[gregorio]

Lock - At $400 for amps and speakers, there may be some small benefit to using active near-fields but you're going to get much better quality at that price point from cans or even IEMs and decently encoded MP3s.

When we get to higher price points, say $1500 or so and up, then I maintain my previous argument. For this still relatively small outlay, you could buy a good pair of say AE Aelite 3s. Kef IQ7s can be had for £400 ($700), the IQ9s are about double. If this is still beyond the budget I'd advise buying used ones. I've heard other good consumer manufacturers in this price range but I'm most familiar with AE and Kef.

These speakers are not going to give you as much accuarcy in the mids as near-fields but you will get better sound overall, which conform more closely to producers' and masterers' intentions. When we get to the high end of the market I don't have very much experience with consumer products but we would be looking at full range systems rather than near-fields anyway.

Careful, quite a lot of studio equipment is sold on name too. The budget end of the pro-market is very similar to the consumer market. There are fashions and reputations just the same. The old Yamaha NS10s are a classic example of this. Most commercial studios around the world had NS10s in the 80s and 90s, even though everyone agreed they were utter rubbish!

By the way Warpdriver, one of my ex-students in now an engineer at Abbey Road, would it help if I got him to send you an email?! tsk

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lock - At $400 for amps and speakers, there may be some small benefit to using active near-fields but you're going to get much better quality at that price point from cans or even IEMs and decently encoded MP3s.

For that remark you get a failing grade.

Skirting the question again. The issue is not: should I buy headphones or speakers? The question was: what kind of speakers should I buy? Why did you bother posting about the floorstanding IQ7/IQ9? (your pricing is off, the IQ7 is $1000 a pair USD). They are clearly not to be used on a desktop or station like studio monitors are used. Floorstanders are not interchangeable with studio monitors for a lot of people.

Quote:

By the way Warpdriver, one of my ex-students in now an engineer at Abbey Road, would it help if I got him to send you an email?! tsk

Sure. Maybe he'd actually offer useful real world information.

Let's use a real world comparison then.

Let's say I have $800 to spend. I want to buy the KEF IQ (based on your recommendation) series for my desktop computer system. I'm also considering studio monitors up to that price range.

The IQ3 is currently going for $500 USD (vanns.com, a popular reputable US dealer). I can add a svelte Cambridge Audio 40W integrated amp for about $300. Total $800 and it looks nice.

Or I can pick up a set of Mackie MR8 for $500 USD (current street price).

Please explain to me, WHY should I spend $300 *MORE* to get the IQ3 setup over the Mackies? You said we shouldn't consider studio monitors and just buy something from KEF. Why would I do that in this case?

BTW I have heard the IQ and the Mackies. So please explain to me how my ears are fooling me that the Mackies are better sounding and also more enjoyable with music (I will list the music that I used if that matters).

 

[gregorio]

Warpdriver - The IQ7s are a lot cheaper over here at £379 UKP ($750 USD) a pair, whereas the Mackies are over $100 USD more (£450).

The original thread dealt with studio monitors for home use. That's what I'm talking about. Monitors in general vs speakers in general. Not just very low budget speakers. Dealing specifically with near-fields though, most near-fields are used on the meter bridge of a console or on a desk housing a DAW. The last place you should put a near-field or any monitor is on a console or a desk!! So you explain to me the intrinsic difference between near-fields on a stand and floor standing speakers.

I'm not going to keep repeating myself so if: You want to use studio monitors, OK. You want to ignore what near-fields are designed for, OK. You want to hear a distorted frequency response, OK. Your choice, if you're happy and enjoying your music go for it.

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Warpdriver - The IQ7s are a lot cheaper over here at £379 UKP ($750 USD) a pair, whereas the Mackies are over $100 USD more (£450). The original thread dealt with studio monitors for home use. That's what I'm talking about. Monitors in general vs speakers in general. Not just very low budget speakers. Dealing specifically with near-fields though, most near-fields are used on the meter bridge of a console or on a desk housing a DAW. The last place you should put a near-field or any monitor is on a console or a desk!! So you explain to me the intrinsic difference between near-fields on a stand and floor standing speakers. I'm not going to keep repeating myself so if: You want to use studio monitors, OK. You want to ignore what near-fields are designed for, OK. You want to hear a distorted frequency response, OK. Your choice, if you're happy and enjoying your music go for it.

I asked you a simple question and you clearly skirted the question again which again demonstrates the laughable uselessness of your posts.

Would you recommend the IQ3 or Mackie in my situation? Which would I find more accurate for a computer listening station (provided I follow basic placement guidelines like elevating the speaker off the surface, boundaries, toe in etc). For the Mackie, I would use the trim controls to tailor the FR to be as flat as possible as I have a calibrated mic and RTA software to analyze the FR. This is exactly a typical situation, a studio monitor used for a desktop listening situation, and many of the people here are facing the same problem or need.

I have floorstanding passive speakers in one of my own systems because that is what I determined to provide the best performance for the money for that particular room. But in another room for a computer setup I found that studio monitors delivered more accurate performance for my money. See? I took into account the application and room restrictions and found the best solution. That's the whole reason your posts have been useless, your "one solution fits all" and generalizations aren't doing anybody a favour. If I bought a KEF IQ7, I would have easily had very poor performance for that application.

Any true professional that would consult and help a customer set up a room for speakers would clearly look at the room layout *first* and then make a recommendation based on that. I know AV consultants that have recommended studio monitors for a particular client because it worked best for his setup (even though they install mainly consumer speakers). Yet you throw out a generic recommendation like "buy a KEF, that will convey the producers best intent". Are you that dumb? I question whether you actually know what you are doing then.

