Hi end professional studio monitors vs hi end "hi-fi" speakers

[antennaguru]

But how many clutches did you burn up before you learned heel and toe downshift? Just kidding

None. I learned a very easy trick when I was instructing. Just turn down the throttle speed until the car will stall without some throttle input from the driver, and then put the driver you're coaching into the driver's seat and have them drive around the parking field a while. They will figure out really quickly how to always leave their heel on the throttle to always apply some throttle input to keep the car from stalling, while using the front part of their foot on the brake pedal for braking input. Left foot is always pure clutch. Then once they are getting the hang of it move them onto the race track with a slower group to start. Once the lesson is learned, the throttle can be adjusted back to normal. Some cars may require physically adjusting the gas pedal closer to the brake pedal, and some cars come with perfect pedals.

 

[AdamG]

Can we gat back on topic please?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Check out the video at 1:10 mark

You're gonna get this guy fired

 

[aac]

The most distinct difference between "pro" and "home" speakers is almost complete absense of "narrow tower" kind of speaker in pro market.

 

[daftcombo]

Isn't the biggest different between studio monitors and "hi-end" speakers that, out of the box, the former remain flat on-axis from 20Hz to 20kHz, whereas there is often a gentle slope with the latter, due to the fact that home are often untreated?

 

[antennaguru]

Check out the video at 1:10 mark

Thanks for the video link and the time notation! I think that what Darren Rose says there quite nicely explains some of my simplified comment.

I am a transducer designer, and have the facilities at my disposal to build many different types of transducers. Transducers convert energy from one medium to energy in another medium. Here we are talking about loudspeakers which as transducers convert electrical signal energy traveling in wires to sound energy that travels through air for reception by our ears. These I have designed and built many of.

There are many other types of transducers I have even more experience with, and what I find interesting is that only in undersea sonar are the transducers simply called transducers...

 

[FeddyLost]

Isn't the biggest different between studio monitors and "hi-end" speakers that, out of the box, the former remain flat on-axis from 20Hz to 20kHz, whereas there is often a gentle slope with the latter, due to the fact that home are often untreated?

Not even close.
Just check Stereophile or any other measurements and you'll see that there's less conformance between customer speakers (i don't like term "hi-end") than between monitors. Monitors at least must be flat on-axis, while there's no standards for home hi-fi at all. I mean, vendors can sell weirdest crap in high gloss laquer and still have sales.
The incredible example of typical "sounding furniture" is this ... (use translation, it's worth reading).
http://www.la-vega.ru/index.php/projectskz/69-pinoccio

 

[LTig]

Not the monitors in my medical office. The have horrible resolution and color, yet cost 5-10 times more than compatible consumer monitor with higher resolution.

I have a glorified vacuum, called smoke evacuator that costs 3k. A surgical chair that is nothing more than a hydro pump, foam and plastic, costs 14k. My microscope digital camera cost 7k, but was horrible with 5k resolution and a small sensors. I replaced it with a Sony consumer digital SLR, and now can take photos of tissue samples in way higher resolution at a fraction of the cost.

My clinic buys medical razors for shaving patients prior to surgery. These things are so so bad disposable units, yet cost 3 times more than the best Gillette razors.

So at least in my profession, all professional equipment is way overpriced.

I agree that medical equipment is extremely expensive for what