You can not mixe what you don't heard. A lot of Myths and legends about the ns10.Really? How many great sounding major label releases were mixed on Nasty 10s (NS-10s)? Probably more than any other speaker.
You can not mixe what you don't heard. A lot of Myths and legends about the ns10.Really? How many great sounding major label releases were mixed on Nasty 10s (NS-10s)? Probably more than any other speaker.
And a lot of truth. Why don't you tell Bob Clearmountain you can't mix on NS10s.You can not mixe what you don't heard. A lot of Myths and legends about the ns10.
No, the 8351A was available from 2015 to 2018 (looks nearly identical to the 8351B and also GLM capable) before being replaced by the newer 8351B (tweeter size got larger, with accompanying crossover/amplifier adjustments to match). These are the 8351A measurements from Genelec which for all intents and purposes look as good as the 8351B. People are getting rid of these to upgrade to the 8351B, but I'm wondering if that's necessary - may be better to just add a Genelec subwoofer.Did you mean 8361A and 8351B?
I'm wondering if this is survivorship bias at work? If we could go back in time and replace all those NS10 monitors with plane jane ATC speakers, would it have made those major label releases any less successful? How much of the success is simply that songs like Born in the USA and Start Me Up are so iconic that the monitors used are simply irrelevant to the success of the studio/song/producer/engineer. A great engineer with great speakers mixing a sucky song will blame his speakers? No, he blames the sucky artist.Really? How many great sounding major label releases were mixed on Nasty 10s (NS-10s)? Probably more than any other speaker.
Does it only use a pair of speakers?And a lot of truth. Why don't you tell Bob Clearmountain you can't mix on NS10s.
I almost bought a pair for a good price but in the long run they're no longer produced and I don't know how many years from now spare parts will be available so I let it goNo, the 8351A was available from 2015 to 2018 (looks nearly identical to the 8351B and also GLM capable) before being replaced by the newer 8351B (tweeter size got larger, with accompanying crossover/amplifier adjustments to match). These are the 8351A measurements from Genelec which for all intents and purposes look as good as the 8351B. People are getting rid of these to upgrade to the 8351B, but I'm wondering if that's necessary - may be better to just add a Genelec subwoofer.
View attachment 164791
You seem to have forgotten the great sounding part. Bob would bring his own NS10s to the studio if he had to. The "consensus" seems to be that they showed flaws in the mix that other speakers (everything sounds good on ) didn't. Or "if you can make your mix sound good on NS10s it will sound good on any speaker ".I'm wondering if this is survivorship bias at work? If we could go back in time and replace all those NS10 monitors with plane jane ATC speakers, would it have made those major label releases any less successful? How much of the success is simply that songs like Born in the USA and Start Me Up are so iconic that the monitors used are simply irrelevant to the success of the studio/song/producer/engineer. A great engineer with great speakers mixing a sucky song will blame his speakers? No, he blames the sucky artist.
And it's not even the "sum of the parts" in this case - it's mostly the producer and artist working together on the song and then working with the mixer/master team and there's little they can do to ruin it with "bad" speakers or elevate it with "good" speakers. Sure you miss the high hat here, or the sibilance there, etc., but the essence of the song is unchanged.
PS. The best analogy I can think of is the kung fu master: whether it's a pencil, a knife or his hands, he's deadly regardless of the tools at his disposal. Cheap studios trying to cut corners bought whatever speakers were on sale in volume (like a rental fleet of Ford Mondeos) because they knew their talented mixing team can deal with it.
You don't mix with an NS-10, you monitor your mix on them. I am a film mixing guy now, but when I did do two-channel mixes, the NS-10 was a "check" speaker, not a mixing speaker.Really? How many great sounding major label releases were mixed on Nasty 10s (NS-10s)? Probably more than any other speaker.
Backed. I don't know when this idea got in people's heads that mixes are done exclusively on those, but absolutely not. Those things hurt to listen to for any extended period of time.You don't mix with an NS-10, you monitor your mix on them. I am a film mixing guy now, but when I did do two-channel mixes, the NS-10 was a "check" speaker, not a mixing speaker.
exactly- the whole point was that they did a good job of approximating a crappy system. check your mix on those and if it still sounds tolerable it'll sound ok on anything.Backed. I don't know when this idea got in people's heads that mixes are done exclusively on those, but absolutely not. Those things hurt to listen to for any extended period of time.
