Crush
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 138
- Joined: 2011/01/19 15:57:29
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 02:25:07
(permalink)
Regarding frequency plots of speakers: The vast majority are useless. If they don't plot frequency response with at least a 1/24 octave resolution, and if they don't also show you the off-axis frequency response, then it's a mostly useless graph. He's the rare type that really knows speakers. The 'marketing graphs' aren't that helpful.
|
Crush
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 138
- Joined: 2011/01/19 15:57:29
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 02:29:39
(permalink)
Those look very nice! Both in appearance and the specs. Well they do spike and dip if you look carefully. 3db difference is 50% spl increase/decrease so keep that in mind. Any high end speaker should come with a graph for your set. Same with amplifiers actually. Also, just because it's flat, it doesn't mean they are going to sound the same as another that is flat. The flat response is such a small part of the total package. Especially when they are studio monitors. There are also octave differences and other things that make the graph not as useful as one might think.
|
Crush
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 138
- Joined: 2011/01/19 15:57:29
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 02:40:43
(permalink)
HumbleNoise
http://www.studio-central.com/studio_monitors.htm
Yes and here is the truth of the matter and why I do NOT recommend people go overboard on monitors when there is other gear to buy is this: "The truth is that if your music is successful, people will listen to it in the car, on boom boxes, on their walkman, on mom's kitchen radio with the 3 inch speaker, in living rooms with surround systems, in listening booths a cd stores, on TV, and every once in a while, maybe 1 out of every 100 listens, someone will hear it on good speakers, and maybe, if you are lucky 1 out of 1000 on studio monitors. The real truth is in the understanding of how your mix on your monitors translates to other listening conditions. That is, you have to really "know" your monitors."
So if we have already established the truth of the matter (which the above is with few exceptions), then the moral of the story is not to get bent out of shape with monitors.
I never said they shouldn't be flat or coloured etc. All I really said is that for music production, is to pretty much get any studio 6.5's with silk tweeters and then GET THE SUBWOOFER!! That's my advice and I'm sticking to it :)
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 03:10:40
(permalink)
Luteman
I just watched Crush's very informative video, which he was kind enough to link to earlier in this thread. I'm a bit puzzled by one thing. though - at 7:44 he mentions 'inter-module distortion, or modular distortion' (for you guys who don't understand speakers).
Is this a type of distortion introduced by the Control Bar in X1?
I think he means intermodulation distortion. It is where one frequency modulates another changing it and causing a very un-HI FI sound.. Its common in amps but very low with good gear. In speakers its fairly high as is harmonic distortion. At least with dynamic speakers. Electrostatic speakers have low distortion in comparison. They are flaky though in not lasting very long. But sound great.
|
Luteman
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 335
- Joined: 2006/12/04 05:48:05
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 04:16:47
(permalink)
John
Luteman
I just watched Crush's very informative video, which he was kind enough to link to earlier in this thread. I'm a bit puzzled by one thing. though - at 7:44 he mentions 'inter-module distortion, or modular distortion' (for you guys who don't understand speakers).
Is this a type of distortion introduced by the Control Bar in X1?
I think he means intermodulation distortion. It is where one frequency modulates another changing it and causing a very un-HI FI sound.. Its common in amps but very low with good gear. In speakers its fairly high as is harmonic distortion. At least with dynamic speakers. Electrostatic speakers have low distortion in comparison. They are flaky though in not lasting very long. But sound great.
Yep, I knew what he meant. I was just trying to be funny - though clearly not as funny as I thought. Certainly not as funny as his video.
Chris
SONAR Platinum, Windows 7 Pro 64bit, Core2Quad Q6600, 8GB, 2 x SSD, M-Audio Fast Track Ultra, M-Audio Axiom 61, Behringer FCB1010 MIDI pedalboard, Stephen Haddock 8-course lute, some guitars, a mandolin and a bass
|
steve@psbnoe.wanadoo
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 256
- Joined: 2008/11/01 13:29:08
- Location: Nottingham UK
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 05:44:19
(permalink)
Hi, i'm looking for some advice.I have the Blue sky media desk 2.1 system at the moment and i'm considering swapping it for the JBL LSR 4326P's, i have a very small room 9ft x 8.5ft x 8ft (not good i know) with as much bass trapping as i can get in it.
