Mackie and Yorkville only decent monitors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ella
  • Start date Start date
E

ella

New member
I tried the mackies 824, KRK 8, maudio bmx8, Alesis m1, and Event 20/20. So far.

The mackies blew them out of the water completely. I know tha mackies were 300 more then the next speakers but the difference was huge!!

I am going to try the Yorkies Monday anything else I should try while I am at that store?

And will the ysm's be as good (in your opinion) as the mackies? Or are the mackies really that good at that price point.

Frankly the KRK's were close in price and were MUCH worst. About the same as the maudio's. But the KRK's had better lowend. All the other monitors dropped off so much faster the the mackies.

Maybe the tannoy's would be good to listen to?
 
In my experience, the V8s are brighter, place vocals a bit more out front and are drier than the the mackies, more studio monitorish in sound. The mackies are darker, have more front back depth, have the vocals placed similar to where typical speakers place them (are ever so slightly scooped) and easier for lay people to like.

Ive been mixing on the mackies for months and life has been alot simpler than it used to be on tannoys, events, haflers and yorkvilles.

Either speaker will work well and is the bang for the buck in that range.
 
Some swear by the YSM's and having had the chance to listen to them at World Pro Audio, the YSM's are solid in clarity with as flat a response as can be allowing the user the utmost in critical monitoring.

I use Event 20's, Tannoy Reveals & ProtoJ's and though they may not be hi-end units, I've basically learned each monitors response
and frequency translation so I can properly judge my mixes.
The Reveals offers the flattest of the 3 with no added hype in freq's 70hz and below. The 20's are used as what I call my "2nd Opinion" with detailed hi freq's and a clean midrange with a more distinctive bass! Fits in nicely as an all purpose cross-reffer or monitoring. Lastly, I use the Proto J's to determine translation
on consumer formats, similar to listening to your final mix in home and car stereos, walkmans or boom-boxes. The Proto-J's are adequate monitors and perform decently for it's price range.
Bottom freqy's are more pronounced w. mids sometimes sounding
a tad muddy. Proto J's are also great for serious monitoring of lower freq's when used in conjunction with other monitors.
I'm no expert whatsoever as I'm simply adding my .000000001 cents!

Peace
Q.rM
 
Yeah I have a feeling from all the responses here that a look at the Tannoy reveals maybe a real good idea:)

And I never thought of have 2 different kind of monitors and then move it over into commercial set ups (car, boombox, etc)

I wasnt sure if there was a reason the mackies sounded so much better overall are the KRK's a more true flat response set up then Mackie's?

I am after the best mix I can get of course to translate over rich and full as possible in a home studio inviroment.

If I dont like the sound maybe it is more my laments ears, and I do not want to miss out on some missing frequency I wont hear on the mackies:)
 
Does anybody recommend the samson resolve 65 or 80?

I am not even listening to anything by edirol, or Behringer truths but samson resolv not sure:)
 
Have a listen to the Truths, they're supposed to be quite good.

Between the 824s and YSMs, I wouldn't pick a winner. The 824s and YSMs have about the same -3dB point, but the 824s have a shallower rolloff so you will naturally get some more bass out of those. The 824s can go much louder, and with the discharges my old sound card gave on a regular basis, I probably wouldn't be here right now if I was using them :).

However, the reason I chose the YSMs, with regard to the fact that the 824s were still within my budget is simply because the YSMs did not sound like a pair of 400 dollar monitors.

Between the two, the midbass response on the YSMs was unreal (or should I say real). Listening to some deep vocal tracks, it sounds very natural, no notes are dragged and every nuance just shows itself off. The depth of the presentation was superb.

The 824s sounded somewhat 'boxy' in that respect. It's as if I was listening to a speaker not a singer. This is what people mean when they refer to the 824s as 'slow'. The bass response was very good no doubt in relativity, but it had just too little definition to make that octave come alive. I've always believed it's due to the smaller woofer on the YSMs that they can get the job done so well. Substantially less surface area and potentially lighter woofer structure.

