Equator D5 or JBL LSR305 or Presonus Eris 5 or...

Anything about hardware musical instruments.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

jovanja wrote:i'm looking for an flat, accurate,brutally honest monitor that will reveal flaws in the mix but a monitor that can sound good and enjoyable when the mix is right,
i couldn't t hear an enjoyable sound with yamaha monitors no matter how good the mix was and i could hear an enjoyable sound with plenty of other monitors
What do you think is an example of a monitor that is both enjoyable and brutally honest? I ask because this is totally subjective and what's acceptable to me might not be to you.

NS10M's are the best example I've found of both enjoyable and brutally honest. I say this it's very difficult to get mixes to sound good on them but professional albums sound great on them (I always guess it's because that's what the engineers themselves used).

Post

With D8 Only very good mixes sounds pleasant. About being mid forward - only in 7-8 khz range due to coaxial design/horn on tweeter. I can say they a little bright in high midrange, but nothing so criminal for my ears.

You can't enjoy listening music on them, because most modern records are crap, especially EDM... )

I can tell some tracks what sounded great on them:

Tangerine Dream - Song of the Whale Part 1
Floex - Veronika's Dream
Submotion Orchestra - Finest Hour
Naden - Cerulean Rays

Yes these tracks you CAN listen on them WITH enjoyment. And With D8+SUB these tracks sounded BETTER than on Dynaudio BM6A. Midrange are more honest and detailed than on Dyn's. And more open. On dyns midrange are scooped.
Good records i prefer to listen with D8+sub, bad records - with Dynaudio ))))

Post

Uncle E wrote:
What do you think is an example of a monitor that is both enjoyable and brutally honest? I ask because this is totally subjective and what's acceptable to me might not be to you.

NS10M's are the best example I've found of both enjoyable and brutally honest. I say this it's very difficult to get mixes to sound good on them but professional albums sound great on them (I always guess it's because that's what the engineers themselves used).
Hi Uncle E,
i'm more looking for a honest monitor than enjoyable non accurate one,
but i was thinking that it should sound good as the mix is good,
the yamaha ns10m sound i just didnt liked whatever i played on them and i didnt liked while in the process of working on them,
but that's just me and my ears,
i know that they are brutally honest and if you set something to sound good on them probably will translate everywhere, but i found their sound dragging me out of creative process,
so because i have active pa speakers and hi-fi rig for general listening i'm searching for an honest monitor but enjoyable one something i didnt found on the yamaha lines,
hope you get my though now

Post

SoulState wrote:With D8 Only very good mixes sounds pleasant. About being mid forward - only in 7-8 khz range due to coaxial design/horn on tweeter. I can say they a little bright in high midrange, but nothing so criminal for my ears.

You can't enjoy listening music on them, because most modern records are crap, especially EDM... )
Midrange are more honest and detailed than on Dyn's. And more open. On dyns midrange are scooped.
Good records i prefer to listen with D8+sub, bad records - with Dynaudio ))))
hi soulstate,
so good records and good mixes will sound good on the d8,
that is ok with me,
it says that they are honest are reveal flaws which turns into a better and translatable mix,
and that is my goal with this purchase , to get an accurate tool for mixing,
they will be used for that matter and maybe 10% for listening,

for the bad records i dont worry cause i will listen them on my pa speakers and or on my hi-fi speakers,

i've worked on the dyns Bm6A (mk1) and i loved their sound too and i found them good for mixing as well,
but i cannot find them now new in shops and are out of my price range,

so at the moment i choosing the equator d8,
and maybe still wait to get the first opinions on the focal alpha 65 coming soon,

plus i'm thinking on getting a subwoofer just for occasional checking of the mixes,
cheers

Post

[warning tedious rambling] I'm typically ignorant but it is a sticky problem of good mixing speakers versus good sounding performance speakers.

Of course everybody has different ears and tastes. A ruler-flat, low distortion speaker may not "sound good" to a great many ears.

