AllenM
Member
Any? And why do some of the old studio monitors use the red and black connectors instead of a quarter inch jack?
M
Muckelroy
Member
There's a crap ton of "red and black connectors". But what type are you referring to?
Some of them are spring-loaded tabs that you stick the bare connector into and release. Some of them are binding post. There's others out there, some with screws, and whatnot.
The key is to have good quality cabling. Thicker is better, but too thick can get ridiculous. 14 gauge cabling is a good thickness. The connector type does not necessarily matter, as long as there is a decent amount of surface area making contact. I'd actually prefer binding post over a 1/4" jack - less part to have to worry about and you know it's making a good solid connection when it's done right.
Some of them are spring-loaded tabs that you stick the bare connector into and release. Some of them are binding post. There's others out there, some with screws, and whatnot.
The key is to have good quality cabling. Thicker is better, but too thick can get ridiculous. 14 gauge cabling is a good thickness. The connector type does not necessarily matter, as long as there is a decent amount of surface area making contact. I'd actually prefer binding post over a 1/4" jack - less part to have to worry about and you know it's making a good solid connection when it's done right.
P
purerad
New member
if your on a budget....
i've had really excellent luck with parts express br-1 kit......
if you wait for them on sale you can get a good deal
and it's not too hard a kit to put together!
I use them as monitors on my computer all the time.........
used them with analog a bit and they seem fine as well.
i have another set that a friend built that are copies of some higher end ones but i haven't had time to put those thru their paces yet.
i've had really excellent luck with parts express br-1 kit......
if you wait for them on sale you can get a good deal
and it's not too hard a kit to put together!
I use them as monitors on my computer all the time.........
used them with analog a bit and they seem fine as well.
i have another set that a friend built that are copies of some higher end ones but i haven't had time to put those thru their paces yet.
WhinyLittleRunt
Member
I use a pair of Yamaha HS50's which are like the new replica of the NS10's. I like them, they don't sound anything like NS10's but they have a good flat response and when I've mixed with them I haven't had any major surprises on the final mix on other systems, so they seem to do the job. They're not that cheap considering, but they're good IMO.
S
samwise666
New member
Call me the silly Newb
But i'd say just stick with speakers you know, its all very well hunting down that "sound" but if you get new monitors and dont know the sound of them you'd probably find them harder to mix on then your old ones.
thats my two bob anyhoo
But i'd say just stick with speakers you know, its all very well hunting down that "sound" but if you get new monitors and dont know the sound of them you'd probably find them harder to mix on then your old ones.
thats my two bob anyhoo
AllenM
Member
Thanks for your replies. Well... Im using a Tascam M208 that has stereo out 1/4 L & R jacks and L & R xlr jacks. So what I was doing was connecting 1/4>RCA to a stereo I had with some speakers. But those speakers went out... (buzzes at loud volume)
D
dodgeaspen
New member
I run a set of Yamaha HS50's I have very little experience with mixing so they can throw me sometimes. I tend to over eq the songs to sound amazing on the monitors but on anything else it's whacked out wrong.
B
Bguzaldo
New member
I have those same monitors and those same problems!
AllenM
Member
I think I'll just get some powered studio monitors that are available on the market today. 
Blue Jinn
Rider of the ARPocalypse
I use the Pacific Stereo receiver I bought in 1979, and the big ass Mitsubishi speakers that used to grace my apartment living room. It is important to know how they sound though, so get to know them by listening to some "reference" material, i.e. tape, cd, record whatever that is similar in style to what you are recording, because the amp/speaker/room/placement variables all will have an impact, no matter what you buy. Get a baseline.
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
Are you under the impression that some monitors work better on analog sources as opposed to digital ones? If so, you are mistaken.
AllenM
Member
No, im looking for some that are very honest and semi-crappy so if I mix and it comes out good on some crappy speaker then it will sound delicious on good ones.
D
desmond22
New member
Rokit KRK
I use these and i find em to be pretty honest. THey get a bashing by people, but i love them. THey dont sound too nice which is perfect. If you get a good mix on them, the music will sound good on anything.
Cheap too. Should be 500 for a pair in the US for 8s
I use these and i find em to be pretty honest. THey get a bashing by people, but i love them. THey dont sound too nice which is perfect. If you get a good mix on them, the music will sound good on anything.
Cheap too. Should be 500 for a pair in the US for 8s
T
The Great Cobb
New member
mixing
KRKs are fine for what you are doing Allen.
If anyone says otherwise they are being ridiculous.
Just use a pair of decent stereo speakers and a hi-fi until you can get some KRKs. Once you have them, set your system up so that you can switch between the regular speakers and the KRKs to see how the mix sounds over both sets of speakers. This setup will last you for a long time before youll need an upgrade that will be worth the money. Then youll probably want some higher end Tannoy reveals or whatever.
