Whats a good price for NS10M's?

Nightfire

Nightfire

Aspiring Idiot
What is a good price to pay for a set of used Yamaha NS10Ms?
Serial numbers on them are 308491L and 308491R. From the pictures they look an old pair, but the seller says theyre in good working order.


Mike
 

Attachments

  • yamahas.jpg
    yamahas.jpg
    15.9 KB · Views: 192
I wouldn't pay $10 for them. They are terrible, if you aren't used to them already, don't bother.

I sold mine on ebay for around $400 a few years ago.
 
They were the most popular choice -- They were the new "little, crappy" speakers after Auratone went under.

Although I know some (exceptionally gifted) engineers that actually use them as mains, they were more or less to "check" mixes on (the little, crappy speakers).

They were however, reliably crappy sounding speakers. And you needed to make sure you had a drawer full of spare tweeters (which were just plain reliably crappy).
 
Allrighty then, good thing I asked;)
Can you guys recomend me a good set of monitors for a home recordist who is looking for decent monitors? So far Ive been mixing in the cans, and with some regular pc speakers.
As always with my college wallet, Im on a budget.


Mike
 
Im one of those who grew up on NS-10's so I always have a set, but I wouldnt reccomend them to anyone, ever

George Augsperger said good things about the KRK V8 mkII's. I dont know if you can even get them anymore, but that's some high praise for cheap speakers!

Plus theyre self powered and more convenient with WAY lower bass extension than the ns-10's have
 
I had a set of BX8's (not the "a's" which I thought were just a whisker lacking) that I thought were quite decent for the $$$. The a's were just "missing something" by comparison. Still not bad though -
 
I don't want to hijack the topic, you guys keep on giving recommendations and such, but as long as we're on the general topic of NS10s, I'm in need of actual specs on either the original NS10s or the NS10Ms, especially their actual rated frequency response and fudge factor. Numbers are fine, charts would be a bonus.

Any of you NS10 owners or users have that info you can pass along or a current valid link to such info? I'd be much appreciative :).

G.
 
Monitors are largely, though not entirely, a personal preference thing. A lot of people, including many big names, still do use NS-10s. I find them useful. It's undeniable that they are really lacking in bass though, so they really can't be your only monitor. Also, you really should have a good power amp with them. Good power amps are not cheap.

By the time you spend nearly or over $1000 between the NS-10s and a good power amp, you could also consider something like ADAM A7s which are pretty popular these days (and new and still in production).

Keep in mind that good monitors are a high return investment, so don't skimp. Every decision you make relies on them. For someone building a studio from scratch I'd recommend max investment on monitors and room treatment before anything else.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I don't want to hijack the topic, you guys keep on giving recommendations and such, but as long as we're on the general topic of NS10s, I'm in need of actual specs on either the original NS10s or the NS10Ms, especially their actual rated frequency response and fudge factor. Numbers are fine, charts would be a bonus.

Any of you NS10 owners or users have that info you can pass along or a current valid link to such info? I'd be much appreciative :).

G.
Click to expand...

Glen,
Try: http://www.fmsystems.net/pdf/cutsheet/ns10m.pdf

I can also attest to the M-Audio BX8. I have the "a" version that John wasn't keen on, but they suit me OK (I'm obviously not doing anything near his level!). No frills, but they get the job done.
 
i mix on mackie hr624s, and i 'double check' on ns10m's.

i'm no pro but i have a few damn good mixes,,,,and honestly, i found that the ns10s really just save me burning a disc and running to my car/home hifi.


basically,,,,if the mix sounds good on the mackies, i'm doing well,,,,

but if it sounds good on the ns10s, i'm done :)

i wouldn't recommend them as a first purchase,, but i would as an additional set.

hope that helps.

btw.i paid 190GBP and they're in good nick.
 
Steenamaroo said:
basically,,,,if the mix sounds good on the mackies, i'm doing well,,,,

but if it sounds good on the ns10s, i'm done :)

i wouldn't recommend them as a first purchase,, but i would as an additional set.
.
Click to expand...

