I've been trying to listen to a bunch of records that I used to like in the new room, stuff I hadn't heard in a couple of years, to try and see how the room sounded and all.

It's not the first time in my life that I realize that albums I used to dig sound bad. In fact, it happens all the time - as I keep on learning I guess. It's only getting harder to find albums that sound amazing.

But in this case there are things I cannot believe I had not noticed before. For example, one of the songs by a little independent band had a phase issue that's impossible to miss - I actually feel it physically, to a point where it almost makes me dizzy. 

I'm listening to other songs and hearing them entirely differently - I mean radically. This one song featuring mostly violin, I'd always heard the minimalist backdrop as a distant kick w/ some kind of sine wave bass dropping in and out. I almost fell off my chair when I listened to it earlier this week - it's actually a whole band playing, ran through distortion and pushed in the back of the mix. But it's still distinct enough to figure out that there is a drum kit, a guitar and a bass.

Those last 2 years, I've worked really hard on improving my skills and learning to ear things. And I know I've made some progress. But not to that extent.

So I am looking at the old monitors which I'll be using for the gym downstairs and I'm wondering if those things that I have used for over 10 years not only distorted my perception a bit but hid tons of things from me, if monitors - when teaming up w/ crappy environments - can lie to you that much, so much that as a listener you'll miss flagrant issues... Is that even possible?

My current set of monitors is by no mean stellar - little Mackie MR5's. I do consider them fifty times better than the old M-Audio. They sound rigid compared to more expensive ones, but overall, I think I would have had to spend considerably more to get better when I bought them last year. I didn't hear any 5" I liked better for less than + twice as much. 

The stereo image in particular is light years ahead of my old Studiophiles. And while they aren't as smooth as more expensive one, they don't seem to exaggerate this or that or distort the picture too much. Not perfect but fair and in line w/ the source.

But still - did those cheap M-Audio really lie to me that much for so long?

'Tis one reason why they say ignorance is bliss!

It amazes me how many people aspire to create music, for others to listen too, whom haven't spent some time learning how to select and set up a simple stereo system that plays back music in a manner that allows one to enjoy the sound of music. 

Music has a lot of components that people enjoy and connect with... the quality of the sound is just one of the components.



Maybe it's because people learn to enjoy ok sound on head phones and so they do not ever learn anything about placing a speaker in a room so that it's unique character isn't overwhelmed by the room. 





I often see people  that appear to be passionate about making music select bad sounding speakers and place them in the very worst position.

I have had the experience of learning about listening from some good listeners way before any one taught me how to make anything to listen too.

It's all about listening. After you have that going on... the awareness that you are describing about the speakers you have owned comes naturally and quickly.




So yeah, those speakers sucked, and I'm guessing that you put em in a place that made them even suck better.


That's what ARC is for.  :-)


all the best,
mike

Hey Rain,  I also use the MR5's and really find them to be quite accurate once you get used to what they are "saying" to you.

And once I figured out what my room was doing, made some acoustic modifications (Auralex tiles), I am really satisfied with my listening environment and results.

tbosco


Hey Rain,  I also use the MR5's and really find them to be quite accurate once you get used to what they are "saying" to you. 

I've had monitors where it wasn't hard for me to know what they were saying to me.  It was along the lines of "Yuck!"  "Bleh!"  and "Don't quit your day job!"  Hehe...

Mike - in all fairness, the music I'm referring to was released mostly by small independent bands. I appreciated them for their ideas, their energy, the inspiration...

I could tell back then that it wasn't as polished as some other more "major" releases. But I didn't hear as much difference as I am hearing now.

tbosco


Hey Rain,  I also use the MR5's and really find them to be quite accurate once you get used to what they are "saying" to you.

And once I figured out what my room was doing, made some acoustic modifications (Auralex tiles), I am really satisfied with my listening environment and results.

Yup. I like them and I think that what they say to me is actually a fair enough representation. It may not be as detailed and smooth as more expensive monitors, but they don't distort the picture like my old ones.


The only word I can think of is rigid. To my ears, the best monitors I've heard sounded like music was just passing through them, effortlessly. Not all expensive monitors I've heard did that. In fact, I think that I have a thing for Adams. 

Going back to the oldie's in a music collection can b great, but it can also be disappointing. For me, those memorable albums are usually memorable for something other than their sound. The first time I heard the Hotel California album it was a real hot summer night at a crazy party. Bonfire's, beer and beautiful girls. It will never sound that good again. 

Totally agree on the Adams.