[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAnomaly /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...or go for some decent ~$300-500 monitors now. anybody have recommendations for monitors in this price range? i like the DT880 sound signature, and the Event TR8s were mentioned earlier in this thread, but i'm afraid they'll be a bit too bottom heavy with that 8" woofer and 35 hz rated extension. i've also been looking at the 8" KRK rokit.

What's your impression of the DT880's sound signature (so we'll have a better idea of what style you prefer)?

I've heard most of the Rokit series including the RP-8, and they all had a huge amount of mid-range bloom, making them sound warm but muffled and inaccurate.

In that price range, I'd look at the Mackie MR5 ($300/pair) and MR8 ($500/pair). They were just introduced at the end of last year, and the reviews so far have been very positive. The Event TR8s are also good. You'll know which pair is for you when you hear them.

I'm going to head over to my local Guitar Center in the coming week to test some of their less expensive monitors, just to get a better idea of what's available on a low budget.

 

[Jon118]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Random Murderer /img/forum/go_quote.gif should i go with the dx4's or the av40's?

Honestly, I can't say. I've only heard the DX-4s, which I have and I'm quite happy with. They have a sound similar to the Etymotic signature, but with a little more bass. I think there are some AV-40 owners around who can describe them and help you decide. Remember these monitors won't be extremely bassy. If you want heavier bass you should stick with the Swan M10s or something of the like, but those are always recommended and in your price range.

 

[TheAnomaly]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif What's your impression of the DT880's sound signature (so we'll have a better idea of what style you prefer)?

well i like the detailed presence they have. they really make technical music like electronica and fast metal jump out at you, in a good way! violin and strings are especially joyful. i heard my city's symphony a few weeks ago, was seated in the orchestra seats (maybe 12 rows from the stage), and thought to myself, where's the bite! this sounds better in front of my computer!

they are also fairly revealing, to me, when it comes to hearing a recording "for all its worth", you might say. they have good instrument separation i think, though sometimes the spatiality seems a bit one-dimensional to me. the only other fault i have is that the bass is not very powerful. it is very articulated, but i find myself listening to a decent amount of electronica, rap, and rock these days, and i feel the DT880s could use a little help in the bass extension/impact department.

Quote:

I've heard most of the Rokit series including the RP-8, and they all had a huge amount of mid-range bloom, making them sound warm but muffled and inaccurate.

that doesn't sound attractive. KRK off the list!

Quote:

In that price range, I'd look at the Mackie MR5 ($300/pair) and MR8 ($500/pair). They were just introduced at the end of last year, and the reviews so far have been very positive. The Event TR8s are also good. You'll know which pair is for you when you hear them. I'm going to head over to my local Guitar Center in the coming week to test some of their less expensive monitors, just to get a better idea of what's available on a low budget.

hmm, i will look into those more thanks. i haven't heard of them before the last few pages of this thread.

 

[Random Murderer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon118 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Honestly, I can't say. I've only heard the DX-4s, which I have and I'm quite happy with. They have a sound similar to the Etymotic signature, but with a little more bass. I think there are some AV-40 owners around who can describe them and help you decide. Remember these monitors won't be extremely bassy. If you want heavier bass you should stick with the Swan M10s or something of the like, but those are always recommended and in your price range.

bass-wise, it's fine. i listen to techno/trance/electronica and mix my own as well. i also listen to a very little bit of rap(mc chris only), but mainly rock. since i primarily listen to rock and game, a set of bright monitors won't really bother me. besides, i can always just use an equalizer and turn up the bass a bit if i choose.
i've been looking at getting some hd580's, but having a 300Ω impedance means i'll need an amp as well, correct?

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Random Murderer /img/forum/go_quote.gif besides, i can always just use an equalizer and turn up the bass a bit if i choose.

Many of these smaller low-powered monitors don't have the necessary frequency extension to play low. If you listen to rock and techno, you may find yourself craving a subwoofer. Have you considered something like the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1, or a similar 2.1 set? These are right in your price range, and may be a better fit for your preferences.

 

[Random Murderer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif Many of these smaller low-powered monitors don't have the necessary frequency extension to play low. If you listen to rock and techno, you may find yourself craving a subwoofer. Have you considered something like the Klipsch ProMedia 2.1, or a similar 2.1 set? These are right in your price range, and may be a better fit for your preferences.

well, i'm on a 2.1 setup right now, altec lansing acs41 with the optional subwoofer. i got the set for free, and it sounds decent, but is by no means studio quality. it's old, so you may not be able to dig up much on the setup, but each satellite is 20w, and the sub is 40w(i think). what sucks is that there's no crossover in the speakers, just in the sub, so the satellites try to play all frequencies, including the low ones that are supposed to only be played by the subwoofer.

 

[tinseljim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Random Murderer /img/forum/go_quote.gif well, i'm on a 2.1 setup right now, altec lansing acs41 with the optional subwoofer. i got the set for free, and it sounds decent, but is by no means studio quality. it's old, so you may not be able to dig up much on the setup, but each satellite is 20w, and the sub is 40w(i think). what sucks is that there's no crossover in the speakers, just in the sub, so the satellites try to play all frequencies, including the low ones that are supposed to only be played by the subwoofer.

as far as 2.1 goes I'm really enjoying the aego 5 (but used as 2.1 most of the time). it killed my logitech z-5400s by a long way and a similar price on the bay.

