Monitors, Pres, Mics, Oh my!

Which one?

  • Monitors

    Votes: 34 77.3%

  • Pres

    Votes: 4 9.1%

  • Mics

    Votes: 6 13.6%
  • Total voters
    44
J

Juggernaut

New member
Anyone think it's a bad idea that I am mixing on my Definitive Technologies Pro 100 monitors and Pro 100 sub? I know it is recomended to use nearfield monitors and they are sure somewhere down the line but with my set up is that the next step or somewhere after new pres, new converters and new mics?

Setup:
Digi002
Baby Bottle
Oktava MC012s
D112
MD421
Using the Digi pres and converters
Definitve Technologies Pro Cinema system

Next purchase I am thinking either Monitors (where I have no clue what I would want), Pres (probably 2x grace 101, neve portico, A-designs MP-2, or John Hardy M-1s), or mics (m-201, some other LDC to compliment the baby bottle or a ribbon)

Give me some opinions on which way I should go.
 
I didn't exactly do it myself, but I think monitors are what you should get. Not only can you listen back to what you've done in the past without monitors, but you can start to make more informed decisions about just what is going on with your sound.
 
Well, the definitive speakers are a solid decent home stereo setup, but you will be seriously missing the high frequencies in your mix, and not hearing a lot of the depth issues by using those. They are a very tilted set of speakers towards the low mids and sub lows, and are lacking seriously in the 3k and up category. I would definately go out and get a set of studio monitors next. You can still switch back and forth, because the Definitive's may be "more enjoyable" to listen to, but they won't reveal a lot of mistakes that you may be making in a huge chunk of the audible frequency spectrum. Studio monitors will offer you a clarity that the definitives just are not designed for.
 
xstatic said:
but you will be seriously missing the high frequencies in your mix, and not hearing a lot of the depth issues by using those. They are a very tilted set of speakers towards the low mids and sub lows, and are lacking seriously in the 3k and up category. I would definately go out and get a set of studio monitors next. Studio monitors will offer you a clarity that the definitives just are not designed for.
Click to expand...

First of all what makes monitors missing in high frequencies, these have a 1" tweeter that they claim can go up to 30 khz. Is there any way of finding frequency response graphs similar to what are provided with mics?

Secondly, I did just purchase these in an upgrade to altec lansing computer speakers that I thought were good but the minute I hooked up these Definitive speakers I heard an increase in what I again think is the clarity that you are talking about and an increase in bass response that seemed tighter and to extend down into lower frequencies.

I guess basically what I am trying to ask is how will I know if what I buy will be "more accuarate" than the Definitives, other than the speakers being labled as "studio Monitors". I ask this becasue all "studio monitors" out there can't be an upgrade theres got to be a point where what I buy will not help. Take the BX8s for instance will these speakers which cost about 400 dollars be more effective than the Definitives that cost almost double?
 
GIGO... mics are the first item in your food chain... use the best possible mic for the job...
 
Can and do go to 30khz is completely different. I am not trying to knock the definitives at all, but they are voiced for a completely different setup. Thats what actually makes them good for double checking mixes on, but its also what makes them bad for creating mixes on. I am sure that if you ran a room analyzer first with your definitives, then with any set of studio monitors. My bet is that the definitives will put out much more low end and mow mids, but that the studio monitors will exhibit a mush smoother high frequency response which also greatly affects stereo imaging. Bootm line however is that good mixes can be done on any speakers if the engineer has the ability, experience, and in depth knowledge of those specific speakers in the specific listening environment.
 
I'd go with preamps. Looks like you've already got some nice mics, so a good pre is the only thing that'll really let them shine! After pres, I'd definatley go for some near-field monitors. Personally, the Grace 101 (from what I gather) is worth every bit of money you shell out!
 
jaykeMURD said:
I'd go with preamps. Looks like you've already got some nice mics, so a good pre is the only thing that'll really let them shine! After pres, I'd definatley go for some near-field monitors. Personally, the Grace 101 (from what I gather) is worth every bit of money you shell out!
Click to expand...

That was my thinking from the start, but I wanted to see if anyone else thought otherwise. Before this post my purchase order would have been 2 channels of nice pre amps, then a nice set of monitors, then another nice LDC and a M-201. In that order. With this poll I am starting to wonder though. Will new monitors help my mixing ability that much? So much that I would forgo having not only having two nice channels to record with but the ability now to do six mic recording for drums or if I wanted to do live recording.

