Avantone CLA-10 (Yamaha NS-10M Clone) Review

[lowkeyoperations]

I am sure I can learn a *ton* by doing this but none of it would be about the topic at hand: proper sound production/

The magnitude of these differences suggests

"The most likely culprits

There are suggestions and likely culprits according to Toole.
They a sound hypotheses.

Now let’s move to the stage of testing the hypothesis.

Then once the studies have actually been done we can know the actual, not likely, cause.

 

[amirm]

SonarWorks marketing materials. Whether someone chooses to believe their specific claims is a personal matter, but there’s no doubt their product is widely used and is probably as close to a standard as we have, particularly among small studios and independents, which is where the large bulk of new music is being produced.

I need to properly test their auto EQ to see how well it works. The tidbits I have seen don't give me confidence. I would be relying on hand tuning for any serious studio work, not an automated system like that anyway. If that is the yardstick, then home theater people have been doing that for far longer than studios.

 

[amirm]

Then once the studies have actually been done we can know the actual, not likely, cause.

We have done studies to show how inconsistent your rooms are even when using pre-calibrated, neutral speakers like the Genelecs. Once again:

It is abundantly clear the the simple concept of room massively impacting the tonality and frequency response of the speaker is not understood or taken seriously. Now add to this a ton of other monitors you use with yet again varying response above transition and the mess becomes abundantly clear.

And it is not like the above is some obscure thing. Simplest concept in acoustics of a room tell you that you are going to have massive low frequency changes in the modal region. Sadly because this type of learning and education is not what you think you need to do, you get it wrong. To be sure, audiophiles also got it wrong but we are now at least 20 years into this level of enlightenment whereas the pro industry still in the dark ages.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

Sonarworks is quite similar to Dirac live. From purely subjective input I have seen, Dirac is better.

Dirac has more ability to be adjusted after the measurement stage than Sonarworks.

Trinnov is the “money is less of a concern” preferred option for bigger studios.

Trinnov comes with a multi-pronged mic, like a pitchfork. This is designed for the system to be able to correct phase issues as well as frequency issues.

Trinnov is in the order of $5000 with the mic.
Dirac and Sonar works are a few hundred dollars with a cheap umik.

 

[PeteL]

I need to properly test their auto EQ to see how well it works. The tidbits I have seen don't give me confidence. I would be relying on hand tuning for any serious studio work, not an automated system like that anyway. If that is the yardstick, then home theater people have been doing that for far longer than studios.

Do you have research on the fact that hand tuning is better? Again, trying to tell professionals how they should do their work.

You know that there is more calculations made with an algorithm like that than what could be done with a PEQ right? I would also assume that you also know that with a simple PEQ you will only be able to correct frequency response, no phase related problems right? You know that not only one measurment, but many, in a very structured sequence are necessary to feed the algorithms with enough data to do the corrections, right?

 

[amirm]

Then once the studies have actually been done we can know the actual, not likely, cause.

Nope. We are guaranteed to have this problem. You listen in one room+speaker and you tune things for that. We listen to another room with another speaker. Ergo, we hear different tonality than you. Now multiply that by all of you producing in different rooms and speakers, and problem becomes massive resulting in totally inconsistent mixes.

Your solution? Let's use a broken consumer speaker to solve it. Did you draw on science then? You didn't. You followed the crowd. And you ask for studies?

 

[lowkeyoperations]

We have done studies to show how inconsistent your rooms are even when using pre-calibrated, neutral speakers like the Genelecs. Once again:

It is abundantly clear the the simple concept of room massively impacting the tonality and frequency response of the speaker is not understood or taken seriously. Now add to this a ton of other monitors you use with yet again varying response above transition and the mess becomes abundantly clear.

And it is not like the above is some obscure thing. Simplest concept in acoustics of a room tell you that you are going to have massive low frequency changes in the modal region. Sadly because this type of learning and education is not what you think you need to do, you get it wrong. To be sure, audiophiles also got it wrong but we are now at least 20 years into this level of enlightenment whereas the pro industry still in the dark ages.

Great. We are using Genelec already so the problem has already been solved.

The problem of the room in pro audio is a lot more front of mind than for consumer hifi in my experience.

Hence Sonarworks, Trinnov, Dirac, Genelec room correction, Neumann room correction.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

Nope. We are guaranteed to have this problem. You listen in one room+speaker and you tune things for that. We listen to another room with another speaker. Ergo, we hear different tonality than you. Now multiply that by all of you producing in different rooms and speakers, and problem becomes massive resulting in totally inconsistent mixes.

Your solution? Let's use a broken consumer speaker to solve it. Did you draw on science then? You didn't. You followed the crowd. And you ask for studies?

You need to prove that your standard fixes the problems better than any current practice.

You have a hypothesis that it will.

But if you have no proof, just belief, then simply an industry will not get on board.

Prove your standard works first. Once proof of concept exists, it’s popularity will grow.

A new standard isn’t going to implemented unless there is proof that the outcome is better. Not just theory. Actual results.

 

[amirm]

Do you have research on the fact that hand tuning is better? Again, trying to tell professionals how they should do their work.

What work? You are saying "professionals" trusted an auto EQ system. They didn't know how to do that work themselves. But yes, there is research that shows AutoEQ can actually make things worse:

I see that Sonarworks makes 37 measurements. These averaged responses are good for optimizing for multiple seats but they waterdown the response for a single one. See the difference between #1 and #2 above that tested this idea.

 

[Zensō]

I need to properly test their auto EQ to see how well it works.

That would be great!

