SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Wow, this sh*t is even more annoying to watch from the sidelines than it is to be stuck in the middle of. 
G.
G.
M
Moseph
New member
Well...if you don't have the space for monitors...then what kind of space do you have for tracking?
Who's to say tracking needs to enter the equation? There are more than one musical genres that don't necessarily need a microphone or acoustic space to be made in entirety. We're not talking about generalized "open to the public" situations here, we're talking about home recording situations, which can be incredibly specialized to the genre of interest.
And if you don't have the $$$...then how do you afford the other things you need? (I'm not talking about guys that have $400 and try to buy a "studio" made up of the cheapest stuff.) Even the most bare necessities for *good* studio are going to cost much more than that...so then why get all cheap/tight when it comes time for monitors?
I think I made a bit of an intuitive leap that I don't think was followed. It's not necessarily that you can't afford anything, it could be that you can't afford something that sounds to your liking. Like it or not, there's kind of a big difference between spending $400 and $1000 (that's a 250% increase). Particularly for the low-budget/low-income crowd.
I'm sorry...but this idea by some that you CAN get a "studio" for a few hundred just by skipping over certain key gear...or just buying a lot of very cheap gear, well, is rather foolish, IMHO.
It's like buying only a small salad when you know you need a full meal...w/dessert. It doesn't work...you just end up being hungry and asking for more anyway.
I contend that your definition of "studio" is too narrow.
In my mind, a "studio" only requires three things:
(01) a way to generate and/or capture signal,
(02) a way to reliably store and replay said signal, and
(03) a way to listen to said signal.
There's no requirement that it necessarily needs to sound "good" or whatever, just that it needs to function properly. If you want to call a portable dictaphone a functional "studio", there's no reason you can't: it's got all the necessary parts.
More to the point, you're completely ignoring the idea that some folks out there maybe can't afford the entire meal, so they make due with the salad. They might be hungry, but at least they're fed: maybe not sated, but at least sustained. Recording is a fairly expensive hobby. That doesn't invalidate those who want to pursue it as cheaply as possible. It, again, just sort of means that maybe it's not preferred.
Last edited:
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
OK...you go with that.
This thread has seen a lot of side arguments injected into it by people trying to explain why headphones might be chosen over monitors, and OK, I've agreed that there ARE some specialized situations where headphones will "get you by"...
...but getting back to the OP's main question....
...the industry standard for a mixing playback system are monitors, not headphones. All the other side arguments are simply excuses to not having or being able to use them.
Yeah...this is getting beat into the ground now.
M
Moseph
New member
You know, you're right.
The real thing that jumped out at me was the amount of anecdotal opinion being used, rather than looking at the rationale behind the anecdotal evidence.
The one thing I think the OP isn't considering, is that "industry standard" stuff is really up in the $1000's (i.e., plural or many) range, whereas most home stuff is generally under $2k.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
If you're talking strictly monitors, most home stuff is probably under $500 for the pair.
This is the split in this thread, whether one wants to answer the OP's question literally, or answer the question he *really* wants the answer to.
The "industry standard" is indeed to use *high quality* monitors in a *high quality* room. That does NOT translate into meaning that monitors are always better than headphones regardless of any other variables. The real question/answer is just not that simplistic.
If one is using something along the lines of Logitec gaming speakers to mAudio BX5s in the corner of your typical basement or attic space, there is absolutely no advantage or ease of use issue to that kind of setup over the use of a halfway-decent pair of headphones. You're just trading one set of difficulties of another of roughly equal difficulty.
And none of this changes the fact that even if every home had Tannoy Elipses instead of some inexpensive bookshelf speaker with the word "Monitor" stenciled on it's outside, it wouldn't make a whit of difference for over half of home users for whom a balanced, flat speaker is not what their ears want.
G.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I don't know about that....
Sure, there are a lot of very low budget home setups, but I wouldn't even consider them "studios"...rather more like small hobby setups, and I don't mean that as a slight...because these days there ARE a lot of dyn-o-mite home setups that do go into the many thousands, that are not necessarily commercial-open-to-public studios...just private, project, home studios.
That said, I know what you are saying about many home setups not coming close to "industry standards"...it's just that to me, there are some basic pieces of gear one needs even for a decent hobby setup if the goal is to get the best possible results, and think that even the guys who only have a few hundred to drop on a home rig still want great quality.
I don't think many are going in thinking ahead it will only sound so-so….
It's kinda funny in an odd way...but I see a lot of perspectives on forums about what is good gear or what is a good technique or what is a good end-product...
...all being dictated by the poster’s wallet.
IOW...if all they have is a few hundred to spend on a rig, they will debate the validity and value of that rig quite vigorously/passionately and sometimes even argue that “buying up” is just about hype.
M
Moseph
New member
I probably should have just said this. This is basically what I'm getting at, except I'm also saying that I didn't like the way any speakers under $1000/pair sounded compared to my $200 headphones. In other words, I personally would go the headphone route given a budget of less than $1000 pretty much every time.