So are monitors worth having only four mediocre pres?

From this Poll it would seem so...
 
I would start with monitors. Until you can accurately hear what is really happening, it would be very hard to take full advantage of what your mics or preamps are really doing. You have a nice little starter mic collection, so after monitors I would consider 1 or 2 nice channels of preamps, but then its back to the mics for a while:D

Although, you don't really have a good solid flexible LD mic on your list yet either. I might even consider getting one of those before the preamps too. It's kind of a toss up but I know that if I were using your setup right now with my own experiences that monitors would certainly be the first purchase. I also reccomend getting the best monitors you can possibly afford. If not, you may be rebuying sooner than you might like:(
 
So I guess the general consensus is twards monitors.

Now the question is which ones?

Budget: about $500-$850

In that range I have looked at things from the BX8a, the mackie HR624, the KRK V8s, and maybe a couple others.

My room is about 15' by 16' so 240 sq feet. Dampening includes a bed lots'o curtains, a couch and a rug.

What should I be looking for in that price range given my room? I like the BX8a for thier price and 8" woofers but there has to be a pitfall somewhere, what is it? The mackies are supposed to be nice but smaller drivers...

So which ones? (not limited to the examples I have given)
 
5 cents

well, sonically, it doesn't matter because you'll have to learn your monitors in your room no matter what you buy. so get something you like the sound of, imo.

but, NS10 were HiFi speakers and not flat or technically "studio monitors" at all...they were HiFi speakers intended to check mixes on the average Joe's home stereo speakers in addition to the huge mains in the control rooms.
so HiFi is used by many Pro's...albeit the NS10's.

then again, in HR world, our Nearfields are our MAINS, so we want more than a HiFI additional reference set....
Our Nearfields are a "HUGE" tool in the setup.
we Track with them, Mix with them and Master with them.
so you probably want something that can take some abuse, well built, flat as possible/ no peaks or valleys in the response curve (so you don't over -or- under emphasize anything by eqing).

however, with this all taken into account, science & physics would offer that at 3ft or 1meter range (typical nearfield monitor position), 4" drivers are min, and 8" max..placing a 5"/6/7" in the sweet spot as far as distance goes. This has to do with air displacement, hence a 1"&2" would be considered headphones and a 10"/12"/15" probably abit too much at Nearfield and better positioned Mid-to Far field.

that being said, you now have rooom acoustics coming into play also.
This is why it is a benefit to yourself to test the monitors in your own location or studio. Reflections, cancelling freq nodes, bass traps, diffusers, foam absorbers will drastically alter what you percieve as "the sound of the speakers". Extreme Example is to listen to the same speakers in a gymnasium, your garage, then your bedroom and outside; the acoustics of the enviroment is a huge player.

so which monitor is best? i haven't a clue. :p
 
Get some acoustic treatment. At the very least enough to get rid of the first reflection points. If you can spend a little more, get some bass trapping (foam generally isn't the best for this application, you can make your own out of rigid fiberglass. Look in the studio building and display forum). IMO I would much rather listen to decent speakers in a well treated room than awesome monitors in an untreated room. BTW, 15x16 is damn near square, stay away from dead center in the room. Acoustics have so much to do with sound, recorded or playback, that I'm shocked it doesn't get talked about more. It's not as cool as a new piece of gear but it's every bit as necessary. /rant off
 
You have to realize something. First of all I'd love to spend money on some of those real traps. But at $200 a piece, they are definitivly not in my budget. Second I live in New Orleans. Second living in New Orleans I simply do not have the access to these materials like 703, due to the severe shortage of building materials in the Greater New Orleans area. If some where knows of a place that supplies rigid insulation at around $200 to at most $400 to treat a whole room well, then I think I will stick to monitors. (Or pres because I actually know what is good in that department)

I appologize if that sounded rantish as I sort of realized the tone that I was writing it. :o
 
