#1039493 - 10/16/05 12:37 PM
Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
Offline
|
|
I really do need to progress to using monitors to help me get things right... I'm still using my headphones (Beyer Dynamic DT250's) to monitor just to keep the noise down but It's got to the point now where I'm having to burn a CD to check the "sound" only to find that levels and EQ are all to pot. Headphones just don't give you a true idea of the bass end of the spectrum so the end result ends up, well... too bassy.
I say active because I'd rather keep the number of components in my system down to a minimum.
I've had my eyes, for a very long time, on Genelec 1029A's but they are sooo expensive... even now, after being on the market for so long they've hardly come down in price.
So, are there any reasonable options out there? What would you reccomend?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1039494 - 10/17/05 09:51 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well what's your budget?
Give us that and I'm sure we can help.
Also, where are you looking to buy from? I've had recent dealings with Making Waves and would highly recommend them for price & service. I'm not connected with them in any way, just I noticed you are in the UK and I think that good service should be commented on as much as bad service is complained about.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039495 - 10/19/05 01:46 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks for the link... I've had a look around [  ]
What about the Berhinger Truths? I've already got a bit of Behringer gear and it seems OK
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039496 - 10/19/05 03:23 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
What you have to ask yourself...
what is my budget?
what are my expectations?
are my budget and expectations realistic?
To me, the signal chain.... instrument/mic/preamp/recorder/plaback/amp/speaker/ear... this all requires quality. I'd rather have less equipment and have it be better quality than more equipment and have it be lesser quality.
Now, in my opinion, the monitor chains are the 'windows' through which we make our mixing and musical decisions. Therefore, that chain needs to be as full range and as high a quality as I can afford. It even makes sense (to me) to unbalance the spending towards the monitor chain, because then we are better able to hear and make good determinations as we improve other parts of the rig, and as our abilities grow.
Cheap monitor chains are equivalent to looking through dirty, smudged, pebbled, frosted, or tinted windows.
The last time that I auditioned cheap monitors, the least acceptable option was the Mackie HR-824. Below that, I found too many things missing, blurred, distorted, or disquieting.
There have been newer options introduced since I last checked out this level of speaker. I think that the guys from Blue Sky hang around here, perhaps they might offer some suggestions as to what might suit you that would be more up to date than my info. I have no doubt that they are aware of what their competitors offer, as well as what is in their own product line.
I did not like the 1029A, it needs a sub, and I didn't think that it was that expensive, which is why I didn't answer your post a while ago. If you think that it is expensive, then you might have different expectations than I have.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039497 - 10/19/05 06:08 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
You're welcome. You still didnt tell us your budget, but I'll go by the Behringers for an estimate.
First of all, read what Bill says, it's always worth reading what Bill says.
Secondly, you'll find a lot of people dont trust Behringer and will advise you against purchasing their gear.
Finally, I'm currently using M-Audio BX8s and I'm very happy with them. They'll set you back roughly £250 I think. I've had no ear fatigue, great translation results and much satisfaction from them!
I listen(ed) to a lot of CDs through my monitors to learn their sound, especially when I first got them. I think that is an essential thing to do with any monitors as it will help you learn what good mixes should sound like in your environment.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039498 - 10/20/05 01:08 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
shmolous
Member
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 26
Loc: Southern Calif.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Bill makes a good point! To me monitoring is critical. I own a pair of Mackie 824's but hardly ever use them anymore. I prefer the tried and true Yamaha NS10 with a GREAT amp. I'm convinced the amp is the most critical part in the chain. I'm using a 50 watt McIntosh with my Yamahas. My other set is a pair of JBL 4312's with a Bryston 4B...Pricey, but not really, if you consider what a really good pair of powered monitors cost..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039499 - 10/20/05 01:12 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039500 - 10/20/05 01:35 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks guys... I had a bit of a problem with my internet connection yesterday which is why I forgot to mention my budget... which I reckon was about £300.
On reflection, and also now that I have read Bill's reply, I need to up that quite a bit. The 1029's are around £500 but what worries me is the comment about them needing a woofer, partly because I wanted to keep the system simple. But does anyone else use woofers in their setup? Should I still consider a woofer for the bass sounds no matter what system I go for?
It seems to me that I am better off saving up for something that is more pro rather than going cheap now and then uprgrading in the future.
