Avantone Pro MixCube Monitor Review

[Hexspa]

Hard to say, I think the 5C measures better.
View attachment 271085

Yes, not too easy to tell given that Amir's waterfalls only extend to 4ms. I'm definitely interested in the 5C getting a spin if Amir is willing.

 

[Hexspa]

I gave mix checking a on small crap speakers a try when I worked on a dance pop song years ago. It became immediately obvious that commercial songs fared much better than what I had worked on up to that point listening to Adam A5X's. There's definitely a use for speakers like this in a mixers arsenal. But that has nothing to do with reproduction for enjoyment.

Are you saying that these kinds of speakers helped you when used in conjunction with your full-range ones?

 

[acctx]

First of all, Avantones are not to be confused with Auratones. Avantones are cheap knockoffs of Auratones. There was also a Behringer version of Auratones that were blatantly called "Auratone" I believe and those weren't any good either, and there was a litigation and those kind of disappeared... I stopped following that drama.

Bottom line, get the real Auratones if you want that kind of speaker but the proper one.

I have original passive Auratones. I still use them to check on mixes, they do sometimes point out some issues. I really like them. They give a good perspective on mids but also shows if your bass is weak if you mix sounds thin. Great full mixes sound amazing on them. Hack jobs sound weak. I also use smaller Yamahas HS50m and I have a bunch of other monitors but I do prefer Auratones, they have the best bang for your buck per square inch of desk space.

 

[Hexspa]

Single wideband driver in sealed box with no filters is the easiest way to have good transients.
But everything else in such product is single big downside.

Thank you for this but can you please tell me exactly what I should be looking for in the spin data to confirm this? Yes, subjectively I agree that this speaker has good transient response but I want to know what to look for in the measurements which supports it. Frankly, I was shocked to see the resonances because minimum phase indicates that they should ruin transient response. @amirm please consider put the impulse response in this review or any other metrics related to transient response that you've omitted, if any. Thanks.

 

[Hexspa]

First of all, Avantones are not to be confused with Auratones. Avantones are cheap knockoffs of Auratones. There was also a Behringer version of Auratones that were blatantly called "Auratone" I believe and those weren't any good either, and there was a litigation and those kind of disappeared... I stopped following that drama.

Bottom line, get the real Auratones if you want that kind of speaker but the proper one.

I have original passive Auratones. I still use them to check on mixes, they do sometimes point out some issues. I really like them. They give a good perspective on mids but also shows if your bass is weak if you mix sounds thin. Great full mixes sound amazing on them. Hack jobs sound weak. I also use smaller Yamahas HS50m and I have a bunch of other monitors but I do prefer Auratones, they have the best bang for your buck per square inch of desk space.

You're right about Behringer. From what I gather, they were swapping up trademarks and even got Sequential Circuits or some such other brand but ultimately gave it back.

You're also right that Avantones are cheaper than Auratones. 'Cheap knockoffs' might be a little harsh and I don't believe we have all the information to settle that claim. In the end, I haven't used Auratones but this thread has certainly gotten me interested. You use the vintage Auratones? What amp do you use with them and what do you think of the newest iteration of Auratones currently available? Are you willing to send your Auratone in for a spin?

 

[Hexspa]

Ah, page 10. Thank you to everyone for the spirited debate and especially to Amir for allowing me to respectfully disagree. If any of you feel I have made personal attacks, please let me know so I can apologize. I want to learn and, for me, the best way is to pretend like I know until someone proves me wrong (not the whole story but ok).

As of now, I look forward to defining what contributes to 'translation' and whether consensus can be built around that as it has with 'preference'. Also I'm curious about the Auratones and how the vintage ones may be compared to the modern ones and, of course, how they compare to the Avantone version. There is also the DMax Super Cube which is a full-range cube monitor that might be fun to compare.

