I have a berhinger pair of powered speakers. They suck as monitors. I read good reviews but I have to assume it was just desk-jockeys playing games and they are really just nice desktop speakers. Basically I was a twit; the specs had no response curve etc., or even a +- dB figure. So they have tried to overcome the cones' shortfall by using the amp to boost in the 150Hz+ range...I know this because my headphones (AKG K240) tell me..... So. Crap. So what I want is some speakers that may not be flat (if there is a decent EQ to compensate MINOR blips) but which do seriously go from 20Hz to 2KHz and not need more than 3dB boost /cut to get flat....AND HAVE A RESPONSE CURVE CHART. This can be a powered speaker, but I am happy to have just cones in a box and then get a nice flat amp. I am finding it hard to get real data about monitor speakers. EDIT: NOT want "warm" "rich" "bassy" etc...I want FLAT. I can't believe how many reviews and discussions revolve around what colour a monitor speaker has.

Supposedly, or perhaps realistically, there is no such thing as flat speakers. 

I would suggest a reading of Mike Seniors Book Mixing Secrets for the small studio.   It has. I think 2 or 3 of the opening chapters which deal with this very topic and why it's nearly impossible to find flat speakers and especially in the ones that are in the "affordable" price range and used in 99% of all home studios. 

If you have "ported" speakers (and who doesn't?) they are not flat. The book has pictures of some 3D graphic models to show the frequency responses of several of the more popular "affordable" speaker frequency curves. Not pretty if you're expecting a flat response. 

If I remember the chapters correctly, just about everything under $1000 fits into this category. 

The advice I give to people seeking studio monitors is to visit the stores and compare the models side by side with the same musical material through them. They will ALL sound slightly different. they will all have some sort of sound coloration. My advice is to pick the ones that sound the best to you, take them home, try them out, and if you still like the sound at home, learn the strengths and weaknesses and the coloration and bias so that you can mix relatively well. 

The book is a good investment BTW. 

What I did:  I bought some Mackie MR-5 powered speakers. I added a stereo sub 10" 100w to it and then I picked up ARC and calibrated the system and room. 

ARC is a good investment since it will listen to the room and make the corrections needed to get you closer to hearing what the music is actually sounding like. 

After all, the entire purpose of "flat speakers" is to give you accuracy. You don't want the speakers to boost or cut anything based on their design....same thing with the amps. This is reason #1 not to use a stereo amp/speaker combination for monitoring... it's biased.... 100% guaranteed. 

Assuming you have flat speakers or nearly so, the next and bigger factor I believe is the room and it's inherent acoustics. The room will boost and cut certain frequencies as well, so that has to be fixed, or at least taken into consideration. That is what ARC is supposed to do. It listens to the room in the location you will set when mixing and through the magic of software it "corrects the mix" and sends the corrected mix to the speakers so that what you hear is supposed to be flatter and thus a more accurate rendition of what you are actually doing with the mix. 

I use ARC and it certainly has my stamp of approval. I do not use it on every mix but I do use it on many if not most. It is sort of a "second opinion" sort of thing because I can turn it on and off as needed. 

What you need is at least some degree of room treatment. Period.

The better you do that, the better ANY speaker will sound.

The biggest investment in terms of room treatment is not $$$, but time. You can do a lot of serious DYO, if you get into it deep enough (and there's brilliant literature out there). Mind you, it might take quite a while as this is an iterative process (unless you emply a seasoned/expensive acoustian in the first place) and you need a spare room (as the bedroom might no longer be a bedroom afterwards).

Only afterwards you should think about spending $$$ on flat speakers. In a poor room the best speakers will sound like crap.

ARC is good and does help, but it's the cream on top of everything else. It's not the be all, end all solution to circumvent room treatment. With ARC you should either use always or not at all. You need to learn how your envirnment sounds (listen to commercial mixes!!!) and then mix in it and get better with every knob you turn. Switching a plug on/off may just be more confusing than not using it at all. I do own a copy of ARC; I used it a lot in the old room; it did help, but after proper room treatment I could do without it.

This just a short summary of the recommendations that I got when I raised the same question years ago ...