The most important first step of getting a good mix is YOU and your understanding of how your speakers/listening environment can be misleading. You will never have perfect gear and never have perfect environment. So the faster you can get used to trusting your ears the better.
Something worth noting about equipment in general, people will be fast to tell you that this sucks or that sucks. And they can be right or horribly wrong. Peoples opinions can come from fact or totally biased lies. Or even facts that are skewed (like if someone bought a mic that is great, but theirs was bad due to bad quality control so they assume that that brand sucks across the board). So your best bet is to just get equipment that is decent, and do your best to get the most amazing results you can out of it. You gotta remember, there is no glory in using under-rated equipment... until you do great things with it and then everyone is impressed. Its the "doing great things with it" that takes the real concentration and effort. Spending a ton of money on stuff just because it has public reputation as being "the best" takes no effort at all. So be proud of what you are using and make it work for you at all costs. I think almost everyone would be surprised at how good things can sound even with minimal semi-pro equipment.
KRKs are fine for what you are doing Allen.
If anyone says otherwise they are being ridiculous.
Just use a pair of decent stereo speakers and a hi-fi until you can get some KRKs. Once you have them, set your system up so that you can switch between the regular speakers and the KRKs to see how the mix sounds over both sets of speakers. This setup will last you for a long time before youll need an upgrade that will be worth the money. Then youll probably want some higher end Tannoy reveals or whatever.
The most important first step of getting a good mix is YOU and your understanding of how your speakers/listening environment can be misleading. You will never have perfect gear and never have perfect environment. So the faster you can get used to trusting your ears the better.
Something worth noting about equipment in general, people will be fast to tell you that this sucks or that sucks. And they can be right or horribly wrong. Peoples opinions can come from fact or totally biased lies. Or even facts that are skewed (like if someone bought a mic that is great, but theirs was bad due to bad quality control so they assume that that brand sucks across the board). So your best bet is to just get equipment that is decent, and do your best to get the most amazing results you can out of it. You gotta remember, there is no glory in using under-rated equipment... until you do great things with it and then everyone is impressed. Its the "doing great things with it" that takes the real concentration and effort. Spending a ton of money on stuff just because it has public reputation as being "the best" takes no effort at all. So be proud of what you are using and make it work for you at all costs. I think almost everyone would be surprised at how good things can sound even with minimal semi-pro equipment.
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
No, im looking for some that are very honest and semi-crappy so if I mix and it comes out good on some crappy speaker then it will sound delicious on good ones.
"Honest" & "semi-crappy" are mutually exclusive terms. That being said, I'm not interested in getting into a pissing contest with you over your inexperience. Regardless of what you buy, you want monitors you can understand if not completely trust, in order to be able to gauge, aka: 2nd guess, how work on them will translate on other systems. Good luck on your quest.
Blue Jinn
Rider of the ARPocalypse
No, im looking for some that are very honest and semi-crappy so if I mix and it comes out good on some crappy speaker then it will sound delicious on good ones.
I think that logic is misplaced. You could get a great sounding mix on anything, and it could still sound crappy on something else, b/c of any number of variables, ie. your amplifier (if not powered) and environment. "Honest" and "semi-crappy" may not coexist peacefully, but even assuming they do, honest is still totally subjective. E.g. a flat frequency response might still not translate into anything meaningful if you have all sorts of reflections in your room. I might have the most badass hifi system in my living room and still use the eq to get it to sound right....
I'd say figure out what you can afford based on the best case scenario of placement (a triangle with you head as the apex) and make sure you get a baseline from a known good mix.
Like I said before I still use an old receiver (has a bad preamp, so I just use it as an amp) and actually two sets of speakers. A nice pair of furniture Mistubishis, and a cheapass pair of Fishers. I can do a bit of an A/B that way, but the importance is knowing how everything else sounds on them. I do know the Fishers have a little less bottom end than the Mitsubishis.
And nothing says you can't mix and then make a test CD/cassette and listen to that on other hifi's to get a feel the mix.
AllenM
Member
Well what I do is EQ, set volume levels for the tracks then send the audio to my cassette deck. Then from there I take the cassette to my car and listen to it. Its a drag but oh well.
AllenM
Member
And yes, I do want monitors I can understand.
T
The Great Cobb
New member
car
Actually i think its awesome that you are taking the tape to your car and listening to it. Thats a classic listening environment. Not only that, but its so unorthodox and minimalist and honest compared to some bastard that doesnt even like music anymore who owns multiple sets of 3 thousand dollar monitors that were scientifically engineered to impress people who barely have decent taste in music anyways. So i applaud you.