I've been wanting a pair of hr824s for about six years now, and fairly close to getting some. Does anyone have any opinions on how it would sound with the Zero Dac (with OPA627s) used as a preamp (with MacBook and Apple Lossless of course)?

Thanks!

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinseljim /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've been wanting a pair of hr824s for about six years now, and fairly close to getting some. Does anyone have any opinions on how it would sound with the Zero Dac (with OPA627s) used as a preamp (with MacBook and Apple Lossless of course)?

If you like the sound of both the HR824s and the DAC, it should be a great match.

Some people say that the original USA-made HR824s are the best... I've briefly heard the originals, the Chinese-made mk1, and the Chinese-made mk2, and if I were buying now, I'd pick the mk2s. The enclosures are new and the components are still sourced from the original OEMs (Vifa Italian woofers, not sure who makes the tweeter).

 

[gregorio]

I'm a little confused about why some of you want studio monitors rather than speakers. If you're a producer who is used to high quality studio monitors, cheap near-fields can be a useful tool provided the producer is able to compensate for the near-field's weaknesses relative to quality monitors. If you're a starting producer with a limited budget then get near-fields for working on separation and positioning and decent cans for working on the frequency spectrum. If you're a consumer then near-fields are not going to be satisfactory. Put it this way, a top class pair of studio monitors is going to cost around $100,000. In comparison, how good do you think $500 monitors are going to sound? You would be far better off with $500 consumer speakers. You may not get quite the clarity or separation but you will get a more listenable frequency response and a better audio experience overall.

 

[vulc4n]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm a little confused about why some of you want studio monitors rather than speakers. If you're a producer who is used to high quality studio monitors, cheap near-fields can be a useful tool provided the producer is able to compensate for the near-field's weaknesses relative to quality monitors. If you're a starting producer with a limited budget then get near-fields for working on separation and positioning and decent cans for working on the frequency spectrum. If you're a consumer then near-fields are not going to be satisfactory. Put it this way, a top class pair of studio monitors is going to cost around $100,000. In comparison, how good do you think $500 monitors are going to sound? You would be far better off with $500 consumer speakers. You may not get quite the clarity or separation but you will get a more listenable frequency response and a better audio experience overall.

I don't think you've ever used a decent pair of nearfield monitors.

Quite honestly, my KRK ST6's are the best speakers I've ever had, and were an absolutely incredible value at 100.00 each.

I really don't see how you could go wrong with monitors... They are typically more neutral and accurate and typically have a very solid build quality. If on top of that ,they sound great for the money, why not use them?

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Put it this way, a top class pair of studio monitors is going to cost around $100,000.

Can you name some $100,000 studio monitors, and studios that actually use them? For that price, I'd assume you're mastering in some kind of cavern...

 

[warpdriver]

Studio monitors are great for several reasons over passive consumer speakers

1. A studio monitor is made to be a tool, and unlike consumer speakers, they don't tend to push snake-oil features, or "well finished" cabinets. People are buying a tool deigned with a specific accuracy goal. People (professionals) tend don't really overpay for tools, whereas there are lots of high priced consumer speakers that aren't very accurate and really are marketing driven.
2. Most studio monitors are bi-amped, tri-amped which can have sonic/efficiency benefits to using a passive crossover.
3. Because the amp, drivers, enclosure are a complete closed system, you can introduce features like distortion limiters to keep the speaker behaving properly and from being overdriven. The designers just have more strict control of what goes in, what comes out.
4. Studio monitors are designed to be used nearfield and often have very good tweeter dispersion. They often have trims to tailor the response for best results in any placement

The only downside is that you can't use your favorite amp with most studio monitors (except if there is a passive version).

I don't think there is really any downside to using studio monitors exept for the looks factor for music listening. Not all studio monitors are made alike, they often different amongst each other as much as consumer speakers, so it's not really any easier to choose among them.

 

[vulc4n]

Well said warpdriver.

 

[mercbuggy]

Totally agree, Warpdriver.

They are a great tool for a desk based rig, for PC Audio/Gaming Console/Music Production et al, especially as they often have more than one input and many have full magnetic shielding.

 

[gregorio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vulc4n /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't think you've ever used a decent pair of nearfield monitors.

Depending on what you mean by decent, I would agree with you. I've worked professionally with various KRKs, Genelec, Alesis, ATC, Yamaha, PMC, Blue Sky and quite a number of other near-fields over the years. None of them are particularly good and some are truely awful, although they can all be usable tools provided you have a good mental image of how you have to compensate for their weaknesses while mixing.

I currently own a set of big Genelecs but again, I know how I have to compensate relative to top class monitors because even these ($4,000 per monitor) Genelecs still have weaknesses. It's not until you get to the high end professional JBL and custom monitors in the right environment that you no longer have to compensate.

I've never heard near-fields produce any sort of balanced quality across the frequency spectrum. The are normally very mid and top heavy, with good separation and placement. It's that unusable frequency response that's the real killer.