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

[sigbergaudio]

So the main reason for them to use the NS-10’s in the first place where that they were highly revealing for faults in the mix, which in turn speeded up the work, not the opposite as you have decided to presume.

This should then also imply that the largest studio monitors manufacturers (Genelec etc) are sort of morons, since they don't make monitors with a similar midrange emphasis? Surely they would like to build monitors that are effective tools for their customers?

 

[Mart68]

I don't think this is true at all. Way too many people use super cheap monitors for this to be true. Also remember that most engineers didn't actually own the studio, so they weren't necessarily the boss of what monitors were available.

Itinerant engineers sometimes bring their own monitors to the studio.

 

[Mart68]

Genelec were unknown outside of Finland when the NS10 was becoming ubiquitous, not so many options back in 1978. If history had been different maybe no-one would have heard of the NS10

But it wasn't so we have what we have.

If they really were such a problem we'd have a lot of odd-sounding records. But we don't so clearly it wasn't an issue. Would a different monitor have made it better or easier? Possibly. But it's pointless speculation now.

 

[goat76]

This should then also imply that the largest studio monitors manufacturers (Genelec etc) are sort of morons, since they don't make monitors with a similar midrange emphasis? Surely they would like to build monitors that are effective tools for their customers?

Please stop replying to me if you can't keep the discussion serious.

 

[sigbergaudio]

Please stop replying to me if you can't keep the discussion serious.

What I am trying to figure out if you genuinely think a non-linear speaker is a better tool for the sound engineers. Because that is what you are implying when you are saying that the engineers would have switched if the Yamahas weren't the best tool for the job.

 

[MAB]

Please stop replying to me if you can't keep the discussion serious.

You’re not serious.

 

[MAB]

Itinerant engineers sometimes bring their own monitors to the studio.

Which monitors? NS-10M?

 

[MAB]

What I am trying to figure out if you genuinely think a non-linear speaker is a better tool for the sound engineers. Because that is what you are implying when you are saying that the engineers would have switched if the Yamahas weren't the best tool for the job.

Would be good to hear a serious response.
Like, a specific use condition, and the technical reason why this speaker in each of it's several guises over the years, is specifically useful. Just one example would do.

 

[goat76]

What I am trying to figure out if you genuinely think a non-linear speaker is a better tool for the sound engineers. Because that is what you are implying when you are saying that the engineers would have switched if the Yamahas weren't the best tool for the job.

I have not been ”implying” the things you are asking about, either you have misunderstood the things I’ve said or you are not very serious expecting me to give you answers on things you have put together in your own fantasies. Do you see me asking you question about things you have not said, no, I keep the discussion to what is said and don’t assume you mean anything you have not said.

No, i don’t think that a non-linear speaker is a better tool for mixing engineers in general, whatever works for a person may not work for the next person, but when a particular loudspeaker works as a mixing tool and give someone a great result every time in a fast and reliable way for a person, there is no reason for that person to seek out another speaker that may not give the person the same good, fast, and reliable result.

Yes, I trust the engineers who says that the NS-10’s works great for them to identifying problems in the mix in a fast and reliable way FOR THEM, but that doesn’t mean that the same loudspeaker will work for everyone else. So no, Genelec doesn’t have to be morons making a clone of the old Yamaha speaker as there is a market for ”better” speakers even if it may not be the better tool for everyone.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I have not been ”implying” the things you are asking about, either you have misunderstood the things I’ve said or you are not very serious expecting me to give you answers on things you have put together in your own fantasies. Do you see me asking you question about things you have not said, no, I keep the discussion to what is said and don’t assume you mean anything you have not said.

No, i don’t think that a non-linear speaker is a better tool for mixing engineers in general, whatever works for a person may not work for the next person, but when a particular loudspeaker works as a mixing tool and give someone a great result every time in a fast and reliable way for a person, there is no reason for that person to seek out another speaker that may not give the person the same good, fast, and reliable result.

Yes, I trust the engineers who says that the NS-10’s works great for them to identifying problems in the mix in a fast and reliable way FOR THEM, but that doesn’t mean that the same loudspeaker will work for everyone else. So no, Genelec doesn’t have to be morons making a clone of the old Yamaha speaker as there is a market for ”better” speakers even if it may not be the better tool for everyone.