Would this give me an improvement as i'm not sure about the sub in this small room.
I'm also thinking the automatic room correction on the JBL's could help.
Cheers
Steve.
I was faced with a choice at a difficult age Would I write a book? Or should I take to the stage? But in the back of my head I heard distant feet Che Guevara and Debussy to a disco beat
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 07:23:07
(permalink)
Automatic correction is evil.
It's ok for listening to stuff that has all ready been mixed... but it's not good to mix with it.
*Truth* is stranger than fiction.... but facts are facts.
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 07:28:45
(permalink)
UnderTow
tarsier
I tried to dig out that information from a lot of manufacturer's websites, and the only ones who had that info easily available are JBL and Genelec. What are the other ones hiding? Can anyone point me to other manufacturers that publish their speaker specs in that much detail?
These are the specs for my monitors: http://psiaudio.com/downloads/active_studio_monitors/docs/PSI_A25_M_techdata.pdf
They also provide a specific frequency plot for the actual pair of speakers which tells you that they are properly tested after being manufactured. Not some idealised plot for a brochure:
There are a few other manufacturers that gives detailed specs and measurements:
http://www.neumann-kh-line.com/neumann-kh/home_en.nsf/root/prof-monitoring_studio-monitors_nearfield-monitors_O300D#
http://www.me-geithain.de/studio/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=32&lang=en
I couldn't find much else but I'm sure the higher end manufacturers would provide them on request.
How many people here have had their hearing checked lately?
*Wave*
UnderTow
I hope you and everybody else here understand that this with charts are very misleading. You can get all kinds of chart depending how you conduct and calculate the chart. The same goes with AD/DA converters. In deciding between two similar interfaces, the often hard-to-decipher performance specifications play an integral role for the clued-up engineer. And here’s the problem – you would be fooled if you thought that these performance figures were reliable. Because companies do not adhere to the same measurement standards, their performance figures often misrepresent the true performance of a product. Digital dynamic range figures are a classic example of this. There is a standard - the AES17 standard. Some measure to this standard, but many interface companies do not. Worse than this, some companies in the pro-recording industry quote figures from the datasheets they receive from the manufacturers of the silicon devices they’ve selected for their product. These figures are extremely misleading, since once placed in the environment of a product, with essential circuitry around the chip, performance figures change for the worse. Herein lies the real talent of good product design – to get the most out the chips used. Sometimes the difference can be as much as 12 dB dynamic range, with a chip's DAC performance measured at 114 dB outside of the box, and 102dB inside the box. That difference of 12dB is equivalent to a reduction from 19bits to 17bits – essentially, the studio is being short-changed by two bits! So, in summary, unless it says that it has been measured to AES 17 standards, you cannot trust the figures. When you’re told that a product does ‘exactly what is says on the tin’, treat these words with caution – appearances can be deceiving. Also to professional treating and fine tuning your room to a perfect listening environment has often more value per dollar compare to buying a new set of monitors. You can have the finest high-end monitors in the world but those monitors can still be useless if you don't have the perfect listen environment. Best Regards Freddie
post edited by Freddie H - 2011/02/08 07:44:13
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 09:21:18
(permalink)
RE: http://www.studio-central.com/studio_monitors.htm The truth is that Tweak is a gear pimp and he starts bending the truth at the very top of the page with his paid to pimp affiliation link to zzounds.:  JBL LSR4326P Powered Studio Monitor (220 Watts, 1x6.25 in.) 19 words into his *article* he starts lying about the advertised system being 220 watts where it is clearly specified by JBL as a bi amped 150 w/ 70 w system. That means it's a 150 watt system. Gear pimps don't care about you... or the truth... they care about closing a sale with what ever budget you are bringing to the table. The best way to close a sale at any price point is to make the customer feel good about the compromises they are making. By paragraph 3 he starts myth making by suggesting that hi-fi speakers and *monitors* are different... when it as been demonstrated repeatably that when quality is comparable both stereotyped categories have more in common that different. I'll admit that bottom feeder gear has so many compromises that you may see a trend towards some enhancement rather than "neutral"... but that is simply a result of the bottom feeder budget being unable to provide any balanced value or quality. When did bottom feeding become and "ideal" or "standard"? By Paragraph 6 he's naming a basic physics phenomena after himself "Tweak's Law"... oh well. In Paragraph 7 he speaks about blowing apart a woofer and indicates that the cause is related to the fact that he was using a hi-fi speaker... which is ridiculous... he simply blew out the woofer on a cheap stinky speaker... move on... nothing to see here. By Paragraph 9 he starts making a little bit of sense... but it's common sense and could have been placed up in paragraph 1. In fact it's so common that it makes the article in its entirety seem like useless ad copy drivel. I'm mildly amused to think that Stairway to Heaven might be a reference mix... it's one of the crudest recorded and edited tracks I can think of... but it does make stinky speakers sound stinkier so maybe t is a good choice for searching out less than stinky speakers. At least at the end of paragraph 9 Tweak finally shares the facts with you: "The more speakers you listen to, the more you will hear the problems. Then it dawns on you, you can find a problem with every enclosure and know there is no perfect monitor. So you look at the higher end and you find that the better priced monitors typically exhibit fewer objectionable problems. The end is always a compromise with what you like and what you want to spend."
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 09:24:18
|
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3029
- Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
- Location: 6 feet under
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 10:23:36
(permalink)
Automatic correction is evil. It's ok for listening to stuff that has all ready been mixed... but it's not good to mix with it. *Truth* is stranger than fiction.... but facts are facts. er... "Automatic correction is evil" is not a fact, but an opinion. The fact of the matter is that when done properly, "room correction" (which is a misnomer, it is more along the lines of "playback equalization") can make your system sound excellent. "Done properly" is complicated, however. It includes having a well treated room and good speakers. "Room Correction" can't compensate for bad acoustics. But it can (and dare I say should?) be the final step in getting a truly remarkable playback environment. Mike, I believe you've posted that you've used some of the dip switches on your speakers to change the response to fit your environment. "Room correction" just takes that a step further to actually analyze the speaker/room system and apply a suitable compensation factor. Sure, it can be done poorly, but when done well it can produce fine results.
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 10:39:22
(permalink)
I have never used any of the switches on my JBL speakers. I'd pay extra to not have any of those switches on the back of my speakers. I don't have any other EQ capability on either my monitor or home entertainment systems... but that's just me. I also happen to have the EQ switched off on my Mini Van's player.
As I have said "It's ok for listening to stuff that has all ready been mixed" But, I think that any active correction in a scenario where you are mixing is very bad idea. I have in the past mentioned that I use TrueRTA, a mic that has been tested in an anechoic chamber, and that mic's not certified for legal witness calibration file to test my mix situations and move my traps around until I get what I consider a best case situation. I certainly admit that this is based on an opinion... but stand by the notion that my opinion, within a strict context of mixing rather than listening, is based on facts: Any active EQ applied to the playback while mixing, regardless of whether it is a cut or boost, will simply confuse the situation and create a scenario where you are more likely to over or under compensate with your mixing decisions. all the best, mike
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 10:42:00
|
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3029
- Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
- Location: 6 feet under
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 10:56:54
(permalink)
mike_mccue
I have never used any of the switches on my JBL speakers.
I stand corrected.
But, I think that any active correction in a scenario where you are mixing is very bad idea.
