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

[ZolaIII]

I don't think there is a single monitor that will work equally well for everyone, you are probably way better off using other loudspeakers if they give you better results.

Nope, studio is about you having control, everything else comes later. If you have very good time domain and decay times you can simulate any kind reverb you want (small room, club, radio, small speaker including in small space). All kind of boxes and in another boxes, even see they fundamental impact but you can't do that other way around.

 

[holdingpants01]

It maters much more than you think and probably will ever admit.

please keep your delusions to yourself

 

[ZolaIII]

@holdingpants01 are you telling me that in double blind test you will be able to tell a difference between speakers that let's say score 8.2 to one's scoring let's say 8.6? My delusions relay on physics and try to change that if you can.

 

[holdingpants01]

@holdingpants01 are you telling me that in double blind test you will be able to tell a difference between speakers that let's say score 8.2 to one's scoring let's say 8.6? My delusions relay on physics and try to change that if you can.

I have no idea what is your point in most of your posts, just like in this one. Let's ignore each other in peace

 

[ZolaIII]

I have no idea what is your point in most of your posts, just like in this one. Let's ignore each other in peace

How big is your studio?

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

I judge a flawed speaker as a flawed speaker, though I don't believe in a "translation" myth and usefulness of those kind of designs to be any help during the mix. I tried NS10s, different flavors of Auratones, mono speakers etc. throughout all of my career and conclusion was always the same regardless how bad by design they were. I always came back to as neutral monitors as I had available and it work well to this day

You never worked in audio production.

 

[dasdoing]

Do they indicate a lack of energy of kick, bass and low mids on small speakers?

that is a great point. Of course you can mix on a big speaker and than test your almost finished mix on small speakers and phones. But it is much easier when you do it in the actual mixing process instead of fixing it afterwards. Take Billie Jean for example. you can hear the "low end" of the kick on a smartphone. pretty sure Swedien achieved this on his Auratones

 

[holdingpants01]

You never worked in audio production.

you're not exactly right

 

[dasdoing]

You obviously don't have to use this approach, and as many have said before, you could use a Genelec or Neumann and simply throw LP and HP on them.
At the end, knowing your monitor (and room) is the most important.
judging transients is arguable though. With a ported speaker the "thumb" of your kick will always be behind the "tack"

 

[ZolaIII]

You obviously don't have to use this approach, and as many have said before, you could use a Genelec or Neumann and simply throw LP and HP on them.
At the end, knowing your monitor (and room) is the most important.
judging transients is arguable though. With a ported speaker the "thumb" of your kick will always be behind the "tack"

Future more in sub bass it will always be like that (not box related). Thing is 20+ year's ago I had a DAW and transparent multichannel card and they had much less when those come out. Even in tube days there where pasive buffers with cuple tailored to specific speakers EQ's (in semi PEQ form). Tho active analog studio mixers and effects where there (much more than today). I don't find 1/5 of old records broken on vinil to what I found from mid 80's till today and culminating in mid 90's.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

you're not exactly right

View attachment 436656

 

[dfuller]

You never worked in audio production.

I do, and NS10s are in my opinion near enough to useless. I've hated them the entire time I've been in this industry.

There is a strong move away from them even as near fields to more linear speakers - Neumann, Genelec, even ATC and PMC are pretty common.

 

[TheZebraKilledDarwin]

"NS10 useless." Another one claiming translation a myth, posting a screenshot from another person...
Hifi crowd, have a nice day.

 

[holdingpants01]

"NS10 useless." Another one claiming translation a myth, posting a screenshot from another person...
Hifi crowd, have a nice day.

but that's really my profile on muso.ai, I hide my name as I want to stay anonymous here, there's enough crazy people on boards that I don't want to deal with personally. Anyway, translation as a speaker characteristic is a myth, this thing only comes from experience of an engineer with a given tool, no speaker works from day one, especially such flawed ones like ns10s, but most can be learned to work on and around. I don't know what is so controversial here

 

[Blumlein 88]

"NS10 useless." Another one claiming translation a myth, posting a screenshot from another person...
Hifi crowd, have a nice day.