About Behringer... I spent nearly a grand a couple of years ago on the (what I consider in my little world to be awesome) DDX3216 digital MIDI mixer. I've not had any bad experiences yet wwith this device although that may partly be down to me not trying to use it to its full potential and partly to me not really knowing what's good or bad. I also use a Behringer 16 channel line mixer and 4X headphone amp although neither of those two devices sit at any crucial point in the production chain. I know that one thing Behringer are slated for and that's copying other peoples designs. The other option on the market at the time was the Yamaha 01V and I was berated at the time for going for the DDX3216. But onboard effects (again, in my opinion they are fine) on the DDX3216 swung it in Behringers favour.
Anyways... thanks Bill for you expansive reply... my expectations would aspire to match yours but I lack your experience (by a frightening amount). Old I am but this is a completely new arena for me and I've a lot to learn.
And thanks to flyscots and smolous... I'll certainly check out the options you've both listed.
andy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039501 - 10/20/05 06:44 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
If you're going for a sub-woofer, then extensive listening and learning is essential.
If you're having problems with your bass now, you could end up going too far in the other direction with a subr - turning up the woofer so the bass sounds good but then realising later that it doesnt translate onto smaller systems and the bass is now lacking.
Personally I think that once you reach an 8 inch cone you shouldnt need a sub. Think of the listeners, how many people listening to your mixes will be listening on a system as good as yours? Translation is the key for me.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039502 - 10/20/05 04:18 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by flyscots:
Personally I think that once you reach an 8 inch cone you shouldnt need a sub.
Your comment about bass is spot on. I cannot tell you how many times I have gotten mixes in for mastering that have been done in someone's basement studio that have massive amounts of distorted, muddy, blurry bass. They could not hear it, so they just kept cranking it up. Or in video editing, (I'll do the occasional audio for video gig..)I get sent stuff that has all sorts of low end crap that the plastic computer speakers did not reveal to the video editor, but my Dunlavys sure reproduce. And I can pretty much tell you if you mixed on NS-10s, by the reverse sonic signature. There are like, two guys in the world who can mix on them, the rest are just kidding themselves.
A speaker cabinet has a lower limit to which it claims to be able to reproduce sound, within a few dB plus or minus. The size of the driver is not at issue, it is the response of the cabinet, and the cabinet position in the room re: boundaries like walls, floor, and corners.
Finally, much is made of the term 'translate'. Here's the deal... I cannot account for any system that -you- the listener may have on which to play back my work. There is no way to imagine how my work might sound in every given room and speaker configuration. It is stupid to even try. It is even stupider to set up three or four different listening situations to "check" mixes.... so you checked it, now what are you gonna DO about it??? WHICH ONE of these systems do you believe? You are going to compromise the mix on system A because of what it sounds like on B, yet C has different results and D is yet different again... this way lies maddness... or at least a lot of wasted time (not to mention an investment that could probably have bought ONE GOOD system to start with.)
The sensible approach to mixing and mastering is to create a monitoring environment that tells the truth. When that system doesn't lie, and you do your job right, it will sound as good as it is ever going to sound on any system on which it gets played... short of you custom mixing for given systems at fixed levels in given rooms with fixed dimensions.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039503 - 10/21/05 01:57 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
hmmm... scary...
How on earth am I going to sort this one out then?
What I can't afford to do (more in terms of space and upsetting the neihbors) is go for a proper monitering system. By that I mean a full set of speakers... nearfields + main (what are they called? Farfield??).
So, is it possible to do a reasonable job of mixing/mastering using just neafields? If so then I need to find the best nearfield monitors I can find and hang the budget.
So, that's the next question then... In your collective opinions, what is the best nearfield monitoring system available today? Perhaps a list of half a dozen would be nice ;^D in order of cost......
look forward to your replies
andy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039504 - 10/21/05 07:48 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12329
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:
I can pretty much tell you if you mixed on NS-10s, by the reverse sonic signature. There are like, two guys in the world who can mix on them, the rest are just kidding themselves. 
I get kinda' tired of hearing about the virtues of mixing on NS-10s!
And how well the mixes translate...AFTER you become totally use to the nasty sound of the NS-10s!!! 
Heck...you can probably say that about a lot of monitors!!!
I don't understand why anyone would want to get use to listening on a pair of harsh, mid range, no bottom monitors...?
The size of the driver is not at issue, it is the response of the cabinet, and the cabinet position in the room re: boundaries like walls, floor, and corners.
It is even stupider to set up three or four different listening situations to "check" mixes.... so you checked it, now what are you gonna DO about it??? WHICH ONE of these systems do you believe? You are going to compromise the mix on system A because of what it sounds like on B, yet C has different results and D is yet different again... this way lies maddness... or at least a lot of wasted time (not to mention an investment that could probably have bought ONE GOOD system to start with.)