<snip>
I certainly admit that this is based on an opinion... but stand by the notion that my opinion, within a strict context of mixing rather than listening, is based on facts:
Your opinion goes against lots of research done by the AES, acousticians, and others involved in the mixing of sound that has found that properly applying eq to the playback system when mixing is a very good idea. Now, there are systems that claim to "correct" a large area of the room. The research has shown that those claims are exaggerated to say the least. But in a one-sweet-spot scenario (like mixing) you can get terrific results. A google search for more reading
|
Lunatique
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 194
- Joined: 2004/06/19 04:43:27
- Location: Lincoln, California
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 11:04:09
(permalink)
I have lived in different places, and have used different rooms to turn into my studio, and currently I have a studio that was designed from the ground up to be an audio production studio, has extensive acoustic treatment, as well as room correction software. It is after I have done all this that I finally have a room that actually allows my reference monitors (Klein + Hummel O 300D's) to truly sound their best. Prior to achieving all that, the 300D's sounded good, but they were definitely colored--sometimes unpleasantly so.
If you are not going to do all that you can to turn your listening environment into one that's acoustically ideal (or you simply don't have the money or space), then I would highly recommend that you simply use a quality pair of headphones in conjunction with a quality crossfeed/room simulator such as Isone Pro or Redline Monitor. This will allow you a much more reliable monitoring solution that does away with the traditionally problematic "in your head" drastic panning of headphones. Headphones also will always sound the same no matter what room you're in, so they are very consistent.
Today's headphones are very high quality--many are good enough as reference grade monitoring devices (but I must stress, you should use a quality crossfeed/room sim in conjunction). A boutique high-end pair of headphones for studio work like the Audez'e LCD-2 is more accurate than most pro audio monitors that cost the same or more. Even a relatively much cheaper pair of headphones like the Audio-Technica ATH-M50 is pretty damn good compared to many pro audio monitors that cost far more. While a kick-ass pair of headphones like the LCD-2 can reproduce sub-bass down to 20Hz and remain almost ruler flat, they won't be as visceral since you don't feel the physical vibration like you do with speakers, but at least the headphones can reproduce such frequencies, while most speakers--regardless of price, struggle to produce such deep bass frequencies, and even many subwoofers don't go that low.
So my recommendation is that if you want reliable monitoring and you cannot provide an acoustically desirable environment for your speakers, just use a pair of quality headphones with crossfeed/room sim.
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 11:15:42
(permalink)
tarsier
mike_mccue
I have never used any of the switches on my JBL speakers.
I stand corrected.
But, I think that any active correction in a scenario where you are mixing is very bad idea.
<snip>
I certainly admit that this is based on an opinion... but stand by the notion that my opinion, within a strict context of mixing rather than listening, is based on facts:
Your opinion goes against lots of research done by the AES, acousticians, and others involved in the mixing of sound that has found that properly applying eq to the playback system when mixing is a very good idea.
Now, there are systems that claim to "correct" a large area of the room. The research has shown that those claims are exaggerated to say the least. But in a one-sweet-spot scenario (like mixing) you can get terrific results.
A google search for more reading
I'm open to being corrected... and I subscribe to the AES periodical. It's my opinion that until the AES adopts something as a standard or standard practice that many of the papers are merely a thesis that may or may not survive a process of peer review. For example; If I were to take everything I read in the AES journal literally, I would believe that we all need 10,000 speakers to have competent surround playback. I've also heard many old timer AES members complain that AES has been taken over by a bunch of guitar wankers... and I often times assume that I fall into that newer member category when you consider the actual old time real life engineers' perspective. :-) Anyways, I'm more likely to consider your personal opinion rather than go read a bunch more AES articles. FWIW, the THX certified room I occasionally work in has Klark Technik EQ correction that Mr. Holman personally set... so I do understand that some people have other opinions. all the best, mike edit to add: I don't have an E-Library subscription but the first 4 links' overview descriptions speak about playback without mentioning a mix scenario... and the 5th link seems to suggest it is a discussion about using negative polarity "speakers" as sound sinks which nullify room modes... cool stuff but way beyond mere active EQ and perhaps timing correction. Anyways... maybe I'll get a E-Library subscription someday. :-)