As for the rest of the spectrum, they got the job done like any good monitor should. I didn't have enough time with the 824s to make a clear judgement but they both sounded pretty much concievably 'flawless'. There were some notable differences between the two, but I couldn't give a credit to either speaker. It was impossible to say which sounded better, just 'different'. The differences were pretty small, they both shared a common reference point, which is good evidence that they are both very neutral monitors. The price of the YSMs however pushed me over the edge in favor. I would have spent more, but it was obviously unnecessary.

BTW. Likewise I have heard the KRKs/Alesis Mk/Event 20/20, and I'd agree that they were noticably behind. IMO they weren't that much worse, just a little edgy.
 
NO. . .

Dynaudio, Genelec, Adam, Quested

To name a few

Beez
 
For 1000 I cant get that list "Dynaudio, Genelec, Adam, Quested"

I am sure they sound good but even for the 1500 I thought I would need to spend I could only get one lower grad Adam, The mass produced Genelec model that really has the same specs as the 824 and ysm's

But I will look into quested and dynausio but the only ones I see online are way out of my league right now as well:(

Does anybody know where to buy the Yorkies actives online? Just so I can get a quote if I want to buy and can get them to price match:)
 
Nutt btw Extremely informative and thanks you very much!! I totally understand what your saying about the 824's and it is exactly what I needed to hear from someone that my ears were bright enough to hear the difference.

Krk's were crunchy to me and Maudios were thin. The events were not as bad as I thought but no bass in my ears. And the alesis sounded too much like a regular speaker system is the best way I can put it:)

but the 824's were different. And if the yorkville are similiar to the 824's the yorkvilles will win because of the price:)
 
The yorkvilles sound amazing and own the sub $1k range but they do not translate anywhere near as well as the mackies. They suffer from a general overhyped clarity and hyped upper mid. Youre right, NuTT, the 824s are a bit boxy compared to the yorks bec they dont have that hyped upper mid and hyped clarity all around. The midbass and bass sound very natural on the yorks and are more typical club speaker sounding on the mackies. The danger with the yorkvilles is that your mix sounds ALOT clearer than it will on conventional systems. The mackies are more linear and truer to reality while still articulating enormous detail without hype.
 
Well, I have given a listen to the Tannoy Reveals and the Mackie HR824's.... the Reveals were nice... the Mackie's were almost too good... I am with you, NuTT98... I can afford the Mackie's... the wife even told me that if I like them, I should get them (something about wanting me to be happy). <g> I found them on the internet for 600 USD each... ya gotta call them, though. It is very tempting. I just wish I could hear those Yorkies... I can get those for under 450 USD delivered. Right now I am trying to decide if my curiosity is worth satisfying for 450 bucks. <g>

You did answer a question for me, NuTT98... I was wondering if you had a choice, which ones you would have purchased... you were that sold on the Yorkies, eh? Have you had any probs with the alledged "over-hyped clarity"?
 
600 each seems like a good deal, I think they go for around 800 typically.

If I had a choice? What do you mean, I did have a choice, lol.

I'm not exactly sure what he's referring to with this over-hyped clarity, I aint even sure he's actually heard them. How clarity can be over-hyped is beyond me.

However he does agree that the HR824s sound boxy, so I guess that answers one question for you, they are indeed boxy :). I find that to be a bad thing, speakers are supposed to present the audio not themselves, but as you choose.

Do note that the bottom end on the HR824s isn't as bad as you might have made an assumption of. This 'slow' symptom is noticable but it isn't that bad, just one of those pesky little things that most speakers have in one place or another.

The YSMs you should know have some slight rear panel resonance that somewhat distorts bass notes of certain characteristics. This can be virtually eliminated with a high-pass on a subwoofer.

The HR824s on the other hand will give you a littlebit more bass without a subwoofer, so consider that if you will not be using one. And they do go significantly louder, consider that too if you want 120dB+. The YSMs do get very loud, more than I ever listen to so that often won't be a concern, especially for near-field listening.

