new monitors ... ns-10s

[jfreeman373]

VERY wrong...they arent ancient but theyve been with us in the M form since the late 70's or early 80's

Realistically, if every one had a hi-fi system at home, the ns-10 would have died long ago.

The industry has been regurgitating the same crap with a different wrapper for 30 years.

Bleyrad, your right I think about what you just said. All I would say is that there are some really good hi-fi speakers that have good enough dispersion to work as a near- field monitor even though they are designed as far field.

 

[Gunther]

I use B&W 601 S3's as monitors and love them to death (so far). To each their own.

NS-10s are AWESOME monitors. Why? Because they force you to hype the bass and treble in your mix.

Go to K-mart and look at the mini-systems they sell. those f**kers have these ugly Johnny one note bass tubes and all sorts of weird ass passive radiator bass reflex super sub bass gimmicks on them. When Joe blow buys his Aiwa system and pops in a NS-10 mixed CD with even more bass he is happy as a pig in shit. Bass... oooooohhhhhhh
.

Does the recording or playback equipment sound anything like the performance did? Hell no. Does the consumer care? Hell no... He likes what the marketing guys told him too like...

Is it just me, or does modern TV add hyped marketing based ignorant capitalist society bug the shit outa you too?

 

[jfreeman373]

Right on man!

 

[sweetnubs]

hey chowderheads, there is as difference between tracking and mixing. Nubaphonic always tracks on his meyer labs hd1's. I always mix on ns10's.

 

[BuildingStudios]

hey chowderheads, there is as difference between tracking and mixing. Nubaphonic always tracks on his meyer labs hd1's. I always mix on ns10's.

What do you consider the benifits of tracking and mixing with different monitors?? simply different perspectives??

Why do you chose to track with the meyers and mix with the ns 10's... why not the reverse??

 

[sweetnubs]

for tracking a prefer accuracy. I want to hear what the instruments sound like going down accurately. Mixing is a different ballgame for me. I want monitors that translate. I have better luck with ns10's than the meyers in this case. Can I make a good mix on the meyers? hell yeah! but I have an easier time making mixes that translate on ns10's. they cost about 100x less, go figure. It's easy to make mixes that sound good on the meyers, harder to make mixes that sound good on ns10's. If they sound good on the ns10 it's going to translate to a home listening situation. A lot of my reference cd's I know were mixed on ns10's. by checking my mixes with large budget mixes done on ns10's I know if I am getting good results. Never get cocky and think your mix is kicking ass. Always reference it. I will a/b the ns10's and meyers while mixing, but mostly use the ns10's. I also have a single radioshack optimus speaker that I check in mono. I check a subwoofer also. Then I do the standard boombox, car, home stereo dealy. Sometimes if it is a big project I slip a cd to my radio station programming buddies and have them play the mix over the air so I can check how radio compression, limiting, eq, bandwith limitations, etc. will effect the mix. sweet.

 

[TexRoadkill]

for tracking a prefer accuracy. I want to hear what the instruments sound like going down accurately. Mixing is a different ballgame for me. I want monitors that translate. I have better luck with ns10's than the meyers in this case.

I was thinking about buying some other monitors for this very reason. But lately my goal has been to rely less on EQ and dynamics processors and really just get the best sound on disk from the start.

This means having to have more of a plan for the mix before recording and every track needs to sound very close to perfect from the beginning. If I was to track on different monitors then I wouldn't be hearing the track exactly as I would when it is in the context of the mix. I usually don't eq tracks while they are soloed for a similar reason. No tracks exist outside of the mix so it doesn't make sense to make critical decisions without hearing the tracks through the same monitors.

Why would you want to hear a different sound while tracking then you would while mixing? If you need a 'clearer' listen you can always check the tracks on some great headphones or if you want 'big'a killer main system with a sub. If someone just wants to spend the cash then great. I can usually find plenty of other stuff to spend an extra couple of grand on.