Sonarworks does allow for some hand tuning after the fact, but not to the level of an EQ plugin like Pro-Q 3 or EQuilibrium. I've checked my Sonarworks results using REW and I'm satisfied for both mixing/mastering and casual listening on my little desktop workstation. In my case, I could possibly make some more detailed corrections using Pro-Q but I don't believe they would amount to a significant difference, either to the quality of my productions or the enjoyment of my listening.

I believe the ease of use and ubiquity of Sonarworks has been a boon for little guys like myself. It allows me to collaborate with other independent producers who are also using Sonarworks, with some assurance that they're not going to totally screw up the stems I send to them, while providing some level of consistency between my monitors/headphones and their setup. Of course, pro studios are likely to utilize more sophisticated solutions.

All that said, you might be surprised at the number of top tier engineers who are doing more and more work on laptops with headphones. Part of this is a result of the need to be mobile and have the ability to work while on the road, but also because so much music is now being consumed on headphones.

 

[PeteL]

What work? You are saying "professionals" trusted an auto EQ system. They didn't know how to do that work themselves. But yes, there is research that shows AutoEQ can actually make things worse:

I see that Sonarworks makes 37 measurements. These averaged responses are good for optimizing for multiple seats but they waterdown the response for a single one. See the difference between #1 and #2 above that tested this idea.

I have no Idea waht the X Axis is or what this "Research" is about. Please elaborate. Believe me They know how to use EQ and have been using them since the begining.
Now why would you want to Optimize for one single sweet spot? If they where to do this it's exactly the type of Anti Science stuff that you go against. It would sound great for them sitting right in between the speakers, possibly the highest "preference score" you can get but other peoples in the real world, sitting at various distances and off Axis would lose the benefit of their mixing. The core subject of this discussion was about "translating" to the real world.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

To be sure, audiophiles also got it wrong but we are now at least 20 years into this level of enlightenment whereas the pro industry still in the dark ages.

You could benefit by sitting in on some mixing sessions.

Just in this thread you learnt of Sonarworks and Tone Balance Control.

You seem to have no idea what is happening in the pro industry.

You just want to shout at it with no knowledge or experience of it.

And you think that’s conducive to encouraging an industry to adopt your new standard?

 

[amirm]

You need to prove that your standard fixes the problems better than any current practice.

There is no "current practice." It is wild west. You can't even be bothered to measure the room you are in and compare it to other and try to reason how you are getting consistent work done in that situation.

 

[amirm]

I have no Idea waht the X Axis is or what this "Research" is about. Please elaborate.

The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products,
Sean E. Olive, John Jackson, Allan Devantier, David Hunt, and Sean M. Hess, Harman International R&D Presentation [and paper with same name]

From the abstract:
"A panel of eight trained listeners gave comparative ratings for five different room correction products based on
overall preference and spectral balance. The room corrections were applied to a single loudspeaker/subwoofer in a
typical semi-reflective listening room, and evaluated using three different music programs. The same
loudspeaker/subwoofer without correction was included as a hidden anchor. The results found significant
differences in sound quality among the room correction products based on listeners’ preferences and spectral
balance ratings. These differences can be largely explained by examining the steady state, spatially averaged
frequency response measurements of the room corrections measured at the listening location."

I already quoted material from it in response to you. I also have a brief digest of it here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/target-room-response-and-cinema-x-curve.10/

 

[lowkeyoperations]

There is no "current practice." It is wild west. You can't even be bothered to measure the room you are in and compare it to other and try to reason how you are getting consistent work done in that situation.

But how would you know what current practice is?

When is the last time you went to a mixing session? Like I said before. You need to get yourself along to a few mixing sessions so you have a bit of an understanding of what you’re talking about beyond theory.

This Wild West you talk of exists only in your mind.

 

[amirm]

Just in this thread you learnt of Sonarworks and Tone Balance Control.

I have known about Sonarworks for quite sometime. I am surprised of the claim of widespread usage by pros. Here is an example of where we discussed Sonarworks: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...reference-4-studio-edition.18607/#post-608652

It doesn't make a good showing there as I stated. But I still like to test it in detail.

Balance control I did not about but it is not a solution to the problem we are discussing. It was just neat to see something like that.

 

[amirm]

This Wild West you talk of exists only in your mind.

Not my mind. Minds of many including published reports from our top luminaries.

But sure, go ahead and give us the frequency response of 5 major studios you know about.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

I suggest you visit them yourself.
That way you can experience some mixing sessions while you get the information you require.

 

[PeteL]

The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products,
Sean E. Olive, John Jackson, Allan Devantier, David Hunt, and Sean M. Hess, Harman International R&D Presentation [and paper with same name]

From the abstract:
"A panel of eight trained listeners gave comparative ratings for five different room correction products based on
overall preference and spectral balance. The room corrections were applied to a single loudspeaker/subwoofer in a
typical semi-reflective listening room, and evaluated using three different music programs. The same
loudspeaker/subwoofer without correction was included as a hidden anchor. The results found significant
differences in sound quality among the room correction products based on listeners’ preferences and spectral
balance ratings. These differences can be largely explained by examining the steady state, spatially averaged
frequency response measurements of the room corrections measured at the listening location."

I already quoted material from it in response to you. I also have a brief digest of it here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/target-room-response-and-cinema-x-curve.10/

Thanks. So some perform less good than others. Good to know.

But I am stoke now. That those are your words or Mr Olive?

let your ears be the guide. Play some content and if the bass is too strong, it likely is. Reduce the slope some. Don't let anyone shame you into sticking with some reference as is commonly done in online forums. What sounds good is the right answer.

 

[amirm]

Great. We are using Genelec already so the problem has already been solved.

No. I just explained why not and you are still confused? A speaker like Genelec is necessary condition but not sufficient. Below transition frequencies, the room dominates, not the speaker. So there, you must deploy acoustic strategies including EQ to get responses that "translate" from room to room including ours.