Monitors!

taubkin

taubkin

Veteran
Hey All!

I just found something quite lame. My stereo system died on me for no apparent reason. That means I'm out of sound from my Mac temporarily, except for my headphones.

I'm not going to spend money on a new stereo, because I don't listen to CDs anymore, but I need to get sound ut of my computer, and why not go ahead and get a good pair of audio monitors (I know I won't be able to get fancy, but I am okay in adopting a compromise solution...)

Well, there seems to be a very in depht discussion about microphones, and mostly because we have a lot of people here that do more production audio than the actual mixing and editing, but I wonder if we could not get this discussion on monitors in the same spirit we discuss the Mics.

I admit I know nothing about monitors, but let me start asking you guys if what I know seems correct:

They are more expensive than microphones, starting at the same range (100 Dollars) and going up to even to 8000, if you consider you have to buy them as pairs.

Most of them fit in the range of 500-1000 each unit. There are a lot of sub-500 units and a lot of sub 500 pairs. They can be passive or active, meaning passive need an apmplification that will be probably better quality than the built in in the actives, and good amps theese days do come quite cheaper than they used to.

So, my question is: how much does each of those price ranges give me in terms of benefits. I know there is a lot to power in the monsters, if I don't need plenty of power, can I get away with cheaper weaker, but still high quality monitors?

How much would 300 dollars buy me compared to mics, would it buy me an at897 of monitors an at4073a? What about a 416?

Wich are the most popular brands? I've heard Genelec is one of the best, I see plenty of Alesis being used, and I'm still to listen to an M-Audio in person, but they should also hold their stance in their own budget range... What would I miss from an expensive system? Would a cheap system be so off it would be useless? Or it would already be a big improvement on my old stereo speakers?

Well I hope I manage to get this party started...

Cheers! - And Thanks in advance...
 
I will thow in a few of observations.

You probably want active monitors. You can actually solve a lot of problems by placing the amp as close as possible to the speakers they are powering. Most of the better powered monitors are bi-amped, which is probably not something you would do if you were to buy passives.

As far as brands go, the Genelec 1032 ( I think this is the model ) is sort of the yardstick 2-way powered speaker that people refer to. I believe their new 8000 series monitors are also in this same class. They are very nice and durable, but quite expensive. You are looking at over 2 grand for a set if I remember correctly. A step down from these are the Mackie HR824. Despite being made by Mackie, which has a reputation for quality, yet kind of low-end gear, these are really excellent speakers. These run you probably 1200$ new. They were definately designed to be compared to the Genelec, and when they came out pretty much everyone said that they were poor-man's Genelecs. I think this is a fairly accurate statement. I should admit that I have a set of the HR824's and I love them. Depending on who you talk to, people will say that they are too bassy, or too bright compared to the Genelecs. I think this is mostly a result of the HR824's generally being in cheaper rooms than the Genelecs. I cant comment on the more recent M-Audio or Alesis speakers, as I have not used them.

I would try to get something with 6" or 8" drivers. Go smaller, and you lose a lot of information, go larger and you really need a big well treated room. This size of monitor is designed to be fairly close to your head, which helps a lot to minimize having a less than optimal listening enviornment. One thing you can do to tell if a speaker this size is good, is to pick it up. If it almost breaks your back, then this is a good sign. The HR824's weigh almost 40 pounds each, and the Genelecs are similar. Also remember if you want to mix 5.1 that you need FIVE of whatever speaker is your primary, so keep that in mind :)

You would really benefit greatly from finding a decent music store that has a good selection of monitors and listening. The problem you will encounter is that most places only have the really crummy stuff, and the inexpensive / moderate stuff. You usually wont find a place that has everything all in one place, at least in my neck of the woods.


One thing about monitors is that they aren't usually particularly flattering to the content the way normal consumer speakers are. This is intentional, but it takes some getting used to. The other thing about them is that a particular set is not always selected because they are the best, but because they are "standard" or "well known" If you go to any big recording studio, somewhere they have a pair of Sony NS10 passives. These monitors are really hideous and horrible to mix on, but for some reason they caught on, and every studio got them because every other studio got them. People learn how to use a certain piece of gear and when they move from place to place they expect it to be there. To some extent, this is the case with Genelecs. I guess all I am saying is that just because everyone uses Genelecs, it dosen't mean you can't mix on something else. You have to learn your monitors over time with experience. I know the first few mixes I did on my HR824's were not very good because I didn't know them at first.
 
I did a lot of auditioning of monitors and here's my observations of the best sounding monitors in their price ranges (for what I was able to audition).

Event TR6 6" - $175 ea I bought these because it's what I could afford at the time and I think they're very neutral clean speakers for the price. A great value.

Tannoy PBM65LM 6.5" - $300 These are also pretty clean sounding with more midrange detail than the TR6, but basically in the same class.

KRK V6 6" - $350 The KRK's are a definite step up and have a nice crisp sound. Avoid the KRK Rockit line--they're really inferior.

Event 20/20bas V2 8" - $400 This monitor really delivers at the low end and delivers an all around nicely balanced sound.