EDIT: Here's a composite I made of the 30 phons equal loudness contour over the Mixcube response. They seem to be complimentary from 700Hz-2kHz and again from 2-4kHz. All I can say in defense of the resonances from 5kHz up is that 5kHz is the start of the vocal sibilant range and having that range emphasized can be helpful when EQing vocals. The resonances above that are from 7kHz where even the ATC SCM25A has flaws - outside the 'translation zone' from 400-6khz. In support of identifying 'translation' qualities, I currently suspect that this bandwidth is more critical than those outside of it.

Cheers.

 

[markanini]

Are you saying that these kinds of speakers helped you when used in conjunction with your full-range ones?

Yes. In conjunction with commercial reference tracks my initial mix had anemic kick drum and bass lines, and uneven vocal levels. Yet when I compared on full range speakers it sounded on par with the commercial mixes. Final mix decisions were made on full range speakers.

EDIT: BTW Most here are are interested in the reproduction side of things, so it's kind of expected that everyone can't understand the utility in a mixing context. But personal attacks are unnecessary.

 

[audiotron]

Sounds like a Chinese CES show deal!

 

[Geert]

All you need is a filter on both ends for what you are describing. Truth tellers, no, not telling the truth is not the truth.

The truth is, with filters on full range studio monitors you still don't have a small single driver (so no crossover) point source.

 

[Robbo99999]

What do you mean "randomly rubbish"? Besides the frequency response, what else is rubbish? Do you see no value in this speaker whatsoever? Have you ever used one? Do you see that it has mostly low distortion, fairly smooth directivity and good step response? I'm here to talk metrics not opinions so if you can debate me on the technical merits of the speaker, I will respond. If you continue to use subjective terms to trash the speaker then I'm going to ignore you.

I'm not talking opinions, I was talking metrics. Please stop spouting the same lines. I've already said that a randomly varying frequency response including lots of large & sharp deviations that is exhibited by the Avantone is not theoretically good for anything re music creation - as people have already said a randomly bad speaker in this sense would not be good to use to check a mix because the key is in the word random, lots of bad speakers have differently random frequency responses, and your mix won't translate the same on all of them so it's nonsense to create a mix based on one random bad speaker. We've already said that the ideal would be full range flat anechoic, and then if you want to simulate a variety of smaller speakers and speakers used on other types of devices then perhaps you'd put some High Passes and Low Passes on them to remove different amounts of bass and treble on which you can check your mixes. Flat anechoic is likely to be the most average target to use as a standard for checking your mixes, I'd think that most speakers out there vary randomly around flat anechoic. It might be interesting actually to take spinorama data of every conceivable speaker that you could find measured and then average them all to find out what the average curve would be......logically I would think it would be very close to flat anechoic - so to best check your mixes you would use flat anechoic. That's my viewpoint, and I think there's some logic to back it.

The truth is, with filters on full range studio monitors you still don't have a small single driver (so no crossover) point source.

That could be a good point I suppose, but I'm not sure how influential that is if you're sitting in the sweet spot of each speaker and sitting close enough to be getting mainly direct sound. If your point is highly valid though, then a person could instead look for an anechoic flat version of a single driver monitor (rather than one that varies randomly, lol) - at least anechoic flat in the frequency ranges that were being targeted (as praps such a speaker would have early bass & treble roll off - which is kinda intended for such checks that we've been talking about.)

 

[DavidMcRoy]

What did you use in live and pre-pro TV production?

Billie Eilish’s brother produced her whole debut (and breakthrough) hit album in the box on a pair of yam hs5 and the sub.

Did you use a sub?

Hehe

He "recorded" it at home, and sent the tracks to a studio engineer who mixed and mastered the finished product (thank God.)

 

[martin900]

Not sure what the point is of giving it a rating or trying to be objective about it. It's a purposedly broken speaker that's application specific, just like the NS10m is.
It's broken, yet it does it's job perfectly.

 

[KSTR]

But it's needlessly more broken than necessary and it's brokenness is different from the original.