All you need is one set of monitors in a decent mixing environment.
I'm quite happy with my Mackie 824s...but I don't believe that it's ONLY because they are Mackie 824s...
...rather, it's that the 824s and my mixing environment "hit it off" real well! 
I didn't go to extremes in setting up my room...but I did follow some of the basics, and some common sense acoustical adjustments...and I ended up with a very good combination.
I have a second pair of monitors sitting on the meter bridge, that are leftovers from earlier days...
...and I never, ever bother to turn them on!
The only reason I leave them there, is in case one of the Mackies should fail...and I would have something else to tie me over 'till the Mackies are repaired...
...but I doubt I'll have to cross that bridge for quite some time (knock on wood).
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039505 - 10/21/05 05:45 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Bill
1st paragraph - thanks, agreed
2nd paragraph. Yep, of course, good point.
Last two paragraphs - spot on, totally agree.
Andy
There's no way I could possibly tell you what system in the world is. I've heard a few, but only a few, and taking Bill's post into consideration I have no clue what your environment is like.
I like my BX8s and Tannoy Reveals might suit you too, but I'm sure there will be lots of other options. If you can go to a store that stocks them try as many as you can with familiar CDs, but that still wont tell the full story.
"is it possible to do a reasonable job of mixing/mastering using just neafields?"
Yes, I'd say so. Mixing anyway. Mastering, to me, is a different art form.
John
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039506 - 10/21/05 07:40 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
At AES (and other places, now that I think about it...) a lot of poeple are incredibly fond of the Adams. And though the 3s grace a lot of more posh joints, a couple of people were talking about the 2.5s as being much better. I have absolutely no idea what these things cost.
ATCs are good. PMCs are good. I'm sure that the list is long. Lipinskis are very good, (translate: I'd give up my Dunlavys for them...) but probably well out of budget.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039507 - 10/21/05 10:34 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
shmolous
Member
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 26
Loc: Southern Calif.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by miroslav:
[QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:
I can pretty much tell you if you mixed on NS-10s, by the reverse sonic signature. There are like, two guys in the world who can mix on them, the rest are just kidding themselves
Preach on Bill!!
I get kinda' tired of hearing about the virtues of mixing on NS-10s!.
I started out as an assistant for Chris Huston (Led Zepplin, The Who, War, The Rascals, Tommy James and the Shondells) and John Fischbach (Stevie Wonder-Songs in the Key of Life) Both of those guys mixed on NS10's and made a few good records doing it. As a matter of fact, Chris also liked to mix on a TERRIBLE speaker called an Auratone. He claimed that if you could make them sound good you were getting the job done. So says a guy with over 100 Gold and Platinum albums. I guess those are the two guys you were talking about. What it boils down to is the guy with his fingers on the knobs. Those guys could mix on computer speakers!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039509 - 10/22/05 03:10 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Yeah the Adams are awesome. I've heard the S3As and the S2.5As and was VERY impressed, but they will be FAR too expensive for Andy. We're talking thousands here. However, they do have more affordable options in the P-Series, but I dont know enough about them to advise further.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039510 - 10/23/05 04:59 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
shmolous
Member
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 26
Loc: Southern Calif.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Miroslav
Yeah that's all true stuff! My point is that if the monitors are TOO good, you settle for a mix because it sounds great on them. I used to have some George Augsberger mains soffett mounted in the control room . They sounded so good they made you want to cry! Nobody mixed on them because all you had to do was play the tape (Analog 2 inch) and push up the faders and it was heaven. Unfortunately when you listened to the mix on the average consumer set of speakers, it stunk. So we only used the mains when the "suits" from the label showed up.....just to impress them. After they left we went back to NS10's....
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039512 - 10/23/05 12:18 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by shmolous:
[QUOTE]
I started out as an assistant for Chris Huston ...and John Fischbach ... Both of those guys mixed on NS10's ...an Auratone. ...
First, that was 20 years ago. The landscape has changed, home stereos have changed, delivery systems have changed, and even then we were working behind the times in the old school ways that the original rock recordists had taught us... the guys who learned in the 50s and 60s.
Yes, we used Auratones and NS-10s and all sorts of stuff. What was our delivery medium? We were mixing for radio, more than anything. We were also mixing at around analog zero, the electronics weren't being hit as hard, we were using ... well, basically the entire situation was significantly different.