Thanks for your opinion .I prefer Bob Clearmountains or Chris Lord-alges. Many people don't mix on NS10 but a lot of the top pros do.You don't mix with an NS-10, you monitor your mix on them. I am a film mixing guy now, but when I did do two-channel mixes, the NS-10 was a "check" speaker, not a mixing speaker.
The whole philosophy behind the ATC is it's mid range dome - remember, humans hear mostly in the mid range that's likely why they are skewed on a graph but our ears don't hear like a measurement graph. Also, the dome design disperses very wide so there is no 'phasing' as you move your head around like on traditional cone mid range drivers, so everyone in the room is hearing the same thing. So if having a microscope in the most important range of human hearing is important to you - like it is to many pros - then ATC is a fine choice.Short answer: they measure poorly, which makes them unsuitable for use as monitors (a monitor needs to give you the truth).
kh420 mid range driver > atc driverI know of no cone midrange with distortion this low and dynamics on this level, or one with response this smooth.
How much of the success is simply that songs like Born in the USA and Start Me Up are so iconic that the monitors used are simply irrelevant to the success of the studio/song/producer/engineer. A great engineer with great speakers mixing a sucky song will blame his speakers? No, he blames the sucky artist. - AGREE 100%, if it's a great song with a great recording you can mix it on almost anything.I'm wondering if this is survivorship bias at work? If we could go back in time and replace all those NS10 monitors with plane jane ATC speakers, would it have made those major label releases any less successful? How much of the success is simply that songs like Born in the USA and Start Me Up are so iconic that the monitors used are simply irrelevant to the success of the studio/song/producer/engineer. A great engineer with great speakers mixing a sucky song will blame his speakers? No, he blames the sucky artist.
And it's not even the "sum of the parts" in this case - it's mostly the producer and artist working together on the song and then working with the mixer/master team and there's little they can do to ruin it with "bad" speakers or elevate it with "good" speakers. Sure you miss the high hat here, or the sibilance there, etc., but the essence of the song is unchanged.
PS. The best analogy I can think of is the kung fu master: whether it's a pencil, a knife or his hands, he's deadly regardless of the tools at his disposal. Cheap studios trying to cut corners bought whatever speakers were on sale in volume (like a rental fleet of Ford Mondeos) because they knew their talented mixing team can deal with it.
No, it really isn't. ATC's mid dome is far better behaved. Jeff Bagby indicates that throughout its useful range at 95ish dB distortion is at 0.1%. As far as I'm aware, no cone midrange short of Genelec's One series coaxial can match that kind of performance. In fact, some of the only other midranges to behave nearly as well are other domes, Neumann's included. http://studio-hifi.com/images/ATC75-150S_JeffBagby.pdfFun fact, but nowdays that super dome tweeter from ATC is more comparable in distortion vs the UNIQ from kef. Yes, that small coaxial.
The Neumann dome mid is an excellent driver, of that there's no doubt - but because it's a custom in-house design, unless somebody tears down a KH310 or KH420 and takes the dome out to measure it, we can't know its exact behavior.kh420 mid range driver > atc driver
The UNIQ from R series or Reference series are 3-way design like these ATCNo, it really isn't. ATC's mid dome is far better behaved. Jeff Bagby indicates that throughout its useful range at 95ish dB distortion is at 0.1%. As far as I'm aware, no cone midrange short of Genelec's One series coaxial can match that kind of performance. In fact, some of the only other midranges to behave nearly as well are other domes, Neumann's included. http://studio-hifi.com/images/ATC75-150S_JeffBagby.pdf
Compared to Amir's measurements of the LS50 Meta using that Uni-Q driver... Until the midwoofer crosses with the tweeter, at 96dB there's a lot of distortion going on there, up over 1%.
The Neumann dome mid is an excellent driver, of that there's no doubt - but because it's a custom in-house design, unless somebody tears down a KH310 or KH420 and takes the dome out to measure it, we can't know its exact behavior.
But as with many things, you buy the one that visually pulls at your heart strings, and I'm a sucker for the look of the ATC mid-dome. It's like everybody knows the Corvette is a world class performer in every which way, but people still pine for a Porsche 911 or Ferrari in their driveway.Here a comparable (same measurement lab) distortion comparison of the above posted R7 and a ATC SM 3 way which costs 3 times more:
View attachment 166210
(sources: http://studio-hifi.com/images/ATC_SCM50_aktiv-passiv-Stpl-4-2011.pdf and https://www.excelia-hifi.cz/kef/test/kef-r7-stereoplay_11_18.pdf )
Look both quite comparable, being both at a very good (= low) level in the mids.