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 21:11:39
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 12:48:56
(permalink)
OK, I now have a E-library subscription link 1: Describes improving the performance of near real time adaptive dsp techniques. The paper never suggests the results are good or bad... but merely focuses on the the state of the art of making dsp adaptive adjustments while monitoring a speaker with a microphone. link 2: Describes listener preference and perception while relating the inverse benefit of adjusting direct source content in an effort to effect the reflected content. It also investigates how any preference for EQ adjustment as a room correction is esteemed when the number of speakers is varied from a single mono to full surround array. There is no mention of mixing... just playback enjoyment. Everyone enjoyed using corrective EQ... but the playback system was described as consumer grade. The method of correction didn't seem to matter. If it was simply correcting a measured response in an anechoic chamber or correcting an actual room response... There was always a preference for making the consumer grade speakers sound different. Everyone found that listening in mono left them with more appreciation for the EQ difference than stereo or surround. link 3: A 1995 paper discussing the idea that dedicated circuits can possibly make near real time analysis and correction possible. There is no mention of the merits... it is simply a technical discussion about the mechanics of making corrections on the fly. link 4: A really cool 2001 paper by Dolby about both EQ and de-reverberation correction. All of it is within the context of playback and no mention of mixing. The conclusion is that low order EQ correction is easily appreciated while the de-preverberation schemes cause easily recognized problems if you move a few inches away from the listening sweet spot. I stopped there and searched "aes room equalization for mixing audio" I found this link: http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=12662 which does speak to the subject of mix theaters but made no mention of corrective EQ... it is focused on analyzing whether listening positions in mix theaters accurately mimic the experience of the audience at a commercial theater. The conclusion is that all 5 of the rooms tested were already set up so that the balance between direct sound and reflected sound did not cause any anomalies when the mixes produced in those rooms were translated to public performance. The conculsion was that the direct sound was sufficiently loud to make the impact of the reflections inconsequential... in the 5 mix theaters studied. I have yet to find an AES paper that supports the idea that using active near real time corrective filtering is applicable to the occupation of effective mixing. I will welcome any links to a paper that investigates this. all the best, mike
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 12:54:47
|
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3029
- Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
- Location: 6 feet under
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 15:22:53
(permalink)
I'm open to being corrected... and I subscribe to the AES periodical. It's my opinion that until the AES adopts something as a standard or standard practice that many of the papers are merely a thesis that may or may not survive a process of peer review.
Well, sure. And that's why I mentioned others.
For example; If I were to take everything I read in the AES journal literally, I would believe that we all need 10,000 speakers to have competent surround playback.
Where's that paper? I'd love to read it. (yes, I understand hyperbole, but I also know that there are many interesting mega speaker setups that people have done. I've heard a few, including a 20+ channel, I-don't-know-how-many speaker arrangement in the Dolby screening room.) 'Competent' surround playback, by which I mean the point of very diminishing returns in soundfield perception, can be had by 5 channels and speakers. And fortunately, the SMPTE/ITU recommended speaker arrangement is one of the competent ones. That's according to research (AES or otherwise) done according to my personal-opinion-gold-standard: double blind listening tests among many listeners and statistically analyzed for trends on what a competent surround setup should be.
I've also heard many old timers AES members complain that AES has been taken over by a bunch of guitar wankers... and I often times assume that I fall into that newer member category when you consider the actual old time real life engineers' perspective. :-)
Anyways, I'm more likely to consider your personal opinion rather than go read a bunch more AES articles.
Fascinating. I'd never ask anyone to take my personal opinion. I don't know anything.
FWIW, the THX certified room I occasionally work in has Klark Technik EQ correction that Mr. Holman personally set... so I do understand that some people have other opinions.
all the best,
mike
edit to add:
I don't have an E-Library subscription but the first 4 links' overview descriptions speak about playback without mentioning a mix scenario... and the 5th link seems to suggest it is a discussion about using negative polarity "speakers" as sound sinks which nullify room modes... cool stuff but way beyond mere active EQ and perhaps timing correction.