Some synths can sound pretty bad to me on a flat system, but sound real good on stage blasting out of a three-way old-style JBL or EV system, 15" woofer, midhorn or thiel midrange speaker, bullet tweeter, slot tweeter, or T-35. Some folks don't like roland KC-500, 550, but some keyboards sound purt good to me on a KC-5xx.

However, good music mixes sound not that great thru a roland KC, and many folks might also think mixes rather rough-sounding thru vintage 3 way mid-size PA speakers, though I often enjoy recreational listening on mid-size, good quality PA rigs.

====

Have never overly-trusted my ears for mixing. Routinely refer to a real time analyzer as a second opinion whether I'm "in the ballpark" tuning a portable mix. Used RTA to verify monitoring environments when setting them up. Fiddle with placement and such until it is "reasonably flat" with pink noise. With a third-octave RTA, one can only approximately get extreme highs and lows "flat by eye" due to room conditions, but unless one wants to micro-adjust room resonances with physical treatment or electronics, one can only get it close enough and then log enough hours listening to the system, to learn how a "good mix" sounds in that environment.

Going for commercially-palatable mixes, once the monitor environment is as close as one is willing to pay for in terms of time and money, it becomes not necessarily a task of making a mix sound good or bad. More the task of making one's mixes not drastically different in nature from admired product in the genre. Whether C&W, jazz, R&B, whatever, if the mix has drastically different overall tone than the "average" nature of the genre, then it is difficult to hook the ear of a listener.

I will also keep an eye on the RTA connected to the line signal while listening and mixing. Various genres have their own "average spectral content". For instance after one becomes accustomed to how a "good blues mix" appears on the RTA, then it is a warning sign if one's mix looks radically different on the RTA. Having a "typical spectral content for the genre" doesn't anyway guarantee a good mix, but helps avoid a bad mix.

It is a matter of making a mix fit a genre so yer song doesn't stick out like a sore thumb in a play list, rather than making it sound "good" or "bad" or "fun to hear" on the monitor system. After one's ear is accustomed to "pretty flat" systems then good commercial mixes don't sound "bad" so it isn't a complete exercise in misery. Not trying to make a mix sound good, but avoid product that sounds bad.

Then listen on other systems. Sometimes on flat systems, for instance guitar-heavy mixes, guitars can sound buried on flat monitors and simultaneously crazy too loud on a typical car system. Vocals can also be difficult to compromise so they are neither too prominent nor too buried on various systems. If targeting mixes for big club sound systems, it can be heartbreaking to take a mix you think you nailed, and hear it on a loud club system. Back to the drawing board... :)

====

Apologies for a geezer's ramblings. Am just saying I like my JBL monitor setup good enough that its not worth throwing more money at, but it is no fun playing keyboards thru my studio monitors. The monitors are flat, have adequate bass, mids, and highs, and they are loud enough, but just do not sound inspiring for recreational play, therefore also non-optimal for enjoyable composing.

A possible solution might be-- Experiment until one has a good sounding live performance rig-- Compose, play, record, enjoy on the live performance rig, and then switch to the flat monitor system for the analytical purpose of gold-plating the turd.

Or maybe one could even set up a good sounding performance system-- Listen carefully enough, long enough to commercial music on that system, so that one could mix on it. Which may be possible because in mixing one tries to match the sound of a genre rather than reach some abstract ideal.

It only matters if one wants to sell or otherwise publish music. For one's own enjoyment, it doesn't matter whether mixes match some "industry standard" as long as the creator likes it. If the creator likes it, then it doesn't matter how screwed up it might sound to somebody else. :)

I need to set up a more enjoyable performance system in the office. I would play more if it sounded more satisfying than the studio monitors. Maybe drag out my Roland KC and play thru it for a few days with lots of synths, to see if I still like the sound. If I still like the sound, maybe get another KC-550 for a stereo pair.

Have also considered buying a pair of old EV or JBL three way medium size PA speakers, boxes that gave enjoyment for many years of gigging. Play, compose, record thru the big speakers and then mix on the monitors.

Post

jovanja wrote:i'm more looking for a honest monitor than enjoyable non accurate one
Well, just avoid the LSR305's.

