Monitors for mixing?

[sirslurpee]

I am on a budget, and these are my options for mixing: pair of AKG headphones (I'm not sure the model right now, I can't get to them to check and I can't find them on MF.com or anything, I think they are discontinued.), OR my P.A. system (computer->mackie mixer->peavey eq->crown 1000w amp->JBL loudspeakers) OR I have some Klipsch speakers from my computer sound system, they are from the Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 I can use those with my Audio Technica home reciever.

Which would be best for mixing? I saw some people reccommend not to do it on headphones if you have something better, and I've seen that P.A.'s are least desireable for mixing. What should I use?

 

[jonnyc]

Use the computer speakers. Headphones are really the worst for mixing you'll do nothing but frustrate yourself mixing on headphones. The computer speakers cerainly aren't ideal but of the three options its probably your best. Just remember to test your mixes on as many different sources as possible. Some people also hook up little shelf systems, if this is an option for you then you should also consider that. One thing to remember, if you're mixing on your computer speakers and you have them hooked into a say soundblaster type card, or any thing that has a "built in" eq, go to the eq and set it flat, when I first started recording and didn't have monitors its what I did, seemed to make it a little easier to get a decent mix.

 

[scrubs]

I've mixed on Klipsh computer speakers before. The result was not very satisfying, but it's probably the best you have right now. Save your pennies and get some monitors as soon as you can.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I third the motion. The only think worse than mixing on headphones is mixing on PA speakers.

The Klipsch may be far from ideal, but they'll be much better that the other two options. You can still use the headphones for setting relative levels and soundstage panning, but *don't* use them for EQing or final mix balancing or testing.

G.

 

[sirslurpee]

Thanks guys.. I'll see what I can do!

 

[CoolCat]

Klipsch speakers from my computer sound system, they are from the Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 I can use those with my Audio Technica home reciever?

i'll get flamed, but its true...
even basic 2-way cheap HiFi speakers are probably better than headphones... some simple 2-ways, like the ones i gave my brother.
they have improved his mixes considerably.

I don't know why but it works...
its like just accepting the Guitar tuners are correct or accepting tires are round...... no headphones.

I don't know much, but i can attest to a few simple things I learned here at the HR forum. You'll be able to tell right away, and even better yet no ear ringing from the cans for two days!

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

i'll get flamed, but its true...
even basic 2-way cheap HiFi speakers are probably better than headphones...

No flames.... and not "probably"... "will be!"

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

i'll get flamed, but its true...
even basic 2-way cheap HiFi speakers are probably better than headphones

Consumer component speakers get a real bum wrap on this board, but the fact is that is a completly imapropriate over-generalization. The idea that consumer speakers are "hyped" whereas "studio monitors" are not is incorrect and a complete misunderstanding of the situation.

The fact is it totally depends upon the make and model of any individual component. There are some "consumer speakers" that are far more accurate or natural sounding than some widely accepted "studio monitors". For example, I'll take my Klipsch consumer bookshelves (~$100 ea. 7 years ago) - or even better yet, my old original Infinity RS10s from the early '80s (before Infinity went sour) over a pair of NS10s or BX5s any day of the week, without even thinking about it.

At one point I had an associate who was mixing on a pair of Advent 5012s (12" 2-ways) on the bottom, topped off with a pair of Advent 2002s (6"? 2-ways) as satellites on top. His mixes sounded incredible, even when brought to other studios with "real" monitors.

That's not to say that all consumer speakers are up to the task. Most of the cheaper ones aren't. But frankly, neither are many "studio monitors". But even a mid-range consumer speaker is likely to be better than headphones or any PA system short of Bose pillars.

G.

 

[trifidmaster]

sirslurpee,
Appr. for 10 years I have tried to mix on headphones. From cheap ones to a very expensive ones (really expensive ones). Well, I could compose-arrange(?) with them, but I was never able to get any mix decent from them.

And I have tried to discuss this issue with many guys, and I was often told, that it will be extremely difficult to do a correct mix with a headphone. I did not believe (?) them for a decade - but they are were correct.

I realized their good comments when I brought home my 1st set of monitors (400 Euro/pair). No, I was not able to do a mix immeditely (and I am still learning it) - but I started to hear how bad my heagphone mixes were.

Once the set of monitors were running, I started to realize another set of problems: the room needed to be treated - at that time I built tuned traps for that room. (Currently I am working on the acoustic treatment for my new room)

But what I want to say is that in that room one day I had a set of rather cheap speaker with a mosfet amp. I still remember that even on those speakers I could hear the disaster of my headphone mixes.

Recently I have purchased for my son a set of cheapo monitor set (below 100 Euro/pair). Even on that set the heaphone mixes are just not acceptable.

trif.