Anyways... maybe I'll get a E-Library subscription someday. :-)
My point was not to put forth that quickie google link as a be-all reference on room eq. It was more a 'let me google that for you' kinda thing. I skimmed a couple of links, thought two of them were at the very least relevant and ran with it. I left it up as an exercise to the reader to start sifting. Anyways, here's my worthless opinion on the original topic (barring cost concerns): Get some new JBLs with the room correction feature and use it (follow the instructions!). It's the best bang for the buck. I've heard that system in some different scenarios, and I always liked the sound.
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 16:04:21
(permalink)
Freddie H
I hope you and everybody else here understand that this with charts are very misleading.
No they are not Freddy. If you are going to make a claim like that you have to back it up with some real data. This company does not need to tweak their data because they make extremely good speakers. Secondly, that chart is provided with the sold speakers. In other words, it is not used for marketing. It is only provided AFTER you have bought the speakers. It is true that many graphs and specs are misleading but you can not conclude from that that the charts from the companies above are misleading. Worse than this, some companies in the pro-recording industry quote figures from the datasheets they receive from the manufacturers of the silicon devices they’ve selected for their product. These figures are extremely misleading, since once placed in the environment of a product, with essential circuitry around the chip, performance figures change for the worse. Herein lies the real talent of good product design – to get the most out the chips used.
Freddy! I'm impressed! I wrote more or less the above to you about a year ago. I am glad you were paying attention!  So, in summary, unless it says that it has been measured to AES 17 standards, you cannot trust the figures.
These measurements have absolutely nothing to do with AES-17 because they are not digital.  You need to learn a little more Freddy before lecturing people.  UnderTow
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 16:07:38
(permalink)
mike_mccue
19 words into his *article* he starts lying about the advertised system being 220 watts where it is clearly specified by JBL as a bi amped 150 w/ 70 w system.
That means it's a 150 watt system.
Huh? Saying it is 220 Watts might be a bit free and loose with terminology but calling it 150 Watts is even further from the truth! UnderTow
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 16:15:01
(permalink)
Hi Tarsier,
It wasn't Hyperbole... Tomlinson and some Colleagues literally wrote a paper saying that at 10,000 drivers you'd get accurate surround. It was many years ago... I have no idea how to search it out. I was incredulous when I read it... but I think they were quite serious.
It may have simply been a white paper and not an official AES paper.
BTW the AES E Library search function seems primitive.
With regards to the JBL 4300 series correction... your estimation that it sounds great doesn't seem to have anything to do with deciding whether or not it is a good idea to mix with that feature engaged.
I trust your opinion that it sounds great.
I like the sound of the THX certified room I mentioned as well... it has 7 JBL LSR6328P and subwoofer and a state of the art digital hardware EQ on each channel.
Never the less, the concept I work with is that attempting to electronically fix acoustical problems before mixing will not prevent you from attempting to compensate for bad room acoustics while you mix.
all the best,
mike
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 16:22:13
(permalink)
UnderTow
mike_mccue
19 words into his *article* he starts lying about the advertised system being 220 watts where it is clearly specified by JBL as a bi amped 150 w/ 70 w system.
That means it's a 150 watt system.
Huh? Saying it is 220 Watts might be a bit free and loose with terminology but calling it 150 Watts is even further from the truth!
UnderTow
If it was a traditional passive system with a 150 watt per channel amplifier (at some rated THD etc) hooked up to 2 way speakers... The passive system would be marginally quieter because a small amount of energy would be divided out to protect the tweeter. What would you call it? I call my working class quality JBL6328P biamped 250/120 watt speakers a 220 watt system because that's what JBL rates them as. edit to add: Just to point out the differenet way to view this... Using Tweaks math my 220 watt system could be described as 370 watts? best regards, mike
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 16:24:24
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 16:30:32
(permalink)
UnderTow
Freddie H
Worse than this, some companies in the pro-recording industry quote figures from the datasheets they receive from the manufacturers of the silicon devices they’ve selected for their product. These figures are extremely misleading, since once placed in the environment of a product, with essential circuitry around the chip, performance figures change for the worse. Herein lies the real talent of good product design – to get the most out the chips used.