Juggernaut said:
You have to realize something. First of all I'd love to spend money on some of those real traps. But at $200 a piece, they are definitivly not in my budget. Second I live in New Orleans. Second living in New Orleans I simply do not have the access to these materials like 703, due to the severe shortage of building materials in the Greater New Orleans area. If some where knows of a place that supplies rigid insulation at around $200 to at most $400 to treat a whole room well, then I think I will stick to monitors. (Or pres because I actually know what is good in that department)

I appologize if that sounded rantish as I sort of realized the tone that I was writing it. :o
Click to expand...
No apology needed. For what it's worth I wouldn't buy real traps at $200 dollars a pop either (sorry Ethan, I'm sure they're worth every penny, but I just can't afford it :o ). Auralex foam will do a decent job of cutting down the first reflections (spots on the wall, where if you hung a mirror you could see the speakers from your listening position), which will make everything sound 200% clearer, since you're not listening to the direct sound along with 4-5 reflected sounds that are every so slightly out of sync. Your imaging will improve drastically, almost like you're wearing headphones. Hell, even the foambymail ebay stuff will work okay for this (I've got a few panels of it, it works well for mid-high freqs). Bass traps are a little trickier so yeah, that might not be in the cards just yet. Good luck in NO btw.
 
Jugger, I'd go with monitors first, too. I don't trust my experience enough to strongly recommend any particular brand or model, but I'll share three key lessons I learned during my own search. First, if you can't treat the room (due to money, wife, etc.), then choose monitors with some adaptability/EQ switches. Second, don't assume you have to go with larger monitors to achieve better sound--many of us, for various reasons, have chosen smaller (5 or 6") monitors plus a sub for about the same price. And last, but obvious, be sure to audition whatever you're considering in your own room. I had to buy and try 3 different models (in my own studio space) before something fit well. Hearing them at home made for an easy decision--and not the one, by the way, that some knowledgeable colleagues had recommended. There's a lot of personal preference involved in music, and an untreated room further complicates things. Sure, research helps, but trust your own ears in the end.

Best of luck,
J.
 
COOLCAT said:
rereading your post

damn nice mic list by the way....juggernaut
Click to expand...

Thanks, but it is no where near completed. Though the one of the main reasons that I was interested in pres in the first place is that I have five mics and only four pres. And I was anoyed when someone beat me out on an A-designs MP-2 for $1000, at $500 per chanel of nice clean tube sound, that is a bargin.

If no one else has any great sugestions for monitors I think I will be going with the Mackie 624s (unless I find a great deal on ebay) and some slight room treatment of some kind. All this will happen sometime after the break once I get settled back in New Orleans. To fill out my pre situation I might pick up a DMP3 or an RNP.
 
reshp1 said:
Acoustics have so much to do with sound, recorded or playback, that I'm shocked it doesn't get talked about more.
Click to expand...

yeah, audio waves man...can you dig it?
this is a easily overlooked "foundational" issue.

whats that old saying...a house is only as good as its foundation.

the above line is easy to check out, does you playback sound good?
if so, your ahead of the game. when you clap your hands does it ring and ringggggg...this stuff is free.

i was just reading at Ethan Winers smithsonian of info...and theres the DIY traps if your into that.

i'd still pick some monitors over the infinitys, but some room work will only help. or it did with my dry-wall of sound.
 
Whats even more fun with my room is that the walls are concrete! :eek:
Yup our house was built with out skimping on any expense, especially for a 1920's house. Its got a wood exterior followed by a layer of cement, followed by air, followed by cement, followed by some more air, then yes finally the wall that I look at which is also cement.

You are right about the clapping hands thing, it makes a ring for about probably a little less than a second.

And does my sound sound good, well I don't have much to compare it to. The only monitors I have really heard are the $5000 pair of Genelecs at the studio I work at from time to time, and I have never really done any direct comparisons of any kind. Though my mixes seem to come out better on the Genelecs although that could be a number of different factors. eg the sound of the room the audio was recording in, the pres that the sound went into (avalon vs digi002), quality of the D/A A/D converters (192 i/o vs Digi002), or the quality of the artist. And that is not including the monitors mixed on. [these two mixes that I have compared are raping over a beat each rapper on the Baby Bottle]
 
If you put a foam on places where sound reflects (the mirror check) you will still gain at sound quallity.I heard some places must stay reflective because of high freq.

Is it true that if you put a tube preamp between active monitors and dac you get better sound quallity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top