 

[pipelineaudio]

I used to track on some soffited augsperger speakers and mix on NS-10's, but also checked the ns-10's a lot while tracking

 

[fluxburn]

Here is my question. Since the ns-10 have been discontinued, you have to buy them used. Well do they still sell replacement oem speakers for them, to replace the tweeters and woofers? Also aren't the yamaha msp5 and msp10 supposed to replace the ns-10? I have never heard the ns-10's I have written some trance music on the msp10's (my mom has a pair). The msp10 sound unlike the ns10's in that they feature a bright high end, and a hard bass. I don't really remeber crazy mid's coming from those... but that was a few years ago. I barely understood the difference between high mids and lows then lol.

 

[Pennylane]

Just got hold of some Behringer B2031 powered jobs, makes my old Yams. sound like kids stuff. -2 to +4 db attenuation on the tweeter, 0 to-6 db on the woofer and 3 position room compensation, bi amped.

 

[HangDawg]

I found a pair of NS10's for $110. I think I'm gonna get them. They have to be better than my Alesis Monitor Is

 

[sweetnubs]

remeber those of us who use these things professionally don't skimp on the power amp. matching the right power amp (not to mention using good cabling) to your monitors takes a little knowledge, skill and listening time. A lot of the ns10 bashing comments you see here ignore because there is no mention of the power amp being matched to the ns10 that they have purportedly used in a well tuned enviroment. You must think of your monitors and power amp as a whole system. I see lots of harry home recordists and geetar center charlies constantly talking about monitors but not the power amps matched to the monitors, not how they calibrated their monitoring system etc. set phasers for ignore.

 

[jfreeman373]

What exactly do you mean by a matched amplifier? Do you mean trying to match up a high quality amp with a low quality speaker, or vice versa? Do mean impedance matching of the cabinets to the amp, bridged mono blocks, what? What constitutes a proper match. Power ratings? Damping factors? Brand names, powered monitors? Peak power or average power? A powered monitor I would guess is a good match. How do you determine when a speaker is properly matched with an amp. What about harmonic distortion?

I think that an amplifier should be chosen in the same regard as you would a monitor. CLEAN power, and LOTS OF IT. Good heavy welding cables are great but really only matter for delivering high dynamic bass frequencies. The thicker the cable, the more current you can delver to the driver, which in turn can help to reproduce the electrical dynamics of the signal. Different metals have different impedances, the longer a cable the more resistance it has. If you don't have a speaker that can reproduce a 1000 Watt 10 millescond snare peak, why do you really need an amp that can delver it? I have a top of the line amp which was rather expensive, and...well as far as monitors go they aren't the most expensive... but they are the best. The specs tell me that, and now my ears tell me also.It's not a status thing. Everything else is taken with the minimalist aproach.Now i don't ever even hardly use the eq on my board at all, on the way, or on the way out. Only if the mic I need is stuck on something else and say I need a low shelf cut.

If you want to know if your mixer is any good or an effects unit, you need a system that can reproduce the fine variations in equipment. Things stick out like night and day. Some stuff I used to use has so much electronic haze to it I can't believe I ever used to like using it.

I can swap out mixers and hear MAJOR discrepencies in a couple mackie mixers I have tried. Which is a good thing cause now I can get away with finding cheap equipment that sounds accurate because I can now tell the difference. So I spent money to save money. We all know that a Neve mixer is a hell of allot more expensive than a pair of speakers or an amplifier. Is there really that much difference in sound quality between a Neve and a Mackie? If you can't tell by listening to it through the speakers that you have ....you might be able to say "not much". And if you have an excellent playback system, There might actually be less difference than you might think; or they could be drastically different.

So yes, I agree with sweetnubs that you need a whole well designed monitoring system... INCLUDING the room.

But I still think that the NS-10 should be called a monitor as much as Saddam Hussein should be called an honest philanthropist.

yeah.. yeah.......... they "translate" well.