Between the two I couldn't pick a winner, price regardless, I still *think* I would have gone with the YSMs. But given the price of the two systems, I took no more consideration and got the ones that were obviously a much better value.

The HR824s offer some advantages, as do the YSMs. I do wish you could just hear the YSMs before buying so you can judge on your own terms. I don't want to push you towards either one cause I can't undoubtedly say a particular one is the one for you.
 
NuTT98 said:
I'm not exactly sure what he's referring to with this over-hyped clarity, I aint even sure he's actually heard them. How clarity can be over-hyped is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Actually, I own a pair of mackies and yorkvilles. I mixed on the yorkvilles for several months before picking up a pair of 824s.

Hyped generally means that there is an illusion of clarity in a frequency range bec that range is either slightly boosted or another range is slightly scooped or smoothed out. In the case of the yorkvilles there is hyped upper mid that makes the vocal sit on top of the mix and an overall exaggerated sense of separation of the frequencies and panning so that it sounds like your mix is clearer than it actually is.

However he does agree that the HR824s sound boxy, so I guess that answers one question for you, they are indeed boxy :). I find that to be a bad thing, speakers are supposed to present the audio not themselves, but as you choose.[/QUOTE]

One mans boxy is anothers 'natural' or 'smooth' or 'linear' or 'unhyped.' It sounds like youre used to the exaggerated clarity and upper mid hype that plagues just about every speaker in the sub$1k range. Ive heard (or had) them all. Event, hafler, alesis, roland, M-audio, etc All hyped in the upper mids and/or on top to give it that studio crisp sound. The exception would be tannoy. Which some would call too bare or too boxy.

Do note that the bottom end on the HR824s isn't as bad as you might have made an assumption of. This 'slow' symptom is noticable but it isn't that bad, just one of those pesky little things that most speakers have in one place or another.[/QUOTE]

The mackies are not slow on bottom. They arent fast either. Theyre somewhere in between. The room you were in was probably untreated.

Between the two I couldn't pick a winner, price regardless, I still *think* I would have gone with the YSMs. But given the price of the two systems, I took no more consideration and got the ones that were obviously a much better value.[/QUOTE]

Having mixed several songs on both, I found it MUCH easier to get a basic mix going on the mackies. The guesswork is gone.
 
The mackies are not slow on bottom. They arent fast either. Theyre somewhere in between. The room you were in was probably untreated.
Click to expand...
Actually it was, but not extensively. Do note that the YSMs were literally one or two speakers away from the HR824s :), so I had a listen to both in pretty much the same light and that's where I noted the bass difference.

Afterwards I did notice around newsgroups that people share the experience of the 'slow' symptom, which convinced me it wasn't just my imagination at work.
 
Any deep bass producing speaker in a small, untreated room will sound slow on bottom. Most people I know who bought mackie monitors did so more for the accurate bass than anything else.
 
I am wondering.... all of us hear differently... I have found that voices at certain pitches are more difficult for me to hear unless they speak a bit more loudly. Do you think that our preferences in monitors, opinions on how they perform, etc. would have anything to do with this?

Also, different pitches bother some folks and have no negative impact on others. Something too bright for one person is great for another. Perhaps, both hearing and personal taste are involved in our selection of the "best" monitor? I dunno.... just wondering.
 
Not likely. If you're using the monitor for monitoring purposes, personal preference should have nothing to do with it.
 
Actually, ADAM makes the only decent monitors. Not that I have ever listened to one.

I LIKE what Harvey Gerst did at his studio with the FM transmitter. That is a really great idea. And you know, that thing only costs $40 and some soldering!! Every studio should have that gizmo... force your Country Music neighbors to listen to your Hip Hop.

Warrant? FCC? Never heard of ya....
 
You could get Dynaudio BM6's for $850 and a Crown DC300 for $150 on ebay and have a nice monitoring setup.

Beez
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top