Well, the issue with ARC isn't very complex at all. It's that it can only handle one side of the peaks and cancellations problem. That's not iffy or corner case science, it's fundamental stuff. If you can only handle one side of the problem, then it's only half a solution.  And the half that isn't getting solved (in most of the small, rectangular rooms we folks tend to be in), will be vastly worse than potentially less than perfect bass reproduction due to a port. We would not ever be here debating any speakers that were 10 or 20dB off at certain frequences, because such a product would never make it to market.

droddey


Well, the issue with ARC isn't very complex at all. It's that it can only handle one side of the peaks and cancellations problem. That's not iffy or corner case science, it's fundamental stuff. If you can only handle one side of the problem, then it's only half a solution.  And the half that isn't getting solved (in most of the small, rectangular rooms we folks tend to be in), will be vastly worse than potentially less than perfect bass reproduction due to a port. We would not ever be here debating any speakers that were 10 or 20dB off at certain frequences, because such a product would never make it to market.

I mix on cans without ARC mostly because my room is sh** and I use a pair MA15D's.

But I wouldn't mention that here, people would have me quit straight away, or even worse I might be held up for ridicule.  Imagine that!

I HAVE to go by learning my system with reference material, I won some good prizes in a mixing contest last week against some pretty well armed gear heads too and judged by a 'proper' engineer in a damn fine environment.

What does your calculator tell me I'm missing as a result?  Mine shows around £20,000 currently.

And hey, guess what, I already get the issues with ARC.  I understand what they are.  I get what it does too and can understand where it would be a help to some.

Mike already put the info up on making an informed speaker choice, without needing to endorse or bash a particular maker.  I like it when he does that.

I was paraphrasing the "basically junk" comment in fairness to Mr. Senior. But he did say that "The less money you're going to spend on monitors, the more you should approach ported models armed with holy water and garlic!" He then mentions the Rokit 8, DSM2 and Adam A7x as examples. He also says one needs to spend well over $1500 "for a pair of nearfields that can reliably deliver what you need to mix competitively". I know $1500 will get you the Adam A7x's, so maybe they're borderline in his opinion. I was frankly unaware that there was an issue with port vs non-port designs. I'm happy to be enlightened a little bit, which is why I got the book in the first place and knew I'd get some interesting, varied opinions and maybe even learn a little more. Thanks!

Speakers are the weak link still in the end. Even if you have ARC whatever it still is only going to give you the same situation in the end with mixing. But there are science papers and such on this topic of speakers (transducers) and enclosures and as such those papers can be found on the Internet if doing a search for them. No doubt this has been going on for a long time, because before, there were EQ vinyl records, Decibel Sound Level Meters and room measurements before anything digital came out.

Jonbouy

I HAVE to go by learning my system with reference material, I won some good prizes in a mixing contest last week against some pretty well armed gear heads too and judged by a 'proper' engineer in a damn fine environment.

What does your calculator tell me I'm missing as a result?  Mine shows around £20,000 currently.

And hey, guess what, I already get the issues with ARC.  I understand what they are.  I get what it does too and can understand where it would be a help to some.

Mike already put the info up on making an informed speaker choice, without needing to endorse or bash a particular maker.  I like it when he does that.

Stating a fact is not bashing, if that's what you were implying I was doing. Judging by a lot of comments by people who use it, I sort of doubt that they understand the actual issues and what its limitations are.

Jimbo21


 Just got "Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio" by Mike Senior and right in the first section he talks about unless you have really expensive monitors the low end transients are fairly skewed in that the "porting hinders the monitor's ability to track moment-to-moment changes in the mix signal. Specifically, the port causes any spectral energy at it's resonant frequency to ring on for a short time, and while it's this resonant buildup that generated the port's flattering low-frequency level boost for a constant noise signal, the same quality also adds short resonant tails to fleeting percussive attack noises (transients)". He also points out that "the resonance not only disguises the true decay attributes of the sound itself, but it can also make it difficult to judge the character and level of short duration studio effects (such as modulated delays and reverb), which are useful at mixdown".

So, understand this flaw and be aware of the potential issue. Mix with this in mind. Check on good headphones. Check on different monitors with different resonant frequencies. And you're done.


Notice all pro guys tend to check on multiple monitors in the studio anyway? This one particular flaw doesn't really sound like too big any issue we can't get around. In the end, we're probably better off saving $2000 and spending that on 6 months of good singing lessons. Your songs will sound much better. I've pretty much stopped buying gear now and I'm running off pretty basic stuff - Yamaha HS80m's, pair of Rode K2's (well those are mid/high end), a 58 and in through a UA25-ex. I honestly think that's plenty to get a really great sound if I do it right. I'm now going to invest probably about $2000 in singing lessons as I approach recording vocals for my album at the end of the year. Weak points. Find them and fix them first. Stressing about your monitors not reproducing a few sets of low end frequencies accurately really shouldn't be too big a concern from the overall picture unless you have already fixed everything else and this is currently your weakest point. And you're rich.


By the way, this is not intended to be a flame or anything, just a bit of a reality check  I'm always grateful to read up stuff like this. I'm an engineer, so I love this technical stuff. But it's important for us to try not to get too caught up in it too. Always need to keep thinking back to the big picture and remembering what matters. Otherwise we'll all be broke and still make terrible music!  But on the other hand, there'll be plenty of audiophile porn for the lonely nights!

I agree with you Matt.  Hey, nobody chimed in on my new pair of very small D5's from Equator.  For my dining room, they are working great!  Everything is relative. 

Rimshot

Matt I must catch up with you sometime. I might be able to catch up with you at SoundCorp or something, maybe we can have a coffee! I am not that far away from there either. (Kensington) Or I could come over and visit. It's pretty rare to meet someone on the forum who lives in Melbourne.

Yeah that would be good. Maybe drop in to SoundCorp on a Friday afternoon or something? There is a great coffee place just round the corner from there.

The article is not wrong. I have actually "damped" the ports on some of my speakers due to very audible port distortion. I would rather have slightly less bass response and clear sound.

That being said, for monitoring I use KRK Rockets. I have no compliant with the port design on them. If there is distortion, its below my audible threshold.

So while the author is speaking true, he is overgeneralizing IMO.

Cheers
Shad

droddey

Jonbouy

I HAVE to go by learning my system with reference material, I won some good prizes in a mixing contest last week against some pretty well armed gear heads too and judged by a 'proper' engineer in a damn fine environment.

What does your calculator tell me I'm missing as a result?  Mine shows around £20,000 currently.

And hey, guess what, I already get the issues with ARC.  I understand what they are.  I get what it does too and can understand where it would be a help to some.

Mike already put the info up on making an informed speaker choice, without needing to endorse or bash a particular maker.  I like it when he does that.

Stating a fact is not bashing, if that's what you were implying I was doing. Judging by a lot of comments by people who use it, I sort of doubt that they understand the actual issues and what its limitations are.

Yeah, sorry Dean.

I've been jumping up and down on the issue on another thread and a bit of that spilled into this thread, your thoughts were completely accurate.

I was trying to feed McCue some words I felt he needed to eat and you innocently stepped in that pile.  I hold my hands up I responded like a complete arse.