Flatter not flat.  Every system has ... flaws.  Room treatment helps w/ big flaws. 

As far as which speakers, the yamaha mps series are their monitors, as opposed to speakers.  I've used the mps 5s at big studios for near fields.  Several have replaced them w/ the small pelonis.  The mps 7s are more full-range for main speakers.  I still use the big brothers to the ns 10 - for over 30 years now.  They don't sound good - they sound real.

The most important thing is to get the best speakers you can afford.  Then learn them.  I burn a CD a week for my own projects and listen to it in the car and on my living room bookshelf speakers.  Then tweak on my studio speakers.  It is amazing what you can hear, or not hear.

@

As already stated, there is no such thing as a "flat" monitor.  If you find a set with a flat response chart, there are a couple conditions to that.  First, they've used some amount of averaging, there will be very narrow peaks and dips that are way outside of +-3dB if you chart detailed enough.  Second, that measurement is done without room interaction.

Also as mentioned, your room will have way more influence than the speakers themselves.  You'll be better off spending money on difusers, bass traps and other acoustic treatments.  Bass traps are the most useful, because the long wavelengths of bass and standing waves in your room are by far the biggest problems.

EQ is not a good method for correcting these things.  Many of the issues are time based, such as early reflections or woofer / tweeter phase and delay issues.  There is no EQ in the world that will compensate for that.  Standing waves in low frequencies are also simply way too large of a variance to compensate with EQ, and to top it off the EQ would only be valid at the exact position you've placed your measurement mic.

Also, wishing for a full 20-20kHz of flat response is really over the top.  Producing output down to 20 requires some huge amounts of air movement.  A full range monitor will never get there, unless you're into $10,000 soffit systems and are willing to put that much or more into your room acoustics.  If you're looking at full range monitors, you'll do OK with at least an 8" woofer and you'll realistically get down to 40 or 50Hz in your room.  If you need that last octave, you'll have to go with a subwoofer or use a spectrum analyzer.

Ultimately it comes down to learning your monitors by listening to well produced material that you know very well how it should sound.  Move your mixes to as many systems as possible, headphones, home theaters, cars, crappy boom boxes, iPod docks... everything you can try.  Listen to your mixes over and over again, and when you hear something, change it and start over.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

it would help if you gave us a price range.

price makes all the difference in the world.



otherwise, you'll end up buying something that is 'good for the money', but will not fit the bill.

Guitarhacker


If you have "ported" speakers (and who doesn't?) they are not flat. The book has pictures of some 3D graphic models to show the frequency responses of several of the more popular "affordable" speaker frequency curves. Not pretty if you're expecting a flat response. 

I think you may have misunderstood the point of that chapter, Herb. A ported speaker can be as flat as a closed box speaker but the extra low-end extension comes at the cost of time-domain accuracy. 

The question is, however, how big a portion of mix decisions made by the average home producer would be affected by innacurate low-end timing? I'm guessing that, considering you're getting a flat freq response down to, say 50 Hz instead of 70 Hz, a little low-end flamming is a fair price to pay!



Sven

Thanks for all the replies! OK. So money comes into play. I did not mention an amount as I will have to really think about how much I can justify, I guess, and that will come with testing and time. I was not aware of ARC although it was something I dreamed of when younger and even tried with a graphic eq cct and some solid state "Variable resistors". But I never got past one band and it was pretty woeful. HAH! As usual I was probably reinventing the wheel. Digital stuff will be awesome. I will look into that. I take on board the idea of just making a CD and playing in lots of systems. I have done and preached that in a past life :). I also can do a lot with the room, for sure. It's my room to use, even to putting stuff all over the place. Just a work room. ...Anyway, lost of food for thought. Thanks again.

@SvenArne "The question is, however, how big a portion of mix decisions made by the average home producer would be affected by innacurate low-end timing? I'm guessing that, considering you're getting a flat freq response down to, say 50 Hz instead of 70 Hz, a little low-end flamming is a fair price to pay! Sven " I tend to agree. There is a point (quite low for me) where the law of diminishing returns means that I have to be realistic about just how big time I really am! (HAHAHA)