Thoughts anyone? /20 char
omg lol
Hereās a fundamental question: is it possible for a pair of monitors to work well for one person, but not for another? Do different people have different ābest monitorsā for them?
If the answer is yes, then what are the things that make one pair better for person A, but not for person B?
If the answer is no, then I think using reviews is a fine way to choose. Especially when just starting out.
Iām not sure if Jon thought this was a stupid question. But its very much a legitimate one in my opinion. I actually donāt know how to advise a newcomer to the audio world how choose their first set of monitors based on things Iām not really sure if they can hear.
To answer your question, I donāt really believe monitors are genera specific. Some people say buy KRKās if you do a lot of stuff with low end bass, or that NS-10ās are the ultimate speaker for a rock mix. Iām not so sure thatās true.
For an experienced pro, I think there definitely are. And they can articulate what those specific properties are. For a newcomer, Iām totally not sure, hence the reason Iād like others on here to weigh in.
But at a certain level, any pro worth his weight in water should be able to work on any high-end monitor set in any properly tuned room. So, preferences might be a factor, but really, Iām just as happy working on Adams, Barefoots, Focals, or ATCās. It comes down to weather or not I trust the room Iām in. If Iām in a really really bad room, my ears let me know as soon as I make frequency and fader moves that immediately give me a result way off base from what I KNOW should be happening to the sound.
ā¦if it helps at all, I tend to err on the side of very very extreme clarity. Some mix engineers love Yamaha NS-10ās because they trust them to translate. Theyāre inherently muddy monitors, made out of all the wrong shit. As a result, the engineers have to āfightā their way through the monitor in order to get junk to sound right. The line of reasoning is that if you can make it sound good on that, itāll sound good on damn near anything. I mix way too much classical and church choir stuff to have that luxury. I also need to not have to deal with fluff when balancing sound effects for film and gamingā¦I need more clarity than some people do.
2 Likes
I spent quite a bit on my studio monitors when I was starting outā¦ hahā¦ itās all relative, but I bought a set of JBL LSR 2300s plus a sub. I based that decision largely on a heap of reading and Brandonās RR creed of how ultra important it is to be able to really hear what you are doingā¦ They donāt have a āniceā soundā¦ they take no prisoners and I have grown to love themā¦ Iād never have chosen them from listening to them in a shop, they are absolutely functional tools - how would I describe their sound? Quite plain and unadorned? They give me a sense of the drilled-down components of sound, if that makes any sense? But perhaps any monitors could do the job and itās really just doing the time to get to know them and how the sound will translate from them to other systems? They were a high cost part of my set-up and Iāve never ever regretted thatā¦
3 Likes
That makes absolute sense. Iām not familiar with those monitors, but one of the things thatās usually recommend in a studio monitor is a āflat responseā which means they may not sound āprettyā but that supposedly they should tell you the ātruthā. Consumer speakers are many times designed to please the ear in one way or another (or just poorly designed and most people donāt notice), but they donāt tell you the truth about what is going on.
Thatās the key factor right there. Some people purposely donāt use flat response monitors for whatever reason, just whatever they like and whatever works. And yes getting to know them and how they work in the room is of primary importance. When shopping for monitors, or working in multiple studios, it is helpful to have a repertoire of songs you know well that you can āreferenceā to quickly get a feel for a different setup. Kind of like reference songs for mixing, but this is a collection of songs you like a lot (usually) and know well on your favorite speakers. And they are not for mixing purposes, just to ātune your earsā to the new situation. Having several different musical styles and/or production styles in the repertoire is usually best, to cover a wide range of sounds and responses.
3 Likes
Wow! So did I 
Too cool lol.
I actually started with a pair of KRK Rockets that my Grandmother bought me when I was a kid. I used them for years and years. Then someone I found some Behringers I liked betterā¦a person traded me Behringers for KRKs. I used the Beheringers for a several years in different rooms. Then my next move was into this little red room with those 2300s!
5 Likes
Stan, Iām not sure if flat means much these days. Same goes with a mic. Just because a mic is flat, doesnāt mean its clear. The EQ curve and the degree of detail arenāt measured under the same set of stats. Granted that no monitor is perfectly flat, as no mic is perfectly flat. I actually donāt know how detail is measuredā¦or what we perceive as clarity and detail.
BTWā¦what are you using at the moment?