BUT
Whats fun and naive is rarely the best method. And that goes for everything, not just mastering. So i think you should try to do some critical listening practice for now, until you save up for your monitors. This way, when they arrive youll be ten times more thankful and aware of what you are really doing with the equipment.
Take an old Beatles album like Meet the Beatles etc and play it over your home stereo with the EQ on your receiver set to "flat". No bass boost, no treble boost. Now turn it up to decent listening level and try to concentrate on the sound itself, not the song riffs. Ask yourself: is the bass a bit boomy? Or is it nonexistent? How are the mids? Do they seem sharp or piercing? Is the high end more dull or too splashy and artificial? If your speakers are decent and your stereo is decent you should be able to get that record to sound where the bass can be felt, but its not booming and groaning. The mids should let the sound have character and body, but not be harsh on the ears or completely sucked out like its coming from a tin can. The highs shouldnt be boosted too brightly that a nasty hiss is present, but if you go too low it starts to sound like a blanket over the speaker. Basically, you are using a well recorded album to tune your hi-fi to where it sounds nice and even. No too much of any 1 part of the spectrum etc. You will be tempted to boost bass to give your music impact and power. But resist for now and just let the bass be present and punchy enough to be felt a little bit but not too boomy. Do this for a few records and find the sweet spots that allow all the different albums to sound decent.
Now take your song and master it using those speakers and EQ balance. Try to get your recording not necessarily like the Beatles, but to listen to it critically the same way. Is it too boomy? Is it too harsh? etc etc Adjust your mixer eq for different instruments to get it balanced. It will be very hard to get it to sound as balanced as your favorite records. But just bear with it for now and do the best you can.
Once you have it mastered to where it sounded great on your home speakers, try listening to that same version in your car. Or with your headphones on. Or a friends house. You will be probably hearing entire instruments faded into the mix. Or suddenly the shaker is loud as balls and doesnt even sound like a shaker anymore. You might also hear details like conflicting reverb types that will make the recording instantly sound amateurish in a non-chic, shitty manner. Your first results will most likely be less than stellar. But you arent failing, you are succeeding by actually doing all this and learning to critically listen and starting to realize how bad things can sound on accident despite perfect intentions.
Through practice, you will learn what types of listening environments affect what types of frequencies in what ways. For example, i happen to know that for my cheap cpu speakers to sound the most honest and flat, i have to make them less bassy. Also, they dont lend the music any flattery in the realm of power or impact sonically. They make everything sound more distant and thinner. But, since i know this, i can actually do a decent job of mixing over them if i absolutely have to. Simply because i know not to try too hard to boost frequencies in the track EQ to over correct something that my speakers are doing to the sound, rather than what the sound really is and will be like on other stereos and setups. Its possible for me because i know these speakers and how good albums sound over them until i adjust them. Of course though, this is the hack method, but it also can teach you alot about how to listen honestly. If only we didnt have to spend all our time trying to fight with the inaccuracy of our speakers eh? EH?!?
This is where the concept of a "studio monitor" comes in. No matter what the level of design, money, cheapness etc etc that goes into making a studio monitor, the ultimate goal would be to represent the frequencies of your recording fairly flat and unbiased so that you dont have to do all that adjusting and guesswork that you were doing with cheap speakers or a car stereo. You will still end up adjusting your monitors further after they come out of the box. But, you will have a MUCH MUCH easier time mixing your tunes over them and getting decent playback on other peoples stereos.
Actually i think its awesome that you are taking the tape to your car and listening to it. Thats a classic listening environment. Not only that, but its so unorthodox and minimalist and honest compared to some bastard that doesnt even like music anymore who owns multiple sets of 3 thousand dollar monitors that were scientifically engineered to impress people who barely have decent taste in music anyways. So i applaud you.
BUT
Whats fun and naive is rarely the best method. And that goes for everything, not just mastering. So i think you should try to do some critical listening practice for now, until you save up for your monitors. This way, when they arrive youll be ten times more thankful and aware of what you are really doing with the equipment.
Take an old Beatles album like Meet the Beatles etc and play it over your home stereo with the EQ on your receiver set to "flat". No bass boost, no treble boost. Now turn it up to decent listening level and try to concentrate on the sound itself, not the song riffs. Ask yourself: is the bass a bit boomy? Or is it nonexistent? How are the mids? Do they seem sharp or piercing? Is the high end more dull or too splashy and artificial? If your speakers are decent and your stereo is decent you should be able to get that record to sound where the bass can be felt, but its not booming and groaning. The mids should let the sound have character and body, but not be harsh on the ears or completely sucked out like its coming from a tin can. The highs shouldnt be boosted too brightly that a nasty hiss is present, but if you go too low it starts to sound like a blanket over the speaker. Basically, you are using a well recorded album to tune your hi-fi to where it sounds nice and even. No too much of any 1 part of the spectrum etc. You will be tempted to boost bass to give your music impact and power. But resist for now and just let the bass be present and punchy enough to be felt a little bit but not too boomy. Do this for a few records and find the sweet spots that allow all the different albums to sound decent.