They translate well to Aiwa.
That's not saying much.

yeah.. yeah.......... The professional market uses them
They have history.
So does a torch... but now we use electric lights.

IMO most mixes today sound mediocre at best.
Which is actually surprising if so many people are using the NS-10

Yeah yeah It's my opinion, I'm wrong...I just have something against them, I'm a snobby Frazier Crane.(I'm a long haired hippy actually)

I don't mean to offend anybody here, but sometimes I do it anyway. Blue Bear has already called me a pretentious son of a B***. I'm still around.

Sorry

 

[sweetnubs]

"What exactly do you mean by a matched amplifier?" some of your guesses are perhaps right or wrong. My consulting fee is $120 an hour. send me a check and i'll get back to you. obviously you are an expert so you don't need my advice anyhow. check dis dawg: ns10's were used before the year 2000, even 1990! even 1980! holy mackeral j-man! maybe do a little research on some of the truly great albums mixed on ns10's and get back to nubzilla. I'd tell you but like I said my consulting fee . . . . .


ps. i used an old $80,000 dollar (they got a good deal) neve broadcasting console the other day and I have used mr. mackie. I can hear the difference with the pair of ns10's and i've been hauling around with me for about 17 years.

 

[jfreeman373]

Hey man, I said I agreed with you. I am not an expert but getting there. On the scientific end of audio that is.

I was just curious for the sake of everyone elses knowledge. You still haven't answered my question, you just kind of got defensive. I was asking for the people who might not know... that may be reading without replying.I gave you the opportunity to explain it. Since you didn't, I'll have to end up writing a whole other long Post.

Like I said, i didn't mean to offend anyone. If you can't discuss due to consulting fees, that would be ok, cause my fees would balance everything out.

Everyone always takes me wrong that's why I repeated Blue Bears statement cause I already knew It was gonna happen.

What was the difference that you heard? I am sure there was a difference, just curious what it was that you could hear through those NS-10's. What made the BC mixer any better than the mackie? Or was it?

Give me some great album names mixed on the NS-10. I sure would like to hear them. The music may be great. But I doubt I would care for the mixes. It's possible i suppose.

I have to quote myself again, notice the bold lettering.
Yeah the NS-10's are old.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by jfreeman373
Realistically, if every one had a hi-fi system at home, the ns-10 would have died long ago.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I KNOW ALREADY

My whole point

I wouldn't say throw em out or anything. The other guy that can get em cheap go for it. I never pass up cheap gear.They just aren't good for a new person to buy in my opinion. It's like trying to learn how to drive a car with a model T. Very impractical. If you already know em and like em who can convince you anything anyways.

For god's sake people put some info on here that will help people that are struggling out... instead of arguing trivia.

 

[pipelineaudio]

"well as far as monitors go they aren't the most expensive... but they are the best. The specs tell me that, "

woohoo!
the specs on a behringer mixer say theyre the best too! I got some prime swampland for sale man!

"Give me some great album names mixed on the NS-10. I sure would like to hear them. The music may be great. But I doubt I would care for the mixes. It's possible i suppose.
"

LOL!!!! name any 100 albums made in the last 30 years. 99 or more of them will be NS-10's

if you cant hear the difference between a Mackie, Neve, Trident, SSL, and API thru a set of NS-10's you are in the wrong business.

NS-10's make me MAD...really they sound like they are yelling at me all the time. I use 824's now, to get away from that somewhat, but I would NEVER be stupid enough to put them down the way you do.
They are VERY revealing, to the slightest little detail, hell, a lot of us can LOOK at the surround and tell you what frequency of bass is coming out, accurate enough to be VERY confident to mix without even a subwoofer or mains...

puhleeze

 

[jfreeman373]

I really enjoy how people take little snipets of truth, or quotes for that matter and bend them to thier will.