Mackie HR824 8" - $600 These are beautiful monitors and have an incredibly detailed midrange, good bass, and tight high end. The midrange is probably too detailed for a monitor, but I could listen to these all day. If you can afford these, then buy them. I found the less expensive HR624 to be sort of mediocre.

>$600 Genelec and Dynaudio rule way up here.

tigebas's advice is right on--a good monitor will sound sort of flat and dry compared to a home audio speaker. Out of the lot, I'd say the HR824's are easily the most pleasing speaker to enjoy music on. I like M-Audio, just not their monitors. The caveat is that speakers, including monitors are a largely personal preference. You must audition them before buying--and A/B as many as possible.
 
Barry,

I have also heard a lot of good things about the Event TR6, but I have not had an opportinity to listen to them. I didn't really care for the Tannoy PBM, but I have some sort of irrational dislike for Tannoy speakers.

I just remembered something very useful about the HR824's that is probably something to look for on other powered speakers. It is a little detail, but incredibly useful. On the back there are separate staged rolloff switches for high and low. My first few mixes were suffering from general boominess and the problem was mainly my room. It is fairly well treated but kind of small, so it suffers from low-end buildup. Just being able to do a little rolloff on the speakers made all the difference.
 
It used to be that Yamaha NS-10's were the industry standard. Essentially if it sounded good on an NS-10 it sounded good on anything. Almost every professional studio had a set and they were just standard. The quality wasn't that of other monitors, but it definately gave you a good feeling for how to balance. Used you should be able to score some around $250
 
TheYankee is right - NS10s are flippin EVERYWHERE in the industry. The Mackie HR824s are generally regarded as abzolutely ROCK SOLID monitors.

Personally, I own the Samson Resolv 80a active monitors, and you know what, they rock. They arent very expensive, and they really do a great job.

Keep in mind: a good mixer can mix on ANYTHING and be able to get a good sound: its all about knowing what your monitors sound like so you can compensate for them. Room treatment is actually just as important as monitor choice, I think.

Comments?
 
Love my Genelecs but I have been spoiled. Timaper's dead on with the point that room treatment is equally important as good monitors. Problem is some rooms are just not workable. In this DIY age, audio mixing at home is just not something where any location can be used or converted.

Best
 
Hey, thanks for all the feedback!

Let me take a ride on this since I got your attention and ask a little more specific question. I'm not an experienced mixer, and I won't work in a controlled room because I won't be doing any serious mixing. I am an editor and just want to hear a good clean signal of what I have to use my good judgement on how good or bad might be the signal I'm getting, and basically make one or two patch up jobs. I know it's like coming here and asking "what is the best monitor (but should be originally shotgun) to make kickass feature films", but basically, I want to know if I would truly benefit from studio monitors (and if so wich), or if I just should go buy those cute little transparent speakers from Apple and give it a rest...

So far your reccomendations seem pretty interesting.

Barry, those Event speakers seem more in my price range, for what I inted to to with them anyway... Do you think they offer me an edge over regular speaker solutions?
 
Mackie 824's and if you can't afford those get the knock off Behringer 2031a which are flat. We use Mackie 824's,Behringer 2031a's, and Event 20/20's as well as an old set of Altec Lansings and a very old Auratone. The monitors I listed take up some space!

Another option that you may want to consider is 5.1 surround. If you're going to mix your shows in surround you'll need a surround setup so you know where to place audio in the sound matrix while your mixing. Alesis Pro Active 5.1 is THX certified and has the AC-3 decoder built in.
 
Wrong Barry, but what the heck... the Event speakers - or almost any monitors in that class - will indeed give you a tremendous edge over typical "computer speaker systems". Even the smaller and cheaper Event TR5 speakers aren't too bad.

What hasn't been said here, and may or may not be crucial to your purpose, is that PLACEMENT of speakers is also of great importance, and in some situations will drive your speaker choice. I actually have some situations where I can't get anything bigger than an M-Audio 4-inch Studiophile set into a proper monitoring configuration; and it's more important (for what I do) to have the proper configuration than better speakers.

In any case, I think, as you've said, the Event TR6 is likely your sweet spot. You'll get good sound for what you need, and won't overpower your room.

-Barry
 
The Events are a huge step up from cheapo speakers, and will give you the confidence to mix and master with a reasonable idea of what your material actually sounds like. They're bi-amplified active speakers--basically the amps are matched to the speakers (a good thing). I have yet to hear any monitors that I like as much as the TR-6's for the same price, but there are lots of monitors I haven't heard.

What the other Barry (and everyone else) said about speaker placement and room configuration is good advice. It helps to use some acoustic foam (like Auralex) on the walls and to isolate the speakers from any surface they sit on (with foam pads). The idea is to take the characteristics of the room out of the equation--at least preventing any major emphasis or attenuation of certain frequencies.
 
