Best 'hi-fi' audiophile bookshelf type speaker to pull mixing/mastering duties in a studio?

[richard12511]

Different yes, but it's hard to say how. Just something that would be a good complimentary "B" pair to switch to when mixing and mastering.

I'd go for the Focal if you want something different. They generally have wider dispersion from 5-10kHz(at least from what I've seen).

 

[Pearljam5000]

How can it be one of the one of the best tweeter materiels when materiel has no impact on sound at all according to some people here (;

 

[Pearljam5000]

I would go for Focal Trio 6 or Trio 11

Ok peeps, now I need advice on a "B" set to my Genelec 8351B pair. I will make is simple for you since it is multiple choice. Which set will be the most "complimentary" to the Genelec's?

Choices are:

1. Neumann KH 310
2. Neumann KH 120
3. Dynaudio Core 47
4. Focal Solo6 Be
5. Focal Twin6 Be

Of course I am open to other options, but these are the ones that will fit the best in my space next to the Genelec's.

Thanks!

 

[richard12511]

I'd say the Neumann's will sound most similar to the Genelecs. Similar controlled directivity and overall neutrality. Both those Focals will sound quite different, as they will have significantly wider dispersion, especially in the lower-mid treble.

Personally I'd avoid the Twin6 - the driver layout is unnecessarily compromised. Actually, the Solo6 was measured by Sound&Recording:

View attachment 89407

View attachment 89408

You can actually see how much wider dispersion they are in the treble there. Definitely not super accurate and certainly not controlled-directivity, but if you're looking for something to give you an alternative window onto the mix that is probably more similar to a lot of conventional home audio speakers than the 8351, they will be that And they appear to play very clean for a speaker their size.

I posted my reply before seeing yours, but it kinda corroborates what I've seen, and what I said in my reply(ie wider dispersion from 5-10kHz). I'm really curious, as it shows up in most or all of their speakers(regardless of tweeter material), so I'm assuming it's caused by the inverted tweeter. Do you understand the physics of why that happens? What is it about convex shape that causes it to do that?

 

[richard12511]

How can it be one of the one of the best tweeter materiels when materiel has no impact on sound at all according to some people here (;

Perhaps I missed it(haven't read the full thread), but I don't think people are saying tweeter material doesn't matter. I think what they're saying is that tweeter material doesn't matter if all other things are held constant; that is, they measure the same in every way(at least within the audible range).

 

[auraluxstudio]

Yeh, that's because I don't believe any of those will be close to a better speaker than the 8531

I think you might have misunderstood my question. I meant of the speakers I listed, which would you say is the "best"?

 

[auraluxstudio]

I would go for Focal Trio 6 or Trio 11

Much too large.

 

[andreasmaaan]

I posted my reply before seeing yours, but it kinda corroborates what I've seen, and what I said in my reply(ie wider dispersion from 5-10kHz). I'm really curious, as it shows up in most or all of their speakers(regardless of tweeter material), so I'm assuming it's caused by the inverted tweeter. Do you understand the physics of why that happens? What is it about convex shape that causes it to do that?

Yeh, actually it's mostly just straightforward geometry.

I realise this is a thoroughly crap MS paint illustration, but I think it more or less shows what's going on:

On the left we have a standard dome tweeter. Sound emanating from the far side of the tweeter (the bottom in this illustration) has to travel around the dome before it sums with the sound emanating from the near side. This means that it must travel further than in the case of the (Focal-style) inverted dome on the right.

Therefore, in the case of the standard dome, the path length difference between sound emanating from the near side and the far side is greater at off-axis angles, which results in destructive interference at lower frequencies (frequency is proportional to wavelength and therefore the frequency at which destructive interference begins to occur is proportional to path length difference; a greater path length difference = destructive interference begins lower in frequency).

Sorry, that was a bit rushed but hopefully the gist is clear.

 

[andreasmaaan]

I think you might have misunderstood my question. I meant of the speakers I listed, which would you say is the "best"?

Ah, sorry! Yes, the Neumanns are likely to be objectively significantly better than the other options there

 

[auraluxstudio]

Ah, sorry! Yes, the Neumanns are likely to be objectively significantly better than the other options there

I was thinking the same thing, but for some reason are drawn to the Dynaudio Core 47. I have no idea why LOL. I guess I feel like Dynaudio doesn't get enough love. I have two Dynaudio subwoofers that work fantastically. On the other hand I am a stickler for the "best" so I may just get the KH 310's even though they will be similar. I still think they will be contrasting enough.

 

[auraluxstudio]

Ah, sorry! Yes, the Neumanns are likely to be objectively significantly better than the other options there

Let's throw another speaker in the ring. How about PSI Audio?

 

[andreasmaaan]

I was thinking the same thing, but for some reason are drawn to the Dynaudio Core 47. I have no idea why LOL. I guess I feel like Dynaudio doesn't get enough love. I have two Dynaudio subwoofers that work fantastically. On the other hand I am a stickler for the "best" so I may just get the KH 310's even though they will be similar. I still think they will be contrasting enough.

Dynaudio is an interesting one. They have a philosophy of crossing the midrange/midwoofer over the the tweeter quite high in frequency (usually 3kHz+), and of using low-order crossover slopes. This means that their speakers tend to have a very narrow vertical sweet spot, and a relatively wide suckout in the vertical off-axis response around the crossover frequency. This was far from unusual many decades ago, but is unusual in studio monitors today. OTOH, their speakers are generally well-engineered in my experience, i.e. flat-ish frequency response on-axis, reasonable quality components, etc.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Let's throw another speaker in the ring. How about PSI Audio?

A17 measurements:

 

[auraluxstudio]

A17 measurements:

View attachment 89421

Can you please translate this for me the chart "dummy"? Good? Bad?

 

[andreasmaaan]

Can you please translate this for me the chart "dummy"? Good? Bad?

I would say nothing terribly wrong but.... meh

 

[auraluxstudio]

I would say nothing terribly wrong but.... meh

Sounds like KH 310's are winning for me.

 

[auraluxstudio]

I would say nothing terribly wrong but.... meh

Also considered Amphion...?

 

[andreasmaaan]

Also considered Amphion...?

All the measurements of their speakers that I've found online have shown up significant shortcomings.

 

[Pearljam5000]

PMC and ATC are also great.

 

[auraluxstudio]

PMC and ATC are also great.

PMC what? I have read lots of issues with their twotwo lineup.