Opals, or something else for music?

About the cost of a new set of Opals. If something is significantly better the budget might go up a little, but really about $1,500 for the pair.
 
Event Opals are $1500 each.

For a pair for $1500 or less you can listen to:

JBL LSR4328P

Dynaudio BM 5A

Genelec 8030A

Mackie HR824mk2 (I have them w/the HRS120 sub; love them!)


There's lots of nice stuff out there. Everyone has personal favorites, but you have to find the audio monitors that fit your budget, your room, your ears and your application.
 
Yea, he called me to tell me the "good news". It is a shame. They really must be something special. Unfortunately that is a big price difference.

Would you say that the JBL or the Mackie might be the best to get without the subwoofers? The option to get their matching subwoofer later on is very attractive.

Thanks!
 
And just slightly off topic, but when dropping that kind of money on monitors...

Is the room acoustically treated? (First order reflections, flutter, bass trapping, ect...)
I've listened to $2k monitors in a room covered floor to ceiling in 1" Acoustical foam, and I've listened to $300 monitors in a room with $1000 in acoustic treatment setup properly. The later sounded better.

And if you going without a sub, Auralex MoPADs can be wonderful on any monitors (helps isolate the bass to give them a cleaner sound, plus they help angle speakers wonderfully).

Personal opinion though, but there's little need to match a sub with the speakers of the same line. A good sub is a good sub, and good monitors are good monitors. (Certainly matching the monitors is a high priority though)
Finding the right sub for the room is much more about the size of the room, placement, and SPL requirements than "matching" the brand.
No sub and monitor should ever be using the same drivers anyway, so "matching" isn't really possible anyway like it is from one monitor to another.
 
The reason why I am asking for as many opinions as possible is that in the place where the musician lives now it is proven hard to locate a store that carried the Opals, which scared us into requesting as many opinions as possible. I believe the JBL's and Makies will be easier to come by, but a little more research and opinions can never hurt.

The monitors are a long overdue investment, with the sound treatment later. The room where they will be used for the next few months will likely sound quite bad, but the plan is to move into a new place. The priority will then be to find a place based on the acoustic quality of the room that will be used for recording and mixing.

I would likely trust the design and development of the companies when it comes to the right subwoofer to compliment the lower frequencies from their monitors but I'll keep that in mind. I had never heard that before.

Isolation pads are planned for at the same time that the monitors are purchased.
 
"Opinions are like a$$holes; everybody has one and they all stink."

I love my Mackies; one of my best friends hates them. He is dedicated to his Genelecs, but another buddy wouldn't give up his JBLs even if you put a gun to his head. Your best bet is to audition speakers in a working environment, or, at the least, in a quiet space. A few of the better pro shops have listening rooms.

I agree with Gohanto, sound isolation/treatment is just as important as the speakers. You would probably be better off spending $1k on speakers and the rest on room treatment. It's a common thread on the music forums - "I got the super-duper-most-popular-flavor-of-the-month $2k speakers and my mixes still suck." That's because the speakers cannot correct for a poor listening environment. Also, if you are moving into a new facility you should match the speakers to the room, so maybe you should put off investing now and wait until you get on there. You are making a large investment; don't rush in...
 
Well, the idea of matching the speakers to the room sounds a bit tough. However, finding a non-square room with decent materials and adding sound treatment to it after you have the speakers, in it sounds much easier... woudn't you agree?

The studio location could be searched for over a long period of time. There is a minimum of four months before he needs it ready. However, he will still be recording while that happens and at the moment he is mixing on little 3" monitors... there is a little bit of a "rush" on replacing those. I imagine that setting good monitors to a low volume that would limit the effect that the room had on the sound would still give a more accurate representation than the little speakers at their volume sweet spot. For the low end he would at least be able to hear something, even if biased by the room... however I believe it isn't a box, which should help by not resonating any one particular frequency longer than others... hopefully not much anyway...

I assure you guys, this isn't a compulsive toy rush. Aside from the natural excitement. :) Quite the contrary though. This is more of a coming of age that was WAY overdue for the talent involved and a serious commitment into a start up recording studio. A business.

I am carefully considering every single one of your posts to ensure this extremely talented musician gets a professional sounding mixing room. His engineer will be able to help, but the investment will come from the artist who will manage and own the studio. Together, they have been producing some fantastic music. Hopefully with a proper setup both their talents will shine through, without the unavoidable flaws from mixing blind (deaf).

There isn't a major rush, other than the need to get the ball rolling. I remember what getting my 20/20's did to my mixes, and what moving into a great sounding room did to them as well. I only wish I had their musical talent. I don't record music though. :)

I believe he should be able to find a place to hear the Mackies, and the JBL's should be relatively easy to find as well. Hopefully in the same room though. Even if it takes driving from Tampa to Orlando for it.
 