Freddy! I'm impressed! I wrote more or less the above to you about a year ago. I am glad you were paying attention!
UnderTow
In a recent interview I heard with David Bock he describes a trip to a Chinese microphone factory where 6 workers were kept busy hand drawing response curves on top of pre printed graph sheets. He found it humorous that the hand drawn results reinforced the impression that the graphs were actually uniquely generated (they were) and thus assumed to be more accurate than a prescribed and ideal response graph meant to represent a whole production run. :-) Undertow, do you believe in the idea that speakers break in? If you do... and I think to some small extent I do... how does that relate to some test result made in an anechoic chamber when the speaker is brand new? Just curious what your take on it is. best regards, mike edit spelling
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/02/08 21:08:14
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 18:18:09
(permalink)
UnderTow
Freddie H
I hope you and everybody else here understand that this with charts are very misleading.
No they are not Freddy. If you are going to make a claim like that you have to back it up with some real data. This company does not need to tweak their data because they make extremely good speakers. Secondly, that chart is provided with the sold speakers. In other words, it is not used for marketing. It is only provided AFTER you have bought the speakers.
It is true that many graphs and specs are misleading but you can not conclude from that that the charts from the companies above are misleading.
Worse than this, some companies in the pro-recording industry quote figures from the datasheets they receive from the manufacturers of the silicon devices they’ve selected for their product. These figures are extremely misleading, since once placed in the environment of a product, with essential circuitry around the chip, performance figures change for the worse. Herein lies the real talent of good product design – to get the most out the chips used.
Freddy! I'm impressed! I wrote more or less the above to you about a year ago. I am glad you were paying attention! So, in summary, unless it says that it has been measured to AES 17 standards, you cannot trust the figures.
These measurements have absolutely nothing to do with AES-17 because they are not digital. You need to learn a little more Freddy before lecturing people.
UnderTow
UnderTow. If you pay attention and read my post again you will notice I referring the AES 17 standards to AD/DA converters only not monitor speakers. Regards Freddie with "ie"
post edited by Freddie H - 2011/02/08 18:20:44
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8594
- Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
- Location: betwixt and between
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 18:40:05
(permalink)
lol this is like a Gearslut thread, arguing over the minutiae of bollocks...
only the Lord knows what the OP makes of it all...
|
Crush
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 138
- Joined: 2011/01/19 15:57:29
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 18:48:47
(permalink)
Would this give me an improvement as i'm not sure about the sub in this small room. I'm also thinking the automatic room correction on the JBL's could help. Get any 6.5 or even 5's with your room size and definitely get the sub. Any 10" cheap on with variable crossover will do. I would never get the JBL's when it comes a choice between that and some subs. Don't over think the monitors IMO. Pay little. Just get the sub.
|
Norrie
Max Output Level: -58.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1665
- Joined: 2010/04/20 15:48:15
- Location: Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 19:21:15
(permalink)
Crush
Would this give me an improvement as i'm not sure about the sub in this small room. I'm also thinking the automatic room correction on the JBL's could help.
Get any 6.5 or even 5's with your room size and definitely get the sub. Any 10" cheap on with variable crossover will do.
I would never get the JBL's when it comes a choice between that and some subs. Don't over think the monitors IMO. Pay little. Just get the sub.