1 Like
Right, the āflat responseā thing is mostly for marketing anyway. But I figure when they say that, they are staking their companyās reputation on something tangible and reproducible, so they canāt yank us around too much. 
By EQ curve I assume you mean āfrequency responseā, and yes those are mostly for marketing too. Their test conditions will be different than your real world conditions. Itās just one way to try to standardize these things ā¦ better than nothing I suppose. To try to talk about ādetailā probably gets really subjective. That maybe comes down to your ears and your training. Though differences in transient response might come close, like how a dynamic mic canāt pick up the subtle details that a condenser can, due to the design.
I have been using KRK V6 Series 2 for quite a few years. I have been happy with them. They are supposed to be āflatā, and seem to be regarded as decent quality monitors. They are the standard āboxā type design. While the Rokit stuff kind of looks cool, I donāt know that I buy the āimproved airflowā design crap they came out with on those. I think thatās aesthetics. As you pointed out, some people are happy as cheese dip to use NS-10ās. I use a few other speaker systems for translation, nothing fancy.
Yeah, unfortunately almost every speaker manufacturer claims their speakers are completely flat from off to the speed of light, but if you put them all in the same room they would all sound different. There really should be some kind of standard developed, especially for home recording, that allows you to be in the same ballpark with those who are fortunate enough to have a good room with good monitors. It wouldnāt be that difficult to sell a package of powered monitors with built in room correction software and a reference mic. Monitors are supposed to be tools more than toys. Imagine buying 10 twelve inch rulers that were all different sizes. Thatās kind of how the industry approaches it.
2 Likes
Thatās not my view of them. They have a time domain response that beats most other monitors - especially in todayās world of ported super-bass jobbies. Thatās what makes them so clear, and thatās why they were - and still are - so popular. Itās not the frequency response or construction material that makes them difficult to work with, itās the fact that their super clarity requires super precision, and some people arenāt up to that.
I have HS 80s and they are absolutely fine, but I would take NS10s any day.
To answer your question in the OP, I think the quotes are pretty accurate. An engineer/producer who is any good can work on just about anything, providing it has some sort of reasonable quality, so the focus should be on improving skills.
1 Like
not a stupid question at all but I dont think it makes any sense for me to put more than 10 minutes of thought into it
in my particular case id assume most anything decent and basic would be sufficient. The main thing being to give me a second perspective besides the headphones. I dont think the buying criteria needs to be too esoteric
I only have 2 thoughts going thru my head which may be considerations.
-
In my exotic studio setup I picture the monitors standing on stands being positioned approx 7-8 feet from my ears, which is tbh at the foot of my bed lol. So are some speakers designed to work better from 8 feet away than from 3 feet?? Im 99% sure the answer would be that it doesnt matter at all
-
What would COMPLEMENT the headphones and/or a person habitualized to headphones. But again, probably anything with a remotely flat response would be fine
HS8ās look good.
KRK RP8G3ās look good.
Shoot, probably a pair of HS5ās would work but I guess id like a little more headroom power wise
Stepping back and looking at the bigger picture, one of the issues with my ears is that I havent listened to music on stereo speakers in YEARS. I have been in this apt for like 22 years and have never had a stereo setup. Its been all headphones and laptop speakers. The only time id listen in any kind of stereo would be in my car but of course thats not ideal either
So just the act of setting up stereo speakers and listening to music thru them should be quite therapeutic
Most of the time, in a smaller room, itās fine to have the monitors pretty close to you, as long as you can sit in a spot where you would not be closer than they are spread apart so you hear stereo instead of two mono sources. That way you can eliminate a little of the roomās effect on the sound, since reflections wouldnāt be as noticeable. Think of an engineer sitting at a desk with Yamaha NS-10s pointing at him.
Youāre correct that youāll have lots of choices in terms of monitors. Whatever you are comfortable with that doesnāt seem to hype any particular part of the music you like is a good starting point. If you can find a place that will give you a chance to try them out in your room for a little while you can listen to your favorite stuff and verify that the monitors are showing you the details without overdoing it. As far as complimenting headphones, donāt worry too much about it, since youāll likely be using the phones more for tracking than mixing. I tend to listen to headphones much louder than I should. Most guys mix at fairly low levels to keep the ear fatigue down, that takes a little getting used to. Good luck, have fun.