Now take your song and master it using those speakers and EQ balance. Try to get your recording not necessarily like the Beatles, but to listen to it critically the same way. Is it too boomy? Is it too harsh? etc etc Adjust your mixer eq for different instruments to get it balanced. It will be very hard to get it to sound as balanced as your favorite records. But just bear with it for now and do the best you can.
Once you have it mastered to where it sounded great on your home speakers, try listening to that same version in your car. Or with your headphones on. Or a friends house. You will be probably hearing entire instruments faded into the mix. Or suddenly the shaker is loud as balls and doesnt even sound like a shaker anymore. You might also hear details like conflicting reverb types that will make the recording instantly sound amateurish in a non-chic, shitty manner. Your first results will most likely be less than stellar. But you arent failing, you are succeeding by actually doing all this and learning to critically listen and starting to realize how bad things can sound on accident despite perfect intentions.
Through practice, you will learn what types of listening environments affect what types of frequencies in what ways. For example, i happen to know that for my cheap cpu speakers to sound the most honest and flat, i have to make them less bassy. Also, they dont lend the music any flattery in the realm of power or impact sonically. They make everything sound more distant and thinner. But, since i know this, i can actually do a decent job of mixing over them if i absolutely have to. Simply because i know not to try too hard to boost frequencies in the track EQ to over correct something that my speakers are doing to the sound, rather than what the sound really is and will be like on other stereos and setups. Its possible for me because i know these speakers and how good albums sound over them until i adjust them. Of course though, this is the hack method, but it also can teach you alot about how to listen honestly. If only we didnt have to spend all our time trying to fight with the inaccuracy of our speakers eh? EH?!?
This is where the concept of a "studio monitor" comes in. No matter what the level of design, money, cheapness etc etc that goes into making a studio monitor, the ultimate goal would be to represent the frequencies of your recording fairly flat and unbiased so that you dont have to do all that adjusting and guesswork that you were doing with cheap speakers or a car stereo. You will still end up adjusting your monitors further after they come out of the box. But, you will have a MUCH MUCH easier time mixing your tunes over them and getting decent playback on other peoples stereos.
B
Beck
Guest
If you want a specific recommendation I chose the Yorkville YSM1i several years ago as my only studio monitors. They are recently discontinued, but can still be found new. The ART SLM-1 is the same monitor so that will work too. (Yorkville owns ART and these monitors were manufactured in Canada) I use an Alesis RA100 power amp to run them and the combo sounds super... like they were made for each other. ART also makes a power amp, Model SLA-1, but I don’t care for them that much.
http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?id=119&cat=20&type=33
Things translate very well from the Yorkies to other systems. I’ve used many brands of monitors over the years in commercial and home environments, so I knew exactly what I was looking for when I decided on these. I have small studio space compared to past setups so I wanted to narrow things down to one pair of nearfields. They were also way under budget, but I didn’t select them because they were inexpensive... they just happened to be inexpensive compared to other monitors I was looking at.
One thing to look out for: I believe Yorkville started outsourcing these to China a while after I bought mine. You can still find the Yorkville and ART branded models made in Canada, but ask the seller what he has to be certain. It will say “Made in Canada” on the box and monitors. They were discontinued shortly after the outsourcing began... no surprise.
I still prefer matching passive monitors to an amp. Actives have been all the rage for many years now I know, but I think I know better how to match an amp to speakers for my purposes. YMMV I can’t give the same recommendation to the Yorkville powered version, YSM1P, because I don’t know anything about them. They may be fine as active speakers go, but I don’t know.
http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?id=119&cat=20&type=33
Things translate very well from the Yorkies to other systems. I’ve used many brands of monitors over the years in commercial and home environments, so I knew exactly what I was looking for when I decided on these. I have small studio space compared to past setups so I wanted to narrow things down to one pair of nearfields. They were also way under budget, but I didn’t select them because they were inexpensive... they just happened to be inexpensive compared to other monitors I was looking at.
One thing to look out for: I believe Yorkville started outsourcing these to China a while after I bought mine. You can still find the Yorkville and ART branded models made in Canada, but ask the seller what he has to be certain. It will say “Made in Canada” on the box and monitors. They were discontinued shortly after the outsourcing began... no surprise.
I still prefer matching passive monitors to an amp. Actives have been all the rage for many years now I know, but I think I know better how to match an amp to speakers for my purposes. YMMV I can’t give the same recommendation to the Yorkville powered version, YSM1P, because I don’t know anything about them. They may be fine as active speakers go, but I don’t know.