A little history of the NS-10s might be appropriate here. They became popular with a new breed of cat back in the late 1980s.. this was the traveling engineer and/or producer who would work in different studios. Prior to that, most engineers were employed in a studio, they did not move from room to room. When you did move from room to room, you needed an audio reference. Each room sounded different, the house speakers could be anything but were often sofit-mounted boomers, and you didn't know if what you were hearing was what you thought that you were hearing or not.
So these guys started taking a little portable reference monitor along with them (usually with their own effects racks and maybe a couple of favorite mics, too.) They needed something cheap, light, and small. So somehow, the NS-10 became the default choice, but lots of other speakers were used, too. B&W had a very nice one that was smaller and better sounding, but they had such poor distribution that we couldn't find anyplace that sold them when we went looking.
I can tell you that I found mine quite by accident. I had read about them in a 'back to school' issue of Spin magazine.... maybe the first issue of Spin... and I wanted to give them a try. This was in '87 or '88, I think, but possibly earlier.
I tried to buy them from my local Yamaha muical instrument dealer, but he could not get them. They were specifically sold to the hi-fi stores, and were unavailable in the MI chain. I got my first pair for $188, and they came with grille cloth. Wanna know why people put tissue in front to the tweeters? Because the tissue performed the same purpose as the grille cloth on the highs, while allowing the mids to cut through. There were not used a primary monitors at the time, the were used as references (much as the Auratones had been in the previous decade) , but NOT to check against how the mix would sound on the radio, but how the mix sounded on speakers with which we were familiar. The big in house studio monitors were still largely in use.
At any rate, the NS-10 became popular with the journeyman engineer/producer. We complained that we were burning tweeters, so they upgraded the component power handling capability. Mix started showing console photos with NS-10s on the bridge, and then every home musician/studio wanted them. The music store guys complained that they were being cut out of their own market, Yamaha allowed the music stores to start to carry them. Soon everybody had them. So what was intended as a cheap dorm room speaker became the default home studio monitor. And everybody bought them beause they assumed that all of these great records had been mixed on them. Meanwhile, they were used as a -reference-, not as the only listening source.
Of course, eventually this became a self-fullfilling prophecy as those who followed and assumed that the NS-10 was the only monitor, mixed on them exclusively. If you sweep the monitor, you'll wonder why. Neither here nor there, the time is long past for using them.
We had three pair in my studio. I still have one pair, but they have not been used for about ten years. Nasty sounding things, Bob Clearmountain not withstanding. As has been said, why learn to mix on an inferior speaker (and possibly bend your own personal reference in the process?) when there is no reason to do so. This is not the only choice available today, and it is not a better choice.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039513 - 10/24/05 12:18 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
philbo_Tangent
Platinum Member
Registered: 10/08/00
Posts: 1175
Loc: Iowa
|
|
Offline
|
|
You should consider what acoustic treatments your room should have before worrying about what speakers to buy. IMHO.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039514 - 10/24/05 12:46 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
Bill@Welcome Home Studios
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/23/03
Posts: 7343
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by philbo_Tangent:
You should consider what acoustic treatments your room should have before worrying about what speakers to buy. IMHO.
Bill
_________________________
"...it's easier than hitting the kids, and almost as much fun..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039515 - 10/24/05 02:32 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
OK... sounds like I'm really out of my depth now :rolleyes: 
My "studio" is a converted garage and is around 8ft by 10 ft (yes... very small). When I did the conversion I never considered any kind of acoustic treatment and having read quite a few topics in the EQ forum I wouldn't have known where to start anyway. In fact, I gave a description of what I do in my studio in an earlier thread here
Since I posted in that topic I have recorded a band in my studio (who are friends of my eldest son). They have been great in that they are quite keen to let me experiment with recording their stuff and I only charge them less than a fiver a go (at the moment).
The methods I use to record them is, I think, quite unorthodox and will surely make a few of you shudder but here goes...
They are a four piece consisting of singer, guitar, bass and drums. They play contempory pop rock. In my humble opinion this kind of music calls for recording the band in almost a "live" situation where every one plays together. Because my room doesn't have any acoustic damping, and I want to stay friends with my neighbors I provide headphones for monitoring purposes so they can all hear each other. I route the stereo mix, via S/PDIF, directly from my DDX1632 to the sound card of my PC and the three tracks I did with them a couple of weeks ago turned out quite well considering. But because I was also monitoring through headphones (DT250's) I completely over-compensated for the bass that my headphones were unable to reproduce. I don't have the facilities for a control room so I'm in with the band (yes... five of us in a 10 by 8). All sounds crazy I know. And apart from the singer everyone else is DI'd (remember that I'm using an electronic drum kit) so I may just get away with acoustic treatments to my room (may).