 

[Yareek]

Well, even though Glen said that consumer hi-fi speakers aren't that bad, I've found they are very much hit-and-miss. I mixed on some JBL Studio S38 speakers once, and they were actually okay. Recently, I mixed on some Athena loudspeakers, and they were very harsh and hyped. You have to watch out.

There's a Sound on Sound article on the boards somewhere about the differences between hi-fi bookshelf speakers and passive monitors, and they aren't too different. I think this is true to a point; some loudspeakers (i.e. B&W, high end JBL) focus on making the music as clear and flat as possible, just like studio monitors. George Lucas, for example, mixes on B&W speakers, and you'll find lots of recommendations for the 603's. Klipsch and low-end JBL, though, will have tons of highs or lows to impress people in the store. Number one culprit is Bose. They have hands down the worst and most misleading schemes ever. Their sole goal is to trick customers into thinking the speakers sound better and making money.

Anyways, in your situation, I'd use the Klipsch speakers. If you can, try and borrow or buy a cheap pair of decent passive monitors or even bookshelf speakers and a home stereo or receiver. It'll get you by.

 

[HermanDirt]

hell no to monitors

I disagree, headphones are by far the best option for home or studio recording. PA is a bad idea as the speakers are rather large and can be quite heavy and akward to carry, this is annoying as they are very expensive to replace when you drop them down the stairs. Also the PA mixer nearly always has alot of confusing buttons, switches and lights.

Monitors or standard speakers should be avoided at all cost as they have no clear grips or handles and are sometimes very shiney and smooth making them incredibly difficult to carry safely!! they are also very square and are notorious for trapping my fingers underneath when I lay them onto the table! Also people have been known to bend down and catch they're eyes right on the corner and I couldnt see for a week.

Headphones on the other hand have many benefits. They can be used for making and listening to music or as fashion accessories! Even if you cant afford an iPod you can just wear them on your head and people won't know the difference, but be sure to weigh the end of the wire down in your pocket by taping it to something (I like to use a pop-tart as it looks somewhat like an iPod to the untrained eye, try a Kellogs nutri-grain bar for the 'iPod nano' look) otherwise it may fall out causing you to look cheap and uncool!
Another plus when it comes to headphones is that they are considerably lighter than monitor or PA speakers and can be carried in your pocket, hand, or even around your neck (this looks very cool) and should you drop your headphones they are unlikely to break, but if they do, you can buy replacements for as little as $10 for the cans and they even go as low as $2.99 for the 'in ear' variety although these should be avoided as they are small and no-one will see that you are wearing them.

So there you have it! Stick that up yer pipe and smoke it, you so called 'studio engineers'
You make me sick with your 'years of practical experience' and 'Music Technology Degrees'

 

[Dogman]

So there you have it! Stick that up yer pipe and smoke it'

I like cigars better. Pipes don't taste as good.

 

[Middleman]

Yeah headphones are not there yet. I wish some of these gear companies would take a look at making headphones that rivaled a good pair of monitors. Whoever is first, will make a lot of money in the homerecording market.

There are so many times when the kids are sleeping, the wife is not in the mood to hear noise etc that could become useful work hours.

 

[scrubs]

I disagree, headphones are by far the best option for home or studio recording. PA is a bad idea as the speakers are rather large and can be quite heavy and akward to carry, this is annoying as they are very expensive to replace when you drop them down the stairs. Also the PA mixer nearly always has alot of confusing buttons, switches and lights.

Monitors or standard speakers should be avoided at all cost as they have no clear grips or handles and are sometimes very shiney and smooth making them incredibly difficult to carry safely!! they are also very square and are notorious for trapping my fingers underneath when I lay them onto the table! Also people have been known to bend down and catch they're eyes right on the corner and I couldnt see for a week.

Headphones on the other hand have many benefits. They can be used for making and listening to music or as fashion accessories! Even if you cant afford an iPod you can just wear them on your head and people won't know the difference, but be sure to weigh the end of the wire down in your pocket by taping it to something (I like to use a pop-tart as it looks somewhat like an iPod to the untrained eye, try a Kellogs nutri-grain bar for the 'iPod nano' look) otherwise it may fall out causing you to look cheap and uncool!
Another plus when it comes to headphones is that they are considerably lighter than monitor or PA speakers and can be carried in your pocket, hand, or even around your neck (this looks very cool) and should you drop your headphones they are unlikely to break, but if they do, you can buy replacements for as little as $10 for the cans and they even go as low as $2.99 for the 'in ear' variety although these should be avoided as they are small and no-one will see that you are wearing them.

So there you have it! Stick that up yer pipe and smoke it, you so called 'studio engineers'
You make me sick with your 'years of practical experience' and 'Music Technology Degrees'

Moderately amusing. Nice work.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Well, even though Glen said that consumer hi-fi speakers aren't that bad, I've found they are very much hit-and-miss.