Sorry but that is Just BULL! If your room is small a sub is going to be over kill! But that is up to you to decided depending on what you mix etc. By all meens yes with small monitors get a 10inch sub but dont cheep out on the monitors. Rember you will be haveing to listen to them all day. You want to be able to hear deep in to the mix not haveing a crappy monitor / hifi speeker colouring your mix. There is a huge difference in sound from my Tapco S5s to My KRK rockit 8s I can hear things on the KRKS that I just couldnt hear before. I am not as clued up on any of this as everyone else here but from what Ive seen the posts from Crush about monitors just make me laugh. I did a lot of research before buying my KRK 8s Monitors a re a very personal thing what might sound good to me might sound horrible to you. Different types of music etc. For what its worth I was thinking of buying a sub to go with my KRK8S but its just going to be over kill in the room I am in at the momment. The KRK 5s you have are good monitors but I found them to be a little to boxy for my likeing the 6s were ok but better with the sub with them. The 8s just sounded good to me and with out the sub. Maybe you could try your 5s out with the K10 SUB ? I dont know what type of music you are mixing but I hear thats a good combo for dnb / dance etc. Theres a lot of good info on here from everyone but as was said before its best you go to a shop and spend a day trying them out take in music you know well Then go home and think about it and go back and do it again. It worked for me and that was the advice I was given. I nearly bought mackie MR8s untill I heard the KRKs I also liked the Yamahas it was a tough decision :) Like has also been said Room accoustic treatment plays a huge part you can make your own traps etc for cheep a quick google search will pull up a lot of home made info and theres a lot of info about it on the forums here aswell :) Best of luck and let us know what you decide on :)
SONAR X3c Producer Pro Tools 11 Allen & Heath GS-R24 M Adam A77x i7 4930K @ 4.4Ghz
|
Crush
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 138
- Joined: 2011/01/19 15:57:29
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 20:29:26
(permalink)
I hope you and everybody else here understand that this with charts are very misleading. Yes I understand. Most won't though.
|
Norrie
Max Output Level: -58.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1665
- Joined: 2010/04/20 15:48:15
- Location: Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 21:23:35
(permalink)
Just to all in this tread it might be best to avoid this guy CRUSH......
All of the threads he has posted so far have been uninformative and one in particular has been locked. ( I wont go in to why )
He has showen time and time again his lack of knowledge and should be banned from this forum.
Dont just take my word for it go see for yourself that his past threads are actualy amusingly ridiculous !
Just a word of warning
SONAR X3c Producer Pro Tools 11 Allen & Heath GS-R24 M Adam A77x i7 4930K @ 4.4Ghz
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/08 21:28:40
(permalink)
I'm hoping Tarsier and Undertow will push my understanding of speakers and room acoustics a bit further... those guys always have some great stuff to share and never let me stray from reality too far.
Thanks guys!
best regards,
mike
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/09 17:56:08
(permalink)
Freddie H
If you pay attention and read my post again you will notice I referring the AES 17 standards to AD/DA converters only not monitor speakers.
You are correct! You were indeed writing about converters. My apologies. UnderTow
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:Can you guys recommend me Active studio monitors
2011/02/09 18:11:44
(permalink)
mike_mccue
If it was a traditional passive system with a 150 watt per channel amplifier (at some rated THD etc) hooked up to 2 way speakers... The passive system would be marginally quieter because a small amount of energy would be divided out to protect the tweeter.
What would you call it?
I'm not sure I am following your line of thinking here. But anyway, see below. I call my working class quality JBL6328P biamped 250/120 watt speakers a 220 watt system because that's what JBL rates them as.
Isn't that a difference between peak, program power and RMS power? edit to add: Just to point out the differenet way to view this... Using Tweaks math my 220 watt system could be described as 370 watts?
Well that is what PSI says about my speakers. They call them 170 + 80 + 50 Watts or 300 Watts. If the amps are well matched to the drivers, they should all be loaded in a similar way. I mean, all else being equal, why have an amp for a tweeter that is, relatively speaking, twice as powerful as the amp for the bass driver? That would just be a waste. So if the load is evenly shared, why not just add up the wattages? In the end it doesn't really matter. The wattage won't tell you how loud the speakers are anyway. Of course there could well be situations where completely different aspects affect the engineering decisions. Maybe a specific tweeter in a specific monitor only needs a 30 Watt amp but the manufacturers make three other monitors with a 50 watt amp on the tweeter so it is cheaper to just use the 50 watt amp etc... (economies of scale). Or simply availability of parts. That could go either way. It could end up being a "better" part or a "worse" part... who knows... Every work of engineering is an exercise in compromise as I am sure you well know. UnderTow
|