Please shovel your theories and idealisms somewhere else and learn how to give advice that actually is applicable. All that expertise is wasted if you don't know how to apply it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif . You want to hear a distorted frequency response, OK.

Again, speaking in absolutes and generalities. No I don't want to hear a distored frequency response, but thanks to some deliberate work and effort, I was able to set up a rig that sounds good and is NOT distorted significantly in FR, and I *am* using studio monitors. It sounds great, and I dare anybody to come listen to it and say it's not an accurate sounding system. So please get off your high horse and stop assuming that we are morons.

If you were a consultant for hire, I'd fire you right away because you have never demonstrated that you would ever take into the account the needs of the client. You speak in absolutes and you obviously don't have the knowledge to deal with the grey areas such as budget requirements, space requirements, how experienced the user is at setting up a system, etc. Being on a high horse separates one from reality. Maybe you need to step down for a while and actually interact with real people and their needs.

 

[Lock]

I think we should give up warpdriver. This guy is not going to concede there are home applications where studio montors can perform as well, or in my opinion better than consumer speakers. He is trapped in his premise that monitors are inherently incapable of reproducing the sound the producer intended for the end listener.......

On a seperate note, you mentioned you have some kit to measure the Frequency response for you home set up. Is this software? or a piece of harware? I'd be interested in doing exactly this. My monitors do go pretty low frequency wise but I'm debating getting a sub so I'd like to get some data on what flexibility I will need with regards to an active crossover.

cheers

 

[warpdriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lock /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think we should give up warpdriver. This guy is not going to concede there are home applications where studio montors can perform as well, or in my opinion better than consumer speakers. He is trapped in his premise that monitors are inherently incapable of reproducing the sound the producer intended for the end listener....... On a seperate note, you mentioned you have some kit to measure the Frequency response for you home set up. Is this software? or a piece of harware? I'd be interested in doing exactly this. My monitors do go pretty low frequency wise but I'm debating getting a sub so I'd like to get some data on what flexibility I will need with regards to an active crossover. cheers

I think I'm done here replying to that guy.

There are lots of solutions to do your own analysis. You'll need hardware (a mic, or a calibrated sound meter), a proper soundcard (might need a external preamp/audio interface box to power the mic if you are using a balanced mic), and software. I use TrueRTA and/or REW
Go over to the home theater forums such as the "Subwoofer Equalization | Calibration" area in hometheatershack.com and look at the forums for REW (and its FAQ), and recommended mics/meters. I also use a Velodyne SMS-1 for active parametric equalization of my sub in my main system

 

[Lock]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think I'm done here replying to that guy. There are lots of solutions to do your own analysis. You'll need hardware (a mic, or a calibrated sound meter), a proper soundcard (might need a external preamp/audio interface box to power the mic if you are using a balanced mic), and software. I use TrueRTA and/or REW Go over to the home theater forums such as the "Subwoofer Equalization | Calibration" area in hometheatershack.com and look at the forums for REW (and its FAQ), and recommended mics/meters. I also use a Velodyne SMS-1 for active parametric equalization of my sub in my main system

Cheers for the tip, I will check those out. As an aside, I have Logic Pro 8 on my Mac. Not exactly an advance user, I feel this must have a tool to analyse FR. Are you familiar with this software? Incidently I will need to get an external Mic before I can check this anyway....

 

[warpdriver]

oh, Apple hardware. I don't know anything about what software one would use there.

 

[Lock]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver /img/forum/go_quote.gif oh, Apple hardware. I don't know anything about what software one would use there.

No worries, I have a PC too so will check out your recommendations.

cheers

 

[PITTM]

Do the Usher S-520s count as studio monitors? I bought these after 6 months or so of research and they are the best speakers I have heard in the price range. I think I paid $350 or so?

edit: sorry I didn't buy giant floorstanding kef's for my small bedroom where I listen to all my music.

 

[mercbuggy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpdriver /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are you that dumb? I question whether you actually know what you are doing then. Please shovel your theories and idealisms somewhere else and learn how to give advice that actually is applicable. All that expertise is wasted if you don't know how to apply it.

Another recent thread becomes needlessly confrontational

The original thread was 'anybody else using.....', the perspective of 'no I do not and this is why' is perfectly acceptable. There are/were valid points on both sides of the discussion.

 

[mercbuggy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think my Harbeth M30 qualifies as studio monitor; I think BBC use those for monitoring their classical music broadcasts.

Almost missed this post, very musical speakers

. Maybe one day if my beloved Epos ES11's give up the ghost.

 

[kuks]

I have just bought Yamaha HS50m and cant wait to hear it (yup could only afford one right now

). Ive heard they are great.

 

[TheAnomaly]

heck yes studio monitors!



yes that is a logic textbook behind it. always need that one close at hand.

 

[ninjapixie]

My Genelecs are great for music listening. One of the complaints studio folks had on them was their hifi sound, but this makes them great just for listening pleasure.

When it comes to detail and stereo image, they outclass my poor HD580s and totally piss on my old Samson Resolv studio monitors.

Of the monitors I auditioned briefly in the stores:

JBL (forgot the model)- Great sound, slightly warm. Unfortunately out of my budget.
Tannoy 5A- Nice detail but very bright. Thin sounding and lacked bass.
Samson Rubicon 5a- Surprisingly very good. Very tempted by the low price. My experience with their Resolv series kinda swayed me off.
M-Audio BX8- Poor compared to the Samson and Tannoy in the same price range. Compared to the Genelecs they were a joke. Boomy bass and blurry midrange.
Edirol MA15d- Slightly better then the Logitech speakers I used to have.
AudioEngine A5 (at a hifi store through an ipod)- Unfair comparison, but they were the worst of all the monitors/speakers I auditioned before settling with the Genelecs.