I am not trying to make up fantasies about you are saying. I am struggling to understand your standpoint, and when I ask for clarification you get aggressive and/or defensive.

So instead of claiming anything about your opinions, I will try to state MY opinion, and ask if you agree.

I am of the opinion that the engineers who says that the NS-10s work great for them to identify problems in the mix in a fast an reliable way are probably correct. They have learned to know and understand it in such a way that it is an effective tool for them.

I am also of the opinion that they would identify problems in the mix in an even faster and even more reliable way if they had better monitors. Do you agree, or disagree?

 

[goat76]

You’re not serious.

As I said earlier in the thread, it’s impossible to have a discussion about this with a bunch of people who believes that every task in music mixing is dependent on frequency response. That is very clear.

 

[MAB]

As I said earlier in the thread, it’s impossible to have a discussion about this with a bunch of people who believes that every task in music mixing is dependent on frequency response. That is very clear.

Then lead us through an actual example.
Educate this bunch of people about these tasks.
Not with anecdote. What are these properties? Specific examples are useful.

 

[mhardy6647]

For a few centuries many physicians practiced bloodletting. I'm sure they would have told you how effective it could be even though it wasn't always. They would be looking for any effective tools more than recording guys as it was life and death. This was based upon the theory of balanced humours in the blood being the cause of disease. Various, sometimes very odd, methods of bloodletting were developed and used for centuries. Some people survived proving it could work. However, it was based upon a faulty premise. I don't have any records to prove people died of the practice, but people died because of the practice.

Now I don't have access to provide definitive proof of even one example of recordings being negatively effected by using Auratones, car speakers or NS-10s to help create a mix that translated well. No matter the times things have been effective this way it does not prove the method. I cannot show recordings were made worse than otherwise might be the case, but there were some because the premise of this approach is faulty.

The sad part is: I remember seeing that particular skit live. Yes. I am old.

Out of deference to my craft, I will note that Hirulog is a synthetic version of the antithrombin peptide hirudin, found in leeches.

PS Theodoric probably had a pair of Horrortones.

 

[Mart68]

Which monitors? NS-10M?

I know of at least one case where it is/was NS10M, yes.

The familiarity seems to be more important than the accuracy. Why is a grey area I don't really understand, not being a mixing engineer.

 

[goat76]

I am not trying to make up fantasies about you are saying. I am struggling to understand your standpoint, and when I ask for clarification you get aggressive and/or defensive.

But you are making up things and then you ask me about those things.

So instead of claiming anything about your opinions, I will try to state MY opinion, and ask if you agree.

I don’t state MY opinion, it’s a fact that the NS-10’s work for some mixing engineers and some of them has even won prices for their reference-grade mixing, and some of them are considered the best mixing engineers in the world, but you want to state your opinion about their choice of tools making those mixes. I have never heard the NS-10’s in my whole life, I don’t have my own opinion about that speaker.

I am of the opinion that the engineers who says that the NS-10s work great for them to identify problems in the mix in a fast an reliable way are probably correct. They have learned to know and understand it in such a way that it is an effective tool for them.

I am also of the opinion that they would identify problems in the mix in an even faster and even more reliable way if they had better monitors. Do you agree, or disagree?

That depends on the other qualities of those other loudspeakers, I don’t think the wacky frequency response is the main reason why some mixing engineers find the NS10’s highly revealing of problems in the midrange, I believe it’s the limited range which could be achieved by limiting other loudspeakers to the same range, and i also think that the speaker (for the time) had an extraordinary clean response with very few resonances (”fast start and stops”) making it reliable as a tool to clearly hear the reverb tails in a music mix. So I believe the more linear speaker alternative must as least match those qualities, as everything in mixing doesn’t have to do with frequency response.

 

[MAB]

I know of at least one case where it is/was NS10M, yes.

The familiarity seems to be more important than the accuracy. Why is a grey area I don't really understand, not being a mixing engineer.