As Glen sort of guessed already, I meant $2K for individual pieces of gear (I've got several thousand invested myself).
One thing that I don't agree with is that you need anything that's particularly high-end to get results that will fool the average (and oftentimes, no so average) listener into thinking you used gear that's particularly high-end. The tools available, even in the cheap-end, have gotten good enough that the talent/skill factor is the real limiting factor very easily in most situations. Again, that's just my opinion, maybe your ears are better than mine.
It's kinda funny in an odd way...but I see a lot of perspectives on forums about what is good gear or what is a good technique or what is a good end-product...
...all being dictated by the poster’s wallet.
IOW...if all they have is a few hundred to spend on a rig, they will debate the validity and value of that rig quite vigorously/passionately and sometimes even argue that “buying up” is just about hype.
Well, I guess I'm one of those folks, then. Well, maybe not the "hype" folks.
I don't see any additional benefit for me in a signal chain made up of DPA/Crane Song or Neumann/API compared to my current R0DE/Presonus or Shure/Presonus situation. I say this having had the experience of using the genuinely high-end stuff: I get pretty similar results with both signal chains. The limiting factor is me. I suspect this is true of most of the recordists out there with less than a dedicated and extensive amount of experience in the field.
I might hear one or the other as "different", or possibly even "better", but it won't necessarily be the pricey chain. In reality, how many recordists out there compared to the total population of recordists can make this claim? And mean it? And not be lying about it? Not even lying to themselves?
kcearl
I see deaf people
i was reading an article/comment in Recording Magazine suggesting that all music internet message boards should be banned as basically they are just full of other peoples opinions and stop the person from actually going out and trying things...which is the only way they will truly find out if a piece of equipment is the right one for them..
Im beginning to agree with that article
anyway buy monitors...you cant mix for toffee on cans
Im beginning to agree with that article
anyway buy monitors...you cant mix for toffee on cans
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
NO...I actually agree with you that you don't always need very high-end gear to get good results, just like you don't need to always go into a world-class studio. My point was more about the guys that spend a few hundred on what they call a "studio"...which is really a computer with a cheap A/D box/card w/built-in preamp, and a couple of $100 mics...
That certainly is not going to go toe-to-toe with an all-high-end audio chain.
And yeah...there are fine lines often not heard by most people...and yeah, when you are in a world-class facility, you kinda expect to see all top-shelf stuff.
But sometimes less-expensive gear can get you 80%-90% of the way there...which may be good enough for a lot of stuff...though some people want that last 20%...and they CAN hear it.
I have one “expensive” mic ($1500-$2000 range)…and it certainly does give better sound quality for most vocals than several of my next line of mics ($500-$800 range)…and certainly WAY better than my “bottom” line ($100-$300 range).
I think that applies to a lot of audio gear…you just have to find your acceptable price-to-quality range.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
headphones rule
i have some very good speakers - about $6000 each.
that said, i have some very good headphones too.
i can hear things on the cans that you cannot hear from the speakers.
for convenience use your speakers.
for detailed quality work use the phones.
now considering that the public thinks mp3 is really hi fi and many folks cant hear at all cause they have blown their ears out with dangerously loud SPLs you might as well use the speakers on your pc and save some money unless you are producing a classical music album.
i have some very good speakers - about $6000 each.
that said, i have some very good headphones too.
i can hear things on the cans that you cannot hear from the speakers.
for convenience use your speakers.
for detailed quality work use the phones.
now considering that the public thinks mp3 is really hi fi and many folks cant hear at all cause they have blown their ears out with dangerously loud SPLs you might as well use the speakers on your pc and save some money unless you are producing a classical music album.
kcearl
I see deaf people
( and my mics were cheaper)
N
newcomputeruser
New member
depends
depends on your audience. most people think mp3 is hi fi these days. you dont need more than a decent home set up to make them happy.
just because something sounds different does not mean it is better. maybe it is, but maybe it is just different.
the cheap stuff you note was our pro quality gear when i started. and except for a few golden eared stereophile types they cant tell the difference. and if they can then they think anything new that is different is better than the old just because the new is different.
wax cylinders, 88s, 45s, LPs, CDs, DVDs, Computer hi rez etc.
am fm hd, horn, crystal, dynamic, condensor, whatever -- at some point you get so good that changes dont really matter except to be different.
cheap gear is far better than most amateurs and their livingoom/garage/bedroom. first fix the skills, then fix the room, and then consider possible gear upgrades.
depends on your audience. most people think mp3 is hi fi these days. you dont need more than a decent home set up to make them happy.
just because something sounds different does not mean it is better. maybe it is, but maybe it is just different.
the cheap stuff you note was our pro quality gear when i started. and except for a few golden eared stereophile types they cant tell the difference. and if they can then they think anything new that is different is better than the old just because the new is different.
wax cylinders, 88s, 45s, LPs, CDs, DVDs, Computer hi rez etc.
am fm hd, horn, crystal, dynamic, condensor, whatever -- at some point you get so good that changes dont really matter except to be different.
cheap gear is far better than most amateurs and their livingoom/garage/bedroom. first fix the skills, then fix the room, and then consider possible gear upgrades.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
But so are the magazines...just check out all those reviews.