The quote was

well as far as monitors go they aren't the most expensive... but they are the best. The specs tell me that, and now my ears tell me also.

When it comes to specs you have to read the fine print. Do they use smoothing? If they do they have to state it.It is against the law to print incorrect specs, and you can't just look at one spec and say "oh that looks good". You have to know what they all mean. Gear is allot more copmplex to tell (especially digital) by than monitors are. There isn't too much to picking out a great monitor.

The NS-10's are very revealing....on how much they suck.

People must be afraid of specs for some reason, I wonder why that is? Maybe they don't know what they mean.

LOL!!!! name any 100 albums made in the last 30 years. 99 or more of them will be NS-10's

I rest my case. Like I said before, I think most albums that have come out do suck sound wise. There's alot of music I like... that still sucks.It's ok in the car I guess. Not on a real system.

Genelecs, Westlakes, B&W's,SP Technology Loudspeakers, Wilson Audio, Dynaudio,Thiel. Those are monitors, and the some of those aren't great either, but they sure blow away any yamaha crap.

any of it. (Yamaha does make descent saxophones though)

NS-10's make me MAD...really they sound like they are yelling at me all the time

That's why they are not a real monitor. They have a 7db peak at 10khz and 5 or 6 db wide band peak right in the midrange.They are not accurate. They aren't even smooth. They're frequency response looks like a person hooked up a graphiq eq to them and started sliding the knobs all over the place.On the other hand my speakers never vary more than 2 dB all the way down to 30 hz. Yeah they cost alot more, but they are real monitors.

You just wouldn't say it cause so many people like the NS-10 and your scared of getting attacked or you don't care.

Personally, I like pushing buttons.
Especially the right ones.
That's why I mix.

Compare this and tell me you have to listen to know one is better than the other. Which one looks flatter to you? It's even a little difficult to tell how crappy the ns-10 REALLY is because the graph is zoomed out so far also. It still looks like crap even at that distance. Keep an eye on the decible scale on the left.

The NS-10
http://www.dillonacoustics.com/Loudspeaker_plans/Yamaha/Yamaha_XOYA1.htm

The Timepiece 2.0:
http://www.4sptech.com/html/control_menu/products/specifications.php

Nuff said..............................NEXT!

 

[Roker1]

i haven't heard the MSP10's, but i imagine they're similar to the MSP5's. a friend of mine has MSP5's. i can't believe he paid $800 (CDN) for them. they sound like ass. i can't stand hearing them. they have no bass response and their upper midrange is almost as bad as the NS10's. they honestly sound like $50 speakers. hell, i own $50 computer speakers that sound way better, and i would mix on them before the MSP5's.

don't know and don't really care what sort of room you were listening to MSP5s in (and to what sort of a song), but could you tell me what your desktop speakers are, maybe I would trade my MSP5s in for your 'puter speakers.....

P.S. BTW, tell your friend he can adjust the frequencies on the back of his MSP5 speakers

cheers

 

[Roker1]

"

if you cant hear the difference between a Mackie, Neve, Trident, SSL, and API thru a set of NS-10's you are in the wrong business.

uuhh...please pipe, don't discourage us little fish
I've never heard any of those at all (except for my "live" mackie , let alone tell the difference between them..
I reckon we can still have a bit of fun recording, even if we don't hear those differences.....

cheers mate

 

[jfreeman373]

Actually I change my mind, about most mixes sucking. Actually alot of albums are pretty descent. I just meant compared to what Excellent recordings I have heard, which have been very few. There seems to be allot of decent or average, or even a little above average. But it is still hard to find something that sounds great, usually I hear frequency problems in the mix instead of placement issues. Highs are too splashy very often. Or the mids have a high que peak in the mids somewhere that just sounds harsh. I attribute mixes like that to bad monitoring not bad mixing. Alot of times everything else is right on. You can't claim something as bad mixing if they couldn't hear what was really happening. Sorry for that.