Yes, grey area for sure. Toole's comments on these are linked earlier in this thread, and are illuminating. I wait for actual examples of efficacy to emerge, with supporting data, measurements, and specific use. People maintain these are useful, at this point specific evidence would be helpful.

 

[goat76]

Then lead us through an actual example.
Educate this bunch of people about these tasks.
Not with anecdote. What are these properties? Specific examples are useful.

I have already answered that if you mind reading back in the thread. You are obviously side-stepping into this discussion, I’m not your enemy.

In short, the mixing stage is mostly about finding a balance between all the individual tracks that often are 20-50 tracks, and most of those tracks contain elements that share the whole midrange, which in turn is the most important range to get right if the mix will translate to most speaker systems. The mix will often be listen to on a full-range and more linear speaker system, either or both in mixing making sure of the overall tonality, but also in the mastering stage and in a bunch of other systems for quality check. There is a very small risk that a speaker as the NS-10’s used during as on tool among many others would color the final product.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I don’t state MY opinion, it’s a fact that the NS-10’s work for some mixing engineers and some of them has even won prices for their reference-grade mixing, and some of them are considered the best mixing engineers in the world, but you want to state your opinion about their choice of tools making those mixes. I have never heard the NS-10’s in my whole life, I don’t have my own opinion about that speaker.

For a person who has never heard the NS-10 speakers and who has no opinion regarding them, you've been extremely argumentative.

If your issue is the opinions of sound engineers who have used the NS-10s, I suggest that it would be better to let them speak for themselves ... I am sure that they are quite capable of that. Their testimony will be far more authoritative.

Otherwise, your comments amount to the fallacy of argument from false authority.

 

[MAB]

I have already answered that if you mind reading back in the thread.

Read the entire thread. Commented too. You have posted many many times, read them all. Your arguments are vague, and you don't support them with evidence. And they are repetitive. So I ask for evidence now since none is provided.

You are obviously side-stepping into this discussion, I’m not your enemy.

Enemy, no. I am still looking for one specific example among your posts.

In short, the mixing stage is mostly about finding a balance between all the individual tracks that often are 20-50 tracks, and most of those tracks contain elements that share the whole midrange, which in turn is the most important range to get right if the mix will translate to most speaker systems. The mix will often be listen to on a full-range and more linear speaker system, either or both in mixing making sure of the overall tonality, but also in the mastering stage and in a bunch of other systems for quality check. There is a very small risk that a speaker as the NS-10’s used during as on tool among many others would color the final product.

Not an example, another anecdote. With an additional anecdote that the risk is small that the bad sound of a NS-10 or clone will damage the final product.

 

[goat76]

For a person who has never heard the NS-10 speakers and who has no opinion regarding them, you've been extremely argumentative.

I don't have to listen to the speaker as we all already know it has worked well for many great mixing engineers to make great-sounding mixes. It just takes a little bit of common sense to understand that if these engineers had changed to another loudspeaker in a heartbeat, if they found them better for reaching a work-dependending better result.

I simply add some sensible balance to the discussion, if that is argumentative behavior to you you just show that you are against an open type of discussion.

If your issue is the opinions of sound engineers who have used the NS-10s, I suggest that it would be better to let them speak for themselves ... I am sure that they are quite capable of that. Their testimony will be far more authoritative.

The mixing engineers who used this speakers has over the years in many interviews already explained why they found the NS-10 useful as a mixing tool, and that’s what I repeat, they just don’t happen to be members of this forum. I didn’t know I wasn't allowed to repeat that information, you are free to look up those interviews with Bob Clearmountain and other mixing engineers who found them useful.

I have mixed music myself for about 10 years now, so I use that experience and try to explain why a linear response is not always that important as that depends on what mixing tasks the speaker is used for.

Otherwise, your comments amount to the fallacy of argument from false authority.

So everytime you repeat something Toole has said, it should count as a false authority if it doesn't come directly from Toole’s own mouth?

For the record. I have no problems with you or any one else spreading the knowledge of Toole’s research, but it is also a fact that some mixing engineers have find the NS-10 a useful tool for mixing, even if you may have a hard time understanding why that is. I find it great with open discussions why that is.