1 Like
KRK RP8G3ās incoming lol
Most near-field studio monitors are designed to be only a few feet from your head so that you can sit in the mix position and be in the āsweet spotā. If you get near-fields and are that far away from them, you will lose some of what theyāre intended to provide. But! Itāll still be worth doing for sure to complement the headphones, as you say.
I put a lot into being able to hear well in my room, but put much more into room treatment than monitors. Iām happy with my monitors (Pioneer SDJ-08) but theyāre not super great. Theyāre ported, and I got them before understanding that ported monitors are not as desirable as non-ported for a variety of reasons. I do a whole bunch of my mixing on Sony MDR-7506 phones, because it strongly enhances domestic tranquility to be on 'phones much of the time, but always always always check against the monitors multiple times in every mix, then move to my basic computer speakers, home theatre setup, and car audio system on everything before ever posting for bash. If a mix can withstand that big difference in listening environments without falling apart, I am ready to get the opinions of others.
Hope your new speaks work well for you JJ!
1 Like
Donāt know how good they are, but I use Mackie HR 824ās. I see they are $360 ea at sweetwater. The reviews are pretty decent. My two cents
Sincerely
Paul
1 Like
Hard decision, if on a budget i would say maybe a budget up to $1000 then do some research around that price. There are so many in that range that would be greatā¦for even less. I use Focal and like them a lot. But i would also factor in getting some room correction software like IKmultimedia ARC2 or Sonarwork speaker calibration. I use Focal Solo 6 and CMS Sub but these are quite expensive, however i still use room correction software in combination it works well for me.
1 Like
Coming at this from a different angleā¦
I record for my own enjoyment and for a long time I could only use my AKG-240 headphones and my old Yamaha TSS-1B 5.1 computer speakers!
I had an extremely limited budget and little opportunity to ādemoā monitors. I ended up making a decision based on price, reviews and the recommendation of a friend. For under $300 I grabbed a set of JBL-LSR305 powered monitors and to my ears they are some of the most clear and detailed speakers Iāve had the opportunity to listen to. My first ātestā was to take some CDās that knew really well and just listen to some tracks. I sat in the āsweet spotā and just soaked in the crisp and revealing sound. I was hearing things I hadnāt noticed heard before in tracks that Iāve listened to for 25+ years! Through them Iāve been re-discovering a lot of the music I have collected over the years, Because of them I believe my own projects are improving thanks to the more accurate representation of the sounds Iām recording.
Iām sure that more expensive monitors with a larger capacity for moving air would sound even better. Would I like to add a sub or have some bigger woofers? Sure, but even without them these are some fine sounding speakers and I do not regret my purchase in the slightest.
2 Likes
ā¦and having read some of the last threads, I will also caution against mid-field speakers if you donāt have the space. I bough M-Audio M3-8ās based on how they sounded at a certain SPL over a specific set of criteria.
BUT, these monsters are 220W each and will absolutely blow you out of your chair at a few feet. Depending on the size of your room, Stick with 5, 6, or 8" monitors that deliver under 100W. There are many worthy. JBL, Adam, Yamaha, KRK (all mentioned), and donāt forget the Behringer Truth series for good budget monitors.
My Criteria: I made a disk that had a 1k test tone, 2 minute sweep from 20 to 200Hz: and a 10k test tone. I took my SPL meter with me and set the volume of each set of speakers I listened to at 90 dB using the 1k test tone. Then I used the SPL meter to track the sweep, and to see the loudness of the 10k test. The rest of the files on the disc were my reference tracks (that I use to A/B my own mixes) and one of my mixes that I know intimately. I listened to one set of speakers and took detailed notes. Then I took a break and came back for each subsequent set. I donāt remember (or have) the notes anymore, but Iād love to find them and post them.
What I do remember:The M3-8s were the overall winner. Behringer B2031 was second. Past that I donāt even remember all the sets I auditionedā¦sorry.
1 Like
What will a nearfield do that a midfield wonāt? I can take my midfields, put them right infront of my face, and be equally dumbfounded at how pristine and accurate they are. And most midfields have a switch to where you can make them act like a scaled down near field too.
Iām pretty sure midfields can be used up close, but near fields struggle when youāre sitting 6-9 feet away from each one (aka behind a huge console).
I could be wrong on thatā¦do feel free to dump some science on me if Iām incorrect.