[Music Alchemist]

Studio engineers don't use loudspeakers, they use near fields (studio monitors) to reduce the room and distance effect.

If someone wishes to make headphones sound like speakers, near fields that studio engineers use is a much better reference.

Loudspeakers are simply not accurate even if they meassure neutral.

 
I kind of want the Focal Alpha 50 active near field studio monitors...but won't be able to use speakers at all until I have my own place, with no roommates.

 

[lltfdaniel]

Well hello then i also took the plunge into buying the focal 50s.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Well hello then i also took the plunge into buying the focal 50s.

 
Oh, that's cool. How do you like them? (Assuming you already have them.)

 

[lltfdaniel]

Well when i get them because i haven't received them yet.
 
So i sent them who deliver a email message.
 
Got these for £175 for the pair and because the model '50' is better for faster bass other parts for them are already here kettle lead and 1 3.5mm to rca jack because i will use the ehp-02d amp dac with lineout for the speakers.
 
That's it really just expecting the same great focal sound as i have been listening to their classic line up of the hp world.

 

[jDecker]

Studio engineers don't use loudspeakers, they use near fields (studio monitors) to reduce the room and distance effect.

If someone wishes to make headphones sound like speakers, near fields that studio engineers use is a much better reference.

Loudspeakers are simply not accurate even if they meassure neutral.

This makes absolutely no sense. How exactly are studio monitors not loudspeakers? And no, not everyone uses near fields- many mastering engineers use mid-fields, and a lot of high end studios even have huge hifi-style listening rooms for a final check of the track. Near-fields are primarily used simply because mid-fields are wildly impractical from a financial standpoint as they require a very large studio with a ton of room treatment, not because they are "less accurate" than mid-fields.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  This makes absolutely no sense. How exactly are studio monitors not loudspeakers? And no, not everyone uses near fields- many mastering engineers use mid-fields, and a lot of high end studios even have huge hifi-style listening rooms for a final check of the track. Near-fields are primarily used simply because mid-fields are wildly impractical from a financial standpoint as they require a very large studio with a ton of room treatment, not because they are "less accurate" than mid-fields.

 
Perhaps he was referring to casual loudspeaker use in a room that was not treated. I dunno. But any good speaker system can have a balanced frequency response, with the proper adjustments.

 

[ubs28]

   
Perhaps he was referring to casual loudspeaker use in a room that was not treated. I dunno. But any good speaker system can have a balanced frequency response, with the proper adjustments.

I was talking about high-end reference speakers (big towers with many drivers) which are aimed at filling the sound of a big room with a big soundstage. While they sounded incredibly realistic as if the performer was live in the room with us, it was exactly that problem that I hear the room.
 
So in my opinion, in the same room (treated or not), near fields are more accurate than loudspeakers. 

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I was talking about high-end reference speakers (big towers with many drivers) which are aimed at filling the sound of a big room with a big soundstage. While they sounded incredibly realistic as if the performer was live in the room with us, it was exactly that problem that I hear the room.
 
So in my opinion, in the same room (treated or not), near fields are more accurate than loudspeakers. 

 
You have to do very intricate room treatments for each speaker system to get it to sound accurate. I'm guessing what you heard was not in a properly treated room.

 

[ubs28]

   
You have to do very intricate room treatments for each speaker system to get it to sound accurate. I'm guessing what you heard was not in a properly treated room.

The room was tweaked to make the loudspeakers sound their best. Not as good as a recording studio because it's a living room in the end. And the recording studio's I have been in use near fields so no chance to hear the big towers in those types of rooms. 

 

[Music Alchemist]

  The room was tweaked to make the loudspeakers sound their best. Not as good as a recording studio because it's a living room in the end. And the recording studio's I have been in use near fields so no chance to hear the big towers in those types of rooms. 

 
Well, that's good news for me, since near fields are the only ones I plan on buying anytime soon.
 
But are you sure it was treated to have a true neutral response? Just sounding good isn't enough. You have to take measurements. It's tricky.

 

[Music Alchemist]

By the way, this relates to accuracy and is some of the best software I have found:
 
http://sonarworks.com/headphones/overview/
 
Makes my Sony MDR-7506 sound worlds better. (Without the calibration activated, it sounds like someone turned the treble all the way up!)

 

[ubs28]

   
Well, that's good news for me, since near fields are the only ones I plan on buying anytime soon.
 
But are you sure it was treated to have a true neutral response? Just sounding good isn't enough. You have to take measurements. It's tricky.

It sounded exactly as if someone was singing or playing the piano in the room with us, so it was very neutral most likely. I didn't do the tweaking so I can't be sure ofcourse.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  It sounded exactly as if someone was singing or playing the piano in the room with us, so it was very neutral most likely. I didn't do the tweaking so I can't be sure ofcourse.

 
That's cool. So what improvements did the near field monitors give, in addition to sounding "exactly as if someone was singing or playing the piano in the room with us"?

 

[alpha80]

I owned two Focal Spirit Professionals, among many others. (It has similar measurements to the PSB and NAD.) I found it to be far too dark. Sounded noticeably darker than it should to be accurate to my ears, which I have explained before in this thread. The FSP and LCD-2 are too dark to even meet the Harman curve, which is darker than the flat speaker curve. Many darkness lovers in this thread! :tongue_smile:

thank you, I'd not heard the FSP or NAD viso, but assumed I'd find them too dark/dim, since Tyll really liked em. Now a headfi'er whose opinion I know and trust has confined this suspicion! Thank you.

And yeah, 7506's with stock pads, are too harsh and bright. I much prefer stock V6's, or the smoother, V-6's with DT250 pads.

 

[JaZZ]

1.  Sennheiser HE 90 and HE 60 (from memory; impossible to rank among each other)
2.  my own (Stax based) electrostats and my modified HD 800 (all optimally equalized)
3.  Shure SE846 (with empty filter tubes) and Sennheiser IE 800 (both equalized, particularly the IE 800)
4.  (...no other passably accurate headphones come to mind, but I have virtually no experience with the current favorites, like Audeze and HiFiMan.)
 
From the transient response alone the two IEMs may even be the best, but they lack the realism of circumaural open headphones.