Is This True (about Studio Monitors)?

NLAlston

New member
A few years back, I remember reading where someone stated how 5" Reference Monitors were better than their 8" counterparts, for recordings. I can't remember what the reason was, behind the poster's findings, but hope that someone can share something on this issue, now.
 
Well, opinions like that are dependent upon the monitors being judged. I myself would give an absolute "are you *******kidding?". lol!

In my experience, have found the size of the driver to be of less consequence, than the room they are used in. That is also relative to the quality/price of the monitor itself. I get 'more' low end from KRK RPG2 5's than I do from my Event TR8's. But it is artificial, and not accurate from the KRK's. My mixes translate better from the 8" Event's I own. This does not mean that this is an accurate judgement for all monitors. Hell, I have some computer speakers that have 2.5" drivers that sound great in the low end. I would never put trust in them, alone, for mixing.

Learning how your mixes translate on a given set of monitors, in the acoustic environment you are working in, is the only determining factor. Opinions from others are just opinions. One must decide for themselves in their own mind, with their own ears/control room environment. Or what you can afford to try yourself.
 
Yes, and I think I do understand where you are coming from. Just today, however, I was in a discussion with my brother, over something that I had read, a good while back. There had been admission, from the poster, as to how 5" monitors had a clear advantage over their 8" counterparts. I cannot remember what the advantage(s) was/were supposed to be, and just thought that I'd query the issue here. It was probably nothing more than one person's subjective viewpoint, on the matter, but - if you don't know - you don't know.
 
Back
Top