 

[bennybbbx]

Amir's measurement very closely mirrors that contained in the link you posted and my own in-room measurement at sub 86dB listening levels. You are free to propagate rumors but that is the diametrically opposite reason of why I sent this speaker in. For what it's worth, I think that 'rumor' is totally unfounded and I haven't heard it in my travels. On the contrary, like others have said here, mastering engineers tend to use full-range speakers exclusively and more in midfield.

I find only a story about the NS 10 but i guess for avantones it is same .A famous use it. the important part https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/yamaha-ns10-story

The rest, as they say, is history. Clearmountain in particular was (as he is now) a first-call producer and engineer for the biggest projects, and once he and a few others began to rely on the NS10, the phenomenon grew like a virus inhabiting a welcoming host: studios began to buy NS10s in their thousands in an effort to attract name engineers. Of course, in order to thrive, a virus needs a host to which it is particularly well suited, and this was provided by the rapidly increasing number of freelance engineers I described earlier.

 

[Geert]

That could be a good point I suppose, but I'm not sure how influential that is if you're sitting in the sweet spot of each speaker and sitting close enough to be getting mainly direct sound.

I'm also not sure of how influential it is, but I do know listening to a small point source speaker is a different experience (and I don't mean because of the limited frequency response). It's gives you kind of a helicopter view on the music, instead of being surrounded by a sound field. The closer you sit to a speaker the more important the point source element becomes. It's one of the reasons engineers sometimes take it even one step further and listen to a single speaker.

If your point is highly valid though, then a person could instead look for an anechoic flat version of a single driver monitor (rather than one that varies randomly, lol)

I also believe the reason this types of speakers can be helpful to some is because of their strengths and not their weaknesses (uneven frequency response and resonances). The original Auratones are better in that regard. The problem is that 30 years ago there were no small full range drivers that come close to the ideal anechoic flat response (and DSP didn't exist). (I once build my own version using Visaton drivers, with better result than these Avantones but still far from ideal in the high end).

 

[kozi07]

This is perfect midrange speaker

 

[Hexspa]

Yes, not too easy to tell given that Amir's waterfalls only extend to 4ms. I'm definitely interested in the 5C getting a spin if Amir is willing.

A similar, magazine-type measurement of the Avantone Mixcube is here. This review seems a bit more forgiving yet similar to Amir's.

 

[Hexspa]

I'm not talking opinions, I was talking metrics. Please stop spouting the same lines. I've already said that a randomly varying frequency response including lots of large & sharp deviations that is exhibited by the Avantone is not theoretically good for anything re music creation - as people have already said a randomly bad speaker in this sense would not be good to use to check a mix because the key is in the word random, lots of bad speakers have differently random frequency responses, and your mix won't translate the same on all of them so it's nonsense to create a mix based on one random bad speaker. We've already said that the ideal would be full range flat anechoic, and then if you want to simulate a variety of smaller speakers and speakers used on other types of devices then perhaps you'd put some High Passes and Low Passes on them to remove different amounts of bass and treble on which you can check your mixes. Flat anechoic is likely to be the most average target to use as a standard for checking your mixes, I'd think that most speakers out there vary randomly around flat anechoic. It might be interesting actually to take spinorama data of every conceivable speaker that you could find measured and then average them all to find out what the average curve would be......logically I would think it would be very close to flat anechoic - so to best check your mixes you would use flat anechoic. That's my viewpoint, and I think there's some logic to back it.

That could be a good point I suppose, but I'm not sure how influential that is if you're sitting in the sweet spot of each speaker and sitting close enough to be getting mainly direct sound. If your point is highly valid though, then a person could instead look for an anechoic flat version of a single driver monitor (rather than one that varies randomly, lol) - at least anechoic flat in the frequency ranges that were being targeted (as praps such a speaker would have early bass & treble roll off - which is kinda intended for such checks that we've been talking about.)