So, as you may have guessed by now, I won't be using nearfield monitors to get the levels and EQ right whilst playing. Doesn't sound great but I was hoping that I could trust my headphones while tracking (I believe that's what you call the recording process) and then use the nearfields during mastering.
Is it about now that you give up on me entirely? I hope not
I said "methods" above because as well as recording a one off "live" stereo mix I am also recording each part (one at a time at the moment because I don't have mutli-track capabilities yet) to a separate track. Once I have my individual tracks I can send the band home and then start the mixing process. It is during this mixing process that I will need the nearfield monitors as well as for the mastering process (which will probably be one and the same for me).
Right then... I'm hoping that this new info will give you a better idea of what I'm up to.
Actually, I've been waffling on for so long now that I'm kind of losing the will to live so I'm going to leave it there for a bit. Please stick with me if you can and perhaps, at christmas, I'll take you all out for a pint or two.
thanks
andy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039516 - 10/26/05 12:21 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
philbo_Tangent
Platinum Member
Registered: 10/08/00
Posts: 1175
Loc: Iowa
|
|
Offline
|
|
Well, the problem is that the best speakers in existence won't sound right in a untreated room. The frequency response of the room will be maybe +/-25 dB across the audio spectrum, with peaks and dips dependent on the dimensions of the room, where you sit while listening, where the speakers are positioned and a number of other (perhaps less important) factors. Treating the room will remove, or lessen the effect of, most of these variables, so you can hear whats really in the signal going to the speakers.
A good place to start:
ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html
It shouldn't take a major investment to get a major improvement.
A fair start, for a garage, would be to get some 4" and 2" thick rigid fiberglass panels, and put them in the corners plus cover about 20% of the wall area. That would cost maybe $150 or so.
If it needs to look nice also, covering the panels with cloth is a common practice.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039517 - 10/28/05 01:20 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks Phil,
Yes, I've been reading Ethan's acoustics write up for a couple of weeks (since I joined up here) and most of it is brain surgery to me at the moment but I'm slowly picking bits of it up.
It sounds as though perhaps I'm looking too deeply into this. I'm not, in any way shape or form, a competent tracker/mixer/masterer and I could end up spending many bucks on something I am not able to use... perhaps I need a reality check here.
So, for that reason I'm going to spend half a day at one of the large music stores in manchester and listen to some of the budget active monitors they have in stock. I'll probably be spending between 350-500 quid which will hopefully get me something half decent. Probably some Alesis M1 mkII's or similar.
I'll keep you all posted
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039518 - 10/28/05 08:12 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
flyscots
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 12/27/01
Posts: 2258
Loc: SW Scotland.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Andy
Sound Control have a sale on at the moment. They have two stores in Manchester, well one's in Salford. Have a look here.
I saw they had Tannoy Reveal Actives at £199. They're good and that's a decent price for them. Maybe worth a trip to Sound Control, see what else they have to offer.
Have fun!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039519 - 11/01/05 01:49 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks matey... Soundcontrol is the place I spoke to last week about popping in for a few hours ;^)
I spotted the Tannoys but having read a couple of reviews I was put off slightly by the lower end frequency repsonse (62Hz). I'm being lead to believe, by various internet reviews and write-ups that I should be looking at monitors that should be able to get as low as 50Hz... perhaps someone here could comment on that? Saying that, I'll still be trying them out. And they said that if I take a pair home and I'm not happy with them I can take them back and try another pair.
andy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039520 - 11/01/05 12:14 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
philbo_Tangent
Platinum Member
Registered: 10/08/00
Posts: 1175
Loc: Iowa
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by synkrotron:
Thanks matey... Soundcontrol is the place I spoke to last week about popping in for a few hours ;^)
I spotted the Tannoys but having read a couple of reviews I was put off slightly by the lower end frequency repsonse (62Hz). I'm being lead to believe, by various internet reviews and write-ups that I should be looking at monitors that should be able to get as low as 50Hz... perhaps someone here could comment on that? Saying that, I'll still be trying them out. And they said that if I take a pair home and I'm not happy with them I can take them back and try another pair.
andy
If you're doing bass-heavy stuff, you need bass.