BX5s you won't regret! only $199 everything sound so good on them, only 5" but listen to enigma on it, and you will hear the bass! I want to buy another pair.. just for backup. I m serious

u try listen to them and compare it to the 1000$ ones... u will pick the 199 one.

don't get the 5a it's crap
 
I have never been a huge fan of the events. Just in my opinion the mid range has always sounded slightly out of wack, don't know how else to explain it.

The best, as has been said, are the Mackies. The problem with the Mackies though is that things almost sound too good out of them. I used to have a set of them and everything I did on them sounded really great, hence why I would run them through the NS-10's for a reality check.

Monitors are a lot like shoes though, some fit certain people better than others.

I am sure I will take heat for this next comment, but in my opinion a great way to go is just to get some cheap speakers, because at least that way you will always have a reality check on the sound quality. Same theory as an NS-10, if it sounds good on the worst, imagine how it will sound on the best!
 
Cool those are all great options. I now can think about getting higher quality speakers, because I got my stereo back to work (just soldered a loose connector)! At least I'm no longer in a hurry and will be able to think about all this much better.

I think something in the ways of the BX5 or the Events are more appropriate for my budget, since I'm not an audio expert nor I have a good audio editing bay (I do my mixing in Soundtrack, for instance). Still, I'm beggining to feel it's an equipment purchase that could justify itself both in terms of product quality, but mainly (and that is the reasson I buy gear) because I can help me learn some more about sound, maybe enough to manage to put back to work the old AKAI 1/4" tape recorder my father have... :)

Thanks for the help, now it's about managing to listen to them...
 
Just wanted to chime in about Events, since I rarely have an opinion to share on these forums. I have a pair of Event 20/20 BAS monitors and I love them to death. The "slightly out of whack" midrange I would interpret as detailed. Don't you think the Mackies are a little muddy? I A/B'ed them both and chose the Events.

TheYankee is correct, though. You don't want speakers that sound great, you want speakers that are as flat as possible, and this isn't usually the most pleasing. And whatever monitor you choose, IMHO, it is absolutely imperative that you a) get very familiar with them and how they make your favorite CDs sound, and b) always check out your mixes on other speakers/systems, including crappy ones. The sign of a great mix is that it sounds pretty good everywhere. I've made plenty of mixes that sound fantastic - on my monitors - but horrible on many other setups.

Just wanted to feel like I had something to say ... :beer:
 
gibbie said:
Just wanted to chime in about Events, since I rarely have an opinion to share on these forums. I have a pair of Event 20/20 BAS monitors and I love them to death. The "slightly out of whack" midrange I would interpret as detailed. Don't you think the Mackies are a little muddy? I A/B'ed them both and chose the Events.


Just wanted to feel like I had something to say ... :beer:
Click to expand...

My opinion is that the Mackies have a fairly tight low end, but they have a LOT of low end. It is not obvious from looking at them, but they have a passive radiator on the back. They can easily overwhelm a room if it can't handle the bass. I have to use 1 click of rolloff in my control room because it is pretty small, and because I have them almost in the corners of a room, and this really causes lots of bass buildup.
 
I listened to the Mackies and Events in a store, and neither pair were set up well for listening, however, me wanting my toys right away, I chose the Events. It's just I used to know a producer who hated the Mackies (I don't hate them at all) because of their low end. But a lot more people I've heard from agree with you and love them. Just curious if anyone else had a problem with the bass response. I should check them out again in a better environment. My Events can sound downright disgusting in a bad room. Cheers.
 
gibbie said:
It's just I used to know a producer who hated the Mackies (I don't hate them at all) because of their low end.
Click to expand...

This is actually a great point of critism for the Mackies. When they were first released the low end response was far from being 100% accurate. The Mackies certainly emphasize the mid/high spectrum of the signal coming to them. This was rectified with the subwoofer system that they released to compliment the monitors. It does make the overall system more expensive, yet it helps with the reliability response range. If $ is not a major concern, they are beautiful, responsive, and very accurate. The overall package does get expensive though.
 
TheYankee said:
This is actually a great point of critism for the Mackies. When they were first released the low end response was far from being 100% accurate. The Mackies certainly emphasize the mid/high spectrum of the signal coming to them. This was rectified with the subwoofer system that they released to compliment the monitors. It does make the overall system more expensive, yet it helps with the reliability response range. If $ is not a major concern, they are beautiful, responsive, and very accurate. The overall package does get expensive though.
Click to expand...



I definately agree 100% that this is the most common negative comment I have heard about them. I think that the Genelecs the Mackies are designed to emulate are definately tighter in this regard. Some people feel that the passive radiator can cause some slightly out of phase low end to come your way, which I think explains some of the perceived muddiness.

As far as the sub goes, it is definately rounds out the low end really well. Despite being great speakers, they are still only 8" drivers, and you cannot reproduce stuff efficiently in the 20-50ish range with them. I don't have the sub, but I would definately look into it if I ever decide to upgrade to an all HR824 5.1 setup.
 
...might as well ask here, since it was brought up.

Why is it not a good idea to get the EQ and such for each channel correct using your pair of good monitors, then get the 5.1 spatial relationships right using whatever 5.1 setup you already have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top