Exactly. In the studio I constantly switch between monitoring on the NS-10s and HR624s, and use both fairly equaly. I can understand people who dislike how the NS-10s sound but there's a reason they are "studio standards" and a reason people use them A LOT. Any guest engineer who comes to the studio always uses the NS-10s almost exclusively.

A pair of NS-10s in a well designed room with a good amp (Bryston/Quad) actually sound damned good - and if your mix sounds good on them, you can guarantee they will translate just fine (disclaimer - you may want to check the low end first!).

Between NS-10s and HR624s, you can make great sounding mixes! I find people who don't like NS-10s are either using the wrong version of them, or powering them with a severly underpowered/crappy amp.
 
MessianicDreams said:
I find people who don't like NS-10s are either using the wrong version of them, or powering them with a severly underpowered/crappy amp.
Click to expand...

yeah the thing i never got about that standard was the fact that the amp played such a big part in the equation that the standard was fairly useless when the home studio thing started and cheap amps were the norm.

NS10's are just either a really good example of sheep mentality...or an attempt at a standard. They've got a great midrange peak which, once you know them, make it easier to set vocals and guitars. Otherwise they're horrible.

i think the story is bob clearmountain used them to mix something and they took off. i admit i fell for it in the mid 90's... if only because there weren't many other options except the Alesis monitor 1's... If i were buying today i'd stay far away...particularly because they aren't made anymore and the maintenance on them is (should be) at least an every 6 month thing with the tweeters.

actually i do stay far away...my set is in my closet under a bunch of percussion boxes....

Laters....
Mike
 
MessianicDreams said:
but there's a reason they are "studio standards" and a reason people use them A LOT.
Click to expand...
Here's the story:

Back in 1978 when the original NS10s came out, there was no such thing as a nearfield studio monitor. The original NS10s, in fact, were actually built and marketed as home stereo bookshelf speakers. One or two "big name" engineers (the history is unclear as to exact names, maybe it was Bob Clearmountian like was suggested) bought some NS10s as modern-day versions of Auratones so that their mixes sounded as good on an AM radio as on a home hi-fi.

The idea was that they could actually take these compact speakers with them to whatever studio their next project was at and they'd have not only Auratone-like check speakers for lo-fidelity playback testing, but they'd have a "reference"; a speaker that they knew how it sounded regardless of where they were working at the time, and where, because it *was* in the nearfield, was not as affected by the different - large - control room colorations as the farfields might be. (Note this advantage does not really exist in your typical undersized home studio control room).

So, people start to take notice that there are a heavyweight or two carrying a pair of NS10s around with them. So the studios start to put their own NS10s on top of their desks to a) try to attract the big boys to come w/o having to carry their own gear, and b) to attract others by adding the NS10s that are making all this buzz (pun intended) to their gear list. Next thing you know, engineers all over are becoming used to the sound of the NS10s and learning how to mix and check and translate with them. Yamaha notices this trend, they flip the logo on their boxes sideways to accomodate typical top-of-the-mixing-desk horizontal setups, put a slightly different tweeter in there and throw the "m" on the end of the model number to indicate that they are now marketing it as a "monitor" instead of as the home speaker of it's original intended design and purpose.

So now, by the early 80s, the NS-10 has become a de facto standard in studio control rooms. Not because it sounded any good; no engineer ever claimed at the time that they sounded any good whatsoever. Half of them would actually tape tissue paper over the new M-series tweeters to cut down on their harsh sound. No, they became a standard because engineers wanted a standard - a monitor they knew would sound the same wherever they went - and because the NS-10 had no competition at the time. Being the first nearfield studio monitor means, for a little while anyway, that you are the *only* nearfield studio monitor.

Here's the deep, dark secret that few realize and even fewer want to admit about NS10s. The reason many engineers still like to mix on them to this day, and the reason that mixes that sound good on them supposedly sound good everywhere is has nothing to do with sounding good on AM radio anymore. With the home studio situation, it's got nothing to do with needing a standard for translatability across studio environments.

It's because the 5dB midrange bump they deliver along with it's anemic bass response force the home engineer to shave a few extra dB off the mids and add some tight bass on the individual tracks or in the mix. It's the equivalent of a milder but forced version of death scoop EQ applied in the mix.

G.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top