But each extra octave of real honest bass you get from a speaker will drive the cost up by maybe a factor of 4 or more. This is why you see subwoofers for near-fields typically costing 3x or 4x the cost of the nearfield pair.
Even more to the point, (and I'm sorry if it seems I'm harping on this point incessantly) this is all money wasted if your room is not treated to allow proper bass reproduction.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039521 - 11/01/05 01:25 PM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
BlueSky
Senior Member
Registered: 12/15/01
Posts: 318
Loc: La Quinta, CA, UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by synkrotron:
Thanks matey... Soundcontrol is the place I spoke to last week about popping in for a few hours ;^)
I spotted the Tannoys but having read a couple of reviews I was put off slightly by the lower end frequency repsonse (62Hz). I'm being lead to believe, by various internet reviews and write-ups that I should be looking at monitors that should be able to get as low as 50Hz... perhaps someone here could comment on that? Saying that, I'll still be trying them out. And they said that if I take a pair home and I'm not happy with them I can take them back and try another pair.
andy
I hope nobody minds me chiming in...
LF response and how low is "good enough" is an interesting subject. With most other professional audio tools that recording engineers use, wide bandwidth (20 to 20kHz or better) is a perquisite and most users wouldn't except, for example, a DAW that only went down to 50 or 60Hz.
Because monitoring a full range signal with nearfield studio monitors is typically not possible, most users have come to except that 40 to 60hz is "good enough". You will even here people say that I just look at the cones, and if they move too much... Yada Yada Yada. Or, I just roll everything off below X frequency, to avoid any issues, etc.
The reality is, it is always best to hear what you are recording and mixing. If you are creating content for consumer consumption, then bass is critical and not something that should be treated as an afterthought. This is especially true, since most consumers really strive for full-range and dynamic content (movies, digital TV, HDTV, video games etc, all provide this).
So, here are several things we recommend:
1 - Acoustic treatment - http://www.abluesky.com/acoustics
2 - True Full-range monitoring (30 to 20Hz in room response), via the use of sealed box monitors and a sealed box subwoofer or subwoofers, along with the requisite bass-management electronics. http://www.abluesky.com/fullrange
3 - Calibration http://www.abluesky.com/calibration
Once you have a full-range monitoring system, that accurately reproduces what you are creating, recording, mixing, mastering etc., then you can truly make informed creative decisions. Additionally, consumers at the end of the chain, who will probably be listening on systems that include a subwoofer (very common in new cars or home theater systems), won't hear something you didn't hear in your studio.
Anyway, I hope that helps explain our view...
Cheers!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1039522 - 11/07/05 01:30 AM
Re: Active Nearfield Monitors
|
synkrotron
Member
Registered: 09/22/05
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
|
|
Offline
|
|
Pascal, thanks for your input... it is much appreciated and I shall check out those links. The more I read about acoustic treatments, sub-woofers, calibration etc. it just highlights the fact that I am absolutely clueless about all this stuff. Time is a problem here because I am so busy on other projects and I really need to get my head around all the technicalities of "sound" and it's science... so much to read and learn.
Phil... thanks again. And you a right to keep mentioning acoustic treatment but I doubt that, in the short term, I will be embarking on an acoustic overhall of my little studio. Perhaps in the future, when I've got my head around what is needed, and I'm not quite so busy, I'll give it further consideration.
In the meantime, I got myself down to Sound Control in Manchester. Unfortunately, the "experts" were at some demo or other and I had to make do with someone who, although very very helpfull and a very decent guy, wasn't able to answer my million and one questions. I listened to two sets of monitors:-
a) Tannoy Reveals
b) Two sets of Genelecs (8020A and 8030A)
I didn't bother listening to the Alesis M1 actives because I'd heard reports of them "colouring" the sound which surprised me really.
So, all sets of monitors sounded OK to my ears although the Genelecs did seem to produce more bass. In the end I went for the Tannoys mainly because they were cheap and I reckon that, with my experience (or lack of it) they probably will suit me well. The Genelecs did sound a little better but even the rather small 8020A's were twice the price.
I know that the experts will all issue a groan at this point but I feel that I need to spend another couple of years learning the basics. Once I am happy that I am able to better judge what I'm after, in terms of monitors and studio set-up, I'll start saving for something better... I rather liked the look of the Adams monitors they had in there at £1500...
For now, I'll try to learn what I can from the Tannoys... I mean, they can't be that bad can they?
Many thanks to all who have tried to help me over that last couple of weeks on this topic
andy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
| |