Post

Remedial wrote:Just a heads up. I ended up returning the 502A's because of what appears to be some kind of foam that was hanging down in the back of the bass bass port. Seems like they used it for some kind of insulation or molding of the sound but in both monitors it was visible in the back of the port. Also, the noise level is outrageous on those. Meaning, even when no sound is being played through them, there is still a VERY audible, consistent noise.

I'd say, STAY VERY FAR away from those. I'm guessing it's just a by-product of low manufacturing standards.

Either way, I ended up putting up a little more scratch and just getting the HS5s.
Out of curiosity, do you produce EDM? I love the HS5s for mixing more singer/songwriter stuff but I had to work way to hard to hear the bass with them. It could have been my setup in part, but, in any case, I found it much easier to move to something with slightly more low end.

I'm sure that I have tin ears though so take my experience with them with a grain of salt.

Post

Uncle E wrote:
jovanja wrote:i'm more looking for a honest monitor than enjoyable non accurate one
Well, just avoid the LSR305's.
Can you describe little more about 305's? I thinking to get them as some additional nearfield monitoring to my D5's.

I heard LSR 308 and found highs too colored and artifical, and lows not so detailed and smeared. They sounded like some hi-fi.

I hope maybe 305's more detailed in lows?

Post

Guess there are many uses to what a "reference monitor" could be applied. Been reading the thread trying to understand.

Had assumed a reference monitor would be as flat and low distortion achievable, with a wide sweet spot. Considering that the ear isn't terribly precise in some params, and that the perceptual system tends to "auto-normalize" to conditions-- If all studio monitors are "reasonably flat" then one might expect trained listeners to barely discern between the different models in double-blind testing procedures? Because there can be more than trivial perceived differences between monitors, then it strains credulity that some are as "flat" as advertised?

Just wondering do people test monitors when shopping or installing, with RTA and sweeps? OTOH merely looking for ear candy that makes enjoyment, then if it sounds good then who cares if its flat.

By analogy for serious photoshop editing, one might locate a video monitor as flat, dynamic, wide gamut possible. Then machine calibrate it, then use the heck out of it. If one's eye somehow doesn't like the look, then one just gets used to the way that flat video looks? Rather than go looking for a magic video monitor that makes pictures look the prettiest?

Dunno which of the current crop of budget speakers is flattest and cleanest, but I'd probably look at published specs, look for independent freq and distortion and dispersion testing, perhaps even try to measure the speakers myself if possible. Pick the flattest one, and if it ain't broke, is clean and flat, then use the heck out of it til I know the sound. Assuming the primary purpose would be tracking and mixing, anyway?

For instance if the objectively most accurate speaker turns out to sound muddy, too much bass, too little bass, not enough "sparkle" or "separation" or whatever, then possibly that is just the way that flat sounds? Does one want an accurate reference or ear candy?

Then again, perhaps the most technically precise speaker would also coincidentally turn out to be the most pleasing to hear. But it wouldn't be guaranteed.

Post

SoulState wrote:Can you describe little more about 305's? I thinking to get them as some additional nearfield monitoring to my D5's.

I heard LSR 308 and found highs too colored and artifical, and lows not so detailed and smeared. They sounded like some hi-fi.

I hope maybe 305's more detailed in lows?
They sound good, just not brutally honest like the OP wants. Like the 308's, the 305's and the matching sub are like hi-fi speakers.

Post

JCJR wrote:Just wondering do people test monitors when shopping or installing, with RTA and sweeps? OTOH merely looking for ear candy that makes enjoyment, then if it sounds good then who cares if its flat.
I put up my own mixes and listen for the things that challenged me when I did them. If a monitor has a lot of detail in those areas, or better yet show me how to make them even better, I figure they'll tell me what I need to know.

Post

I've had my monitors for over 15 years, I was working at MARs music when I bought them (Tannoy Proto J's) and we had everything on display so I really demoed them a lot just by selling them...I have no desire with my current studio to change them...some places change is not as welcome ;)
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.

Post Reply

Return to “Hardware (Instruments and Effects)”