I have tons of cheap headphones. The ones that mess me up the worst are the sound cancelling ones my wife got me a few years back. I can't mix anything with those on.

I use some $20 headphones that are off ear the most. They are comfortable. The more expensive ones that provide isolation I can't wear for the lengths of time I tend to wear them.

And with Father's day approaching, I was kinda eying these...

http://proaudiotoys.com/akg-k-141-mk-ii-semiopen-studio-headphones-p-566.html
 
http://www.amazon.com/AKG-K141-MKII-Professional-Supra-Aural/dp/B0016MOA7A/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1369359310&sr=1-1-catcorr&keywords=AKG+K+141+MK+II+Semi-open+Studio+Headphones

I will say that when I record with friends we usually forgo the headphones and just play (which means no click track and maybe trying dmbaer's new tempo map tool).
 
I prefer to mix without headphones (using speakers), but I often work with headphones on.
 
I don't like that the microphone sometimes picks up the sound from my off ear headphones when I'm playing, but I really don't like the oppressiveness of isolation headphones. (Again, all mine are varying degrees of cheap - nothing more than $40 USD).

Eeyan, If your mixing on a laptop and are on the move a lot you so need to get a VRM box and some good phones.

Rocky

Soundblend


I just wonder.. How do the Yamaha monitors sound compared to KRK's

1. Do the Yamaha sound more neutral with less bass and more mid-range and treble
2. Do Krk's have more like loads of bass , less mid-range, lot of treble 

or is it opposite ?

Do they sound Harsh, soft or neutral at those frequencies..

How can we get an picture of what it sound's like !

I think this maybe will give an better idea of what monitor and also headphones to go for...

Here is just few videos : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfD7RnC7P6Q
                                     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9ZXT_XZs04
                                     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jANkwzVCZo

Well, i read some reviews from those speakers that i posted, most of them said Yamaha HS series has more neutral and better sounds than the others. That's what they said. So, in order for me to understand more and believe what's true, i posted here in cakewalk to get more info and some of your opinions about it since I'm using cakewalk too... To be honest, I've never been experienced to use branded and good quality of speakers and headphones before. So, I'm completely idiot about all of it.:-) 


Anyway, Thanks Soundblend. I'll take a look for those videos.

bluzdog


Eeyan, If your mixing on a laptop and are on the move a lot you so need to get a VRM box and some good phones.

Rocky

Ayt! I'll think about that Rocky. Thanks!


Eeyan

I've been researching new headphones for a while and kept seeing raves for the ATH M50s everywhere.  Bought them yesterday on sale at B&H Photo for $119!  All I can say is "WoW" the sound quality is so even across the entire spectrum that I think an old problem of listening to a mix and wondering where the "horns" went is a thing of the past. Highs, Mids, Lows all there and clear.  Love 'em.

I'm sure there are other cans around that are excellent, but I can tell you, you will not be disappointed with the M50s.  And at $119....how can you go wrong?

Best,
Rob

On that list, 

Monitors - Yamaha or Mackie. Personally, I preferred the Mackie's and picked them over the Yamaha.

Headphones - ATH-M50.

I always find this an interesting question and subject area as perhaps we should all use cheap consumer speakers!  That maybe controversial but the fact is that for over two decades, most recording studios were using cheap consumer speakers as their main monitors.

That's right, Yamaha NS10s!  Those are the ones you've seen in photos mainly sitting on their sides with the white woofer cones.  They weren't actually very good but that was the point as they were used because they represented what typically most listeners were using so producers could hear exactly how their mixes would sound on the majority of systems used by the general public.

The other fact was that it led to a couple of decades of some of the best sounding and produced records of all time and Bob Clearmountain swore by them as I remember and I think most of the points here are highlighted in the following article: http://gizmodo.com/5637077/yamahas-ns+10-the-most-important-speaker-youve-never-heard-of

So, I often ask myself should I have a couple of consumer speakers as my main monitors like the producers of the past did?  That's exactly what I did recently so we'll see how I get on with them.

Perhaps we all should seek out the most commonly used speakers in consumer audio and reference against them in our studios?

I might have this all wrong of course but it's a test I'm interested in conducting so time will tell...

Regarding the myth of NS-10s...it isn't that they were cheap consumer speakers (though they were) or that they were representative of what people listened to at home (they weren't) but simply that they had poor bass response (and shrill tweeters). Simple as that. By taking the low frequencies out of the equation the mix engineer is free to concentrate on the all-important midrange. You can achieve the same thing with an equalizer.

The problem with the myth of mixing on crappy speakers is that no two crappy speakers are the same; they are all crappy in different ways. It therefore serves no purpose to try and make any one set of crap speakers sound good, because that's all you'll accomplish: making those specific speakers sound good. Your efforts won't translate to all crappy speakers in general.

What you really want to shoot for is neutrality - speakers (and rooms) that contribute as little as possible to the color of the sound. Then you aim for the statistical middle ground. Even if you personally like a lot of bass (and who doesn't?) you still mix flat, and let the end-listener turn up the bass if they want to.

Yeah, I've read a lot about that and you're right about the NS10 myth but there's the other side of that which is the legend of the NS10!

However, the facts still stand and that was most studios in the 80s and 90s had them and it did led to decades of excellent recordings.  According to the SOS article that I read, most of what you say is correct as they did an analysis on the frequency response however as you say, neutral sounding speakers is what is generally recommended and yes, you could achieve a response similar to the speakers by using an equaliser but if that's the case, why didn't producers like Bob Clearmoutain think of that 30 years ago? There are other factors here and that is while you can try and create a similar frequency response using an equaliser, it will never be exactly like a real speakers response due to resonant frequencies which are caused by things like the cabinet, etc and these aren't constants so while the bass may appear to start dropping at say 100Hz, you may find that there is a sharp peak at 72Hz and similar peaks and troughs throughout the frequency spectrum.

I know this as I worked many years for a respective speaker and audiophile company who used to supply speakers to studios, the BBC and consumer markets.

Whenever we wanted to see what was so good about the opposition, we always pitched our speakers up against the competition and took measurements from them while they were suspended in our anechoic chamber.  I can tell you that before general computing power became the norm, this was a very time consuming process and while you would try and re-create the same response, the other factors such as cabinet & cone material could interfere with the equation as they could produce a frequency curve which looked like the tops of the Himalayas!  I could go on all day about this but it would get boring.

Don't get me wrong as I agree with most of what you've said but in my humble opinion coming from my experience, there's got to be a very good reason why respected people like Bob Clearmountain swore by these speakers for two decades as did others and I'm sure they would've thought of using and may be even tried an equaliser.  I'm not sure you could achieve exactly the same with an equaliser as it's a precise box of electronics or a VST emulation which has a finite limit of combinations against a speaker full of resonant frequencies which are far more unpredictable and can even change at different volume settings and that's when measured in anechoic chambers which means that's without considering the studio's room acoustics let alone the listener in their home.

Bottom line for me is that I reference against 4 sets of speakers, ones which are very high-end, these recent bog-standard consumer speakers and my car's speaker system comes in to this equation as I always test my mixes there too!

I'd actually like a producer who used these for years and swore by them to pitch in here and state exactly why they used them extensively and didn't resort to emulation using different speakers and equalisation.

Loved reading all your comments guys! Thanks! It really gives additional knowledge for me.:-)