Naaaa...it's not the BBS that stop people from trying/buying...
...it's their budgets.
But I agree that there are a lot of opinions on forums based mainly on other people's opinions...and not the poster's individual hands-on experiences.
I think everyone passes on anecdotes to a degree...nothing wrong with that...but when you get into a debate with someone about finer points of some technique or process, and they're like 18, with 3 months of "experience" under their belt and the rest is just opinion derived from Internet sources...
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Maybe..and then again, maybe not.
I had cheap gear and a very sparse setup when I first started. Then some years later I upgraded, then later another upgrade, and then again later an even bigger, full studio upgrade...and I haven't stopped upgrading.
I spend a nice chunk of change every year on my studio (that also includes guitars, amps, keys and not just the recording gear) and I have to say, without a doubt, with every gear upgrade the sound quality got better…in small increments, but certainly better.
Sure, my skills also improved over the years, as I can remember totally fumbling about in my early days, but when I also did the major studio upgrades, that’s when stuff really started to fall into place…the combination of improved skills and gear.
Just a different monitor purchase made a HUGE difference in sound quality even though a lot of the other stuff stayed the same (I went from like $400/pair to $1200/pair monitors).
I agree that improving your skills can go as far (and further) than just having good gear will take you...but you know, there is a certain inspiration that comes from learning/working with good gear...not to mention that good gear also challenges YOU to get better.
When you have a dinky setup...it's limiting...and often the excuse.
kcearl
I see deaf people
But so are the magazines...just check out all those reviews.
Naaaa...it's not the BBS that stop people from trying/buying...
...it's their budgets.
But I agree that there are a lot of opinions on forums based mainly on other people's opinions...and not the poster's individual hands-on experiences.
I think everyone passes on anecdotes to a degree...nothing wrong with that...but when you get into a debate with someone about finer points of some technique or process, and they're like 18, with 3 months of "experience" under their belt and the rest is just opinion derived from Internet sources...
yup even as a 43 year old i stay away from technique or process discussions...even with 6 months experience
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Since when is the audience the producer? Producing music on a technical level solely to make Joe mePod happy is setting the bar awfully low. Might as well just write commercial jingles on the back of an envelope and be done with it.
G.
X
XLR
______
I use headphones for tracking and editing. I never use them when making any decisions about sound quality or balance. Speakers only for that. Personally, I don't know anyone who does good quality mix work that does it with headphones.
IME a more common problem is that everything sounds rich and full through cans, then not when through speakers.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
the guy with the money
he who pays the piper calls the tune
you can strive for perfection for yourself
but if you are a biz and the audience wants cheap
then cheap they get cheap as fast as possible
so you can move on to another project hopefully that wants top quality but more likely one that wants cheap fast
or you wont be able to stay in biz
commercial jingles pay quite well
guy in washdc area making 1/2mil a year doing things like that
he who pays the piper calls the tune
you can strive for perfection for yourself
but if you are a biz and the audience wants cheap
then cheap they get cheap as fast as possible
so you can move on to another project hopefully that wants top quality but more likely one that wants cheap fast
or you wont be able to stay in biz
commercial jingles pay quite well
guy in washdc area making 1/2mil a year doing things like that
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
We've had the MP3/quality debates a lot of times...and there's just NO positive argument for intentionally dumbing-down your audio thinking you don’t need anything more than to cater to a lesser format audience…because if you shoot for the best quality you can reach from the start, it's easy to knock out lesser versions/variations of that...but if you only have the lesser, you really can't "upgrade" the quality after the fact.
Better tracking, editing, mixing and mastering even yields better MP3 files.
Better tracking, editing, mixing and mastering even yields better MP3 files.
TeyshaBlue
It's the smell..
I've done the hotel room thing.OK...those are valid justifications for NOT being able to play music loud or do any permanent remodeling, though I think near-field monitoring at 75-85 dB SPL is certainly not very loud and about equal to a typical stereo.
That still doesn't change what most people do & use as an "industry standard" (as much as there are some standards).
If I was forced to live in a hotel room for a month and still wanted to lay down some tracks, I might use a laptop and just bring a couple of mics and headphones...and make do.
Of course, under more ideal conditions, the gear and application would change more toward that “industry standard”…or as close as possible.
I never meant to suggest that headphones are totally unusable...quite the contrary.
AFA room treatment...I'm more of the "make do" mentality rather than frettin-n-fussin about room treatment before laying down a single note to hear how it sounds.
I was working on a soundtrack for a documentary on Louisville, CO a few years ago. I was on location during the day getting an idea of the footage, then with some rough video, I would work at night. I was holed up in a hotel in Denver for 2 weeks. I had a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5's, 100 watt reference amp, 2 keyboards and a sequencer. I worked at a fairly low volume and never had a noise complaint the entire trip.