging propaganda. I think that is sonic's point, and I agree on that level.

Specs are ambiguous at best. They say that "figures never lie, but liars can always figure." Let's say, though that a given speaker has a response of +/-1db from 20hz-20khz. Another speaker with exactly the same specs could sound way better (or worse) based on how well it handles the frequencies across the spectrum? It's not simply a matter of amplitude, but the clarity of the frequency handling?

Just a couple of thoughts....

Chris
 
Chris Tondreau said:
Specs are ambiguous at best. They say that "figures never lie, but liars can always figure." Let's say, though that a given speaker has a response of +/-1db from 20hz-20khz. Another speaker with exactly the same specs could sound way better (or worse) based on how well it handles the frequencies across the spectrum? It's not simply a matter of amplitude, but the clarity of the frequency handling?

Just a couple of thoughts....

Chris
Click to expand...

you can even go as far as having the exact same drivers, in the same boxes, and they can sound totally different, even though they both measure "flat" on-axis.

"figures never lie, but liars can always figure." I like that saying
 
I expected the response I got.

caryindy said:
I read through the thread. What were you hoping would happen?
Click to expand...

I've already answered this question in a previous post.
 
sonicpaint said:
I just got my monitors and I'm real happy with them and thought that I'd let everyone know what they are, to get everyones bashing opinions on them....lol. The speakers that I got will surprise everyone I think.
<snip>
Click to expand...

Sonicpaint - no offense man, seriously, but I doubt anyone would run out and buy a pair of $200 home stereo speakers just to see if they work out as a good pair of monitors for studio use. I think what would have sold people here was for you to start to post killer mixes that sounded good to everyone.

The end product is the proof.

I know a few well respected people here that honestly try and help people to make good buying choices. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but when someone makes a claim about a great buy on a piece of gear and there is no proof of how good it really is, it is challenged by people who have the experience.

Thank you anyway, for trying to pass on what you believe to be a good deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top