USLatin said:
I imagine that setting good monitors to a low volume that would limit the effect that the room had on the sound would still give a more accurate representation than the little speakers at their volume sweet spot.
Click to expand...

100% myth. The room has the same problems whether you're at 105dB or 45dB.

Your friend needs the monitors quickly, but the end point that needs to be made is that you can either trust a mix done in your studio, or you should finish elsewhere. The best monitors in the world, in a junk room, aren't going to work well and yield a mix that'll translate out of it.

There's something to be said for the slight differences a nicer monitor "can" be in a bad room, but that's shining a turd. And you're really doing more damage subconsiously thinking you're getting better sound, but really you're still mixing in a bad room and not getting good results.

You're better off (imho) stick with what you have as you know the weaknesses and checking the mixes in a real studio. Then when you do find the space you want, get a plan together for acoustic treatment, monitor selection, ect... all at once to ensure it all works together.

And for selecting a sub to fit the room, I can tell you that to properly fill a 1000 ft^3 will bass flat to 20Hz and peaking up to 105dB, takes much MUCH less power than filling a 20,000 ft^3 studio to the same specs. Email the companies about finding the right sub for the space and SPL you're going for, and they should be able to tell you how best to proceed. (Even if you're certain that you want to stay in the same line, you may end up needing 2-4 of their subs to get up to the levels you're looking for)
 
Last edited:
Hmm... well that sucks... I didn't read it anywhere though I was assuming it based on the added reverb present (apparent?) when recording a scream as opposed to a soft conversation. Or the same when turning up the gain on a mic to catch dialogue from further away. I wonder how it really works then.

This conversation helped me get him to realize the need for a more serious commitment and he is now talking about the sound treatment! Thanks.

So what do you guys think about the speakers? JBL LSR4328P, Mackie HR824mk2, or Adam A7 with their Sub10 or Sub12? Are Adam Audios any good?

The issue with the Adams being that he might not get the Adam subwoofer for a little while and would be stuck hearing only 46Hz and higher till the sub came into play!
 
I'm a professional film composer, use the KRK VXT6s, and I love them! They're well within your friend's budget.

The other ones I'd suggest are the aforementioned Mackies. The HR824s are pretty standard in many venues. I think the KRKs complete with these, though ... but that's me. :)
 
We seem to have standardized on the Genelec 8030/40A for smaller rooms and Meyer HD-1's for the bigger rooms/suites.
 
Last edited:
USLatin said:
So what do you guys think about the speakers? JBL LSR4328P, Mackie HR824mk2, or Adam A7 with their Sub10 or Sub12? Are Adam Audios any good?!
Click to expand...
USLatin said:
Anyone? Noiz2 u there? I could use some of your wisdom.
Click to expand...
They are all good speakers. I would say go with the Mackies, but then, I have them. The Genelecs are also very nice and are in several of the studios at which I freelance. Adams sound great! You see the problem? Everyone will have their favorites and vehement opinions. One of my favorites -- "Opinions are like a**holes; everybody has one and they all stink." There comes a point where you will have to use your own judgement.
 
USLatin said:
Anyone? Noiz2 u there? I could use some of your wisdom.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the faith but I'm a film post person not a music studio person and some that have FAR better credentials in that field have already spoken.

I would disagree slightly with "it doesn't matter what volume your at" statement. The problems change when you get really loud and they don't go away if your quiet but it's not nec the same problem. Rooms tend to "fill up" (for lack of a more scientific term) with sound when you get over a certain point. So going LOUD in a small room will probably not be helped all that much with treatment. Part of the idea of near fields is that the direct to your ear sound overwhelms everything else and so the room is less important, but that only goes so far. Also perception changes with volume so playing lower than normal is not a good thing for mixing.


I don't have a lot of over the counter "sound treatment in my room but I do have essentially floor to celing bookcases on the back wall and some treatment in front. There are pretty much no flat surfaces facing each other etc.

BUT I'm 99% of the time editing and 1% of the time mixing films. It's not the same as music at all. I would pay more attention to the music folks.
As for speakers I use and like Yorkvile YSM-1's, but that is just an opinion. I have worked with a lot in different places, but most edit rooms are not set up well at all so it's hard to have valid opinions about speakers. I find Genalec's kind of crispy, Mackie's seem OK, JBL's seemed OK, KRK sounded really muddy. BUT again most of these edit rooms were completely untreated with hard walls, basically office spaces so the opinions are not at all fair. The KRK for instance may have been way under powered, which would make them(or just about any speaker) muddy. The Genalec's are used by a friend who loves loud and bright, so it may not be the speakers at all.

Also very few editors calibrate their systems at all so...

You can find a ton of people who will give you THE answer, they are all wrong - or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top