Explain the basic hypothesis of translation. I have never seen how it made any sense. Give it a go anyway and let me see how it is supposed to really work.

 

[goat76]

Explain the basic hypothesis of translation. I have never seen how it made any sense. Give it a go anyway and let me see how it is supposed to really work.

He made a pretty good list on the previous page in post number 1515. If you have a monitor (any monitor) you trust that lets you hear those things he listed, the mix will translate to any speaker system, whether full-range or limited-range speaker system. It can be the NS-10s that give you that information, or any other speaker of your choice.

Here is the list he wrote. All the points except maybe the first two are important to get the mix to translate well to most other speaker systems. Can you easily hear those things and address them, there's a pretty good chance that your mix will translate well.

Do they allow to mix at low levels?
Are they fatiguing?
Are they a good indicator of too-hard transients?
Stereo imaging, reverbs, delays easy to hear/set up?
Are they good at indicating too long or too short decays of sounds?
Do they indicate the needed compression and the kind of compression?
Is it easy to get kick/bass levels right?
Do they indicate frequency problems of kicks and basses?
Do they indicate a lack of energy of kick, bass, and low mids on small speakers?

Most of those things overlap in the mid-frequencies, if everything in a mix sounds balanced for that frequency range, it will translate well to both full-range and limited-range speaker systems. In short: Good translation.


If anyone here (not you in particular) doesn't get the above information, they either don't understand the basic problems in mixing music or they are just here to argue. Sorry.

 

[Purité Audio]

Sounds like any fine measuring loudspeaker would be appropriate.
Keith

 

[dfuller]

Sounds like any fine measuring loudspeaker would be appropriate.
Keith

Honestly, any "fine enough" speaker would be appropriate. Doesn't have to be a totally Toole-conforming wonderbox, just "flattish" and "reasonably decent polars"

The NS10 is... not that. In either case.

"NS10 useless." Another one claiming translation a myth, posting a screenshot from another person...
Hifi crowd, have a nice day.

Again, I literally work in music production as my day job.

NS10s are falling out of favor and fast. They are less and less relevant as consumer systems get better (and as full range systems improve too). Modern music also is less mid-dense than guitar driven music.

Most of those things overlap in the mid-frequencies, if everything in a mix sounds balanced for that frequency range, it will translate well to both full-range and limited-range speaker systems. In short: Good translation.

Yes, but you can get there more easily by having one set of speakers and just doing a high pass at like 100hz. I get it when EQ hardware was at a premium, but it isn't the 90s any more.

 

[goat76]

Yes, but you can get there more easily by having one set of speakers and just doing a high pass at like 100hz. I get it when EQ hardware was at a premium, but it isn't the 90s any more.

Yes, and I have said the very same thing earlier in this thread. But if the NS-10s did it in the past, and if they still do it for some engineers, there’s really nothing to argue against.

The question I answered was “the basic hypothesis of translation”. What tool takes you there, takes you there.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Honestly, I do not understand this "I did not like it" approach. I guess you had listened 30 minutes to similar mixes, before working on them?
Monitors are a tool (for me). Is the tool helpful:
Do they allow to mix at low levels?
Are they fatigueing?
Are they a good indicator of too hard transients?
Stereo imaging, reverbs, delays easy to hear/setup?
Are they good at indicating too long or too short decays of sounds?
Do they indicate needed compression and the kind of compression?
Is it easy to get kick/bass levels right?
Do they indicate frequency problems of kicks and basses?
Do they indicate a lack of energy of kick, bass and low mids on small speakers?

(in all these regards, I vastly prefer them to my KH120IIs)

The problem with this laundry list is vs some reference of a close to transparent speaker what is a good choice? The answer is you cannot have one. A handful of iffy speakers with various deficiencies vs listeners with thousands of sub-par speakers with thousands of deficiencies cannot be tested for this way. It always seemed to me the results could corrupt how good a mix worked on good speakers. Is there some magical sub-optimal mix that works with lesser speakers that applies to most of them? I don't see how. Even some of the ideas about speakers that work with transients etc are actually misguided. Like that a closed box speaker automatically has better transients in the bass than ported so check it with a closed box speaker for that part.