There's no randomness. There's a peak at 5khz and 7kHz with a dip between, and smaller peaks above those. As I've said, 5kHz is an important band because it's above most of the fundamentals of any instrument, piano C8 is ~4192Hz, and the start of the sibilant range. It may make sense to have a peak there. Maybe flat is better for working on that band and maybe it's not. Incidentally, the ATC SCM25A has a 5dB narrow dip at 7kHz and, again, that's the subjective gold standard for translation according to many rabid fans.

I'm not the only one spouting the same lines, you know. When you keep saying 'random' and 'bad', it leads nowhere. We can discuss the merits of a particular frequency range being boosted or attenuated or linear but 'random' is very difficult to conceive let alone discuss. 'Bad' is strictly subjective or a shorthand for 'out of tolerance'. I understand that you do not tolerate this speaker as a whole and that is ok but its raison detre is not neutrality. You suspect that linear amplitude responses are logically best for translation - and I agree that it's logical. What I don't necessarily agree is that this is the way it plays out in practice. Many people claim that such speakers are hard to mix on. I'm not one of those people because I've never used such a speaker; my equipment is known.

The point of all of this is not to create frustration but to identify whether Harman 'Preference' has any bearing on 'Translation' and, if so, which metrics are most important. Yes, you believe that amplitude neutrality is key but many will argue against you. At this time, it is the suspicion of myself and others that time-domain aspects may be equally if not more important than a linear amplitude response within +-XdB; let's say 3dB. If it is 3dB, how much is gained or lost by more or less variation. What bandwidth needs to comply because the SCM25 doesn't comply at 7kHz nor below 60Hz, etc. Translation is not proven to share a linear relationship with a linear amplitude response.

 

[raindance]

Not long ago, I had a discussion with a repair technician for "pro" equipment and he told me that the Avantone are really very appreciated in studio! why? because they restore perfectly the sound that you are going to have on the ****** car radio of your car or the radio of your kitchen.

Car radios, even bad ones, haven't sounded that way in about 20 years.

 

[Hexspa]

there is told the avantone have good stereo imaging. One point i notice it have much fewer group delay in bass than all other speakers. I compare with a very expensive revel f328 . it is much worser. see screenshots . of course the cheapest headphone is better as the avantone . for people that can hear ITD speaker precision in range from 60 hz is important because reverb on kick and bass sound strange as when polarity between left and right channel is changed, happen not with cheapest headphone. it is not my room because when put speakers put 2 cm to ears bring not the bass clarity as cheapest headphone bring. I wish buy a modern speakers with group delay at least as the avantone

but wy this old avantone speaker have shorter group delay as all other i check on this page ? I use 69.9 hz to compare.

View attachment 271026

the next is the revel https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/revel-f328be-speaker-review.17443/

other speakers smaller bigger or much cheaper are simular to this in group delay


View attachment 271025

next is measure from me with the minidsp ear system. The headphone measures from @amirm have .csv data . is there a way to load that in REW ,or maybe the heasdphone measures can output as txt too ?. the resolution of this txt is only not good to see step response. but because we can see group delay we need no step response

View attachment 271024

next is the measure of magnepan LRS group delay https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/magnepan-lrs-speaker-review.16068/
It too have much worser group delay as the avantone and much bass loss

View attachment 271155

Thank you for this. I guess we could argue that we all need a pair of $15 iems for the utmost in group delay performance. Has anyone tried high pass filtering a loudspeaker then taking a group delay measurement? The review to which I linked (which I found through the Avantone site) says there's no decay because of the acoustic high pass filtering. Group delay isn't something I've looked into much. If it isn't obvious, I'm not an engineer nor a loudspeaker expert so really I'm looking for the right measurement that shows me 'good transient response'. Is group delay part of it? Is that related to 'acoustic source position'? Does 'step response' have anything to do with it? To what extent are the HF series of resonances working against 'good transients'?