I don't disagree with that. My point was that the same is equally true with "studio monitors". Some of the biggest selline studio monitors are some of the most horrible-sounding, colored loudspeakers I have heard. It's hit-or-miss on both sides of the street. I have heard consumer louspeakers that will blow the lids off of some "studio monitors" for frequency response, accuracy and sound. I have also heard studio monitors that will send all but the most esoteric audiophile louspeakers packing. It goes both ways. I was simply attacking the wild generalization that "studio monitors" are always better than "consumer loudspeakers".

The thing about Bose consumer speakers is that they are direct/reflect speakers that are designed for specific placement within rooms and designed to actually "couple" with the room to get their sound. When set up properly in the proper room, some of the Bose models sound quite good. Some of them, that is. Just like any other brand, some of their models sound sweet and some sound like crapola. But regardless of which model you use, they are simply going to suck in a treated control room situation. They are the wrong tool for the job; it's like using a reverb to EQ your mix.

G.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

So there you have it! Stick that up yer pipe and smoke it

Whew, baby! I'd love to try some of whatever this guy is smokin'.

G.

 

[CoolCat]

The thing about Bose consumer speakers is that they are direct/reflect speakers that are designed for specific placement within rooms and designed to actually "couple" with the room to get their sound. When set up properly in the proper room, some of the Bose models sound quite good. Some of them, that is. Just like any other brand, some of their models sound sweet and some sound like crapola. But regardless of which model you use, they are simply going to suck in a treated control room situation. They are the wrong tool for the job; it's like using a reverb to EQ your mix.

G.

i have feebly, tried to understand the physics of speaker design. i read and read, and can absorb a bit of it... and i believe in most of it, the science of larger woofers can do lower freq's etc..the easiest stuff i can comprehend.

but what exactly makes one speaker "designed" for wall reflections or farfield over a short throw, or directional....i don't get how they "design the differences.

i'm in total agreement some speakers perform/designed for different tasks and placements...just don't understand it.

they all have the coil, magnet, cone etc...??? the cabinets aren't radically different for the most part?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

but what exactly makes one speaker "designed" for wall reflections or farfield over a short throw, or directional....i don't get how they "design the differences.

they all have the coil, magnet, cone etc...??? the cabinets aren't radically different for the most part?

I have to admit that it's been a couple of years since I have been intimately familiar with exact model numbers of Bose speakers, but their direct/reflect design counted on two things: first was that may of their models did indeed have speaker elements that did not face forward, but rather were angled off in seeming bizarre directions; second that they came with specific instructions as to placement relative to floor, ceiling and walls. The placement, combined with speaker orientation, general acoustical physics and (with the higher end models like the 901 series, for example) active electronics were designed to create a stereo image and reenforced frequency response that was (supposedly) above par. It didn't always work as well as advertised; quality varied widely between models with usually (but not always) the flagship models sounding great, and the lesser-expensive models sounding worse. But these won't work right in a treated control room designed to absorb and reflect sounds in it's own specifically tuned way.

They even made changes in models from year to year that weren't always sonic improvements, but actually made them sound much worse (to all ears.) I remember when I used to sell them (back in the 80s), they had a bookshelf-sized model called the 301. The original 301 was not a bad sounding speaker, and was a great affordable way to get the Bose name. It wasn't necessarily the absoluet best sounding speaker of it's size and price point, but it was far from the worst. Then one year Bose replaced it with the 301mkII, which had a bit of a redesign to them that was supposed to be an improvement. This redesign was far from an improvent; it turned it from one of the best-sounding speakers of it's category we sold to one of the worst.

The same thing happened with Infinity. Way Back When, they made a fairly decent line of consumer speakers; everything from $200/pair bookshelves to $4000/pr "reference monitors". Some sounded better than others. I had a pair of those bookshelves (original model RS10) that I would put up favorably against half of the nearfields sold as studio monitors for four or five times the price today. Then in '84 or '85 or so Infinity was bought by anther company and they changed components and manufacturing techniques. The next year's RS10s sounded worse than many of todays computer speakers.

G.

 

[CoolCat]

nice post G.

its all in the components i guess.
i remember the 301, just as you described it, an amazing little hifi speaker which really became known as the common "Bose" speaker in my area.

Some went further to other models,
but no one could afford the 901's in my circle. That was the gearhead lust hifi speaker set.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

but no one could afford the 901's in my circle. That was the gearhead lust hifi speaker set.

Yeah, that was a favorite of the sales staff, too. Not so much because of the sound - though set up right they sounded pretty nice - but because of the extra $50 cash spiff we got out of the register drawer at the end of the day for selling a pair (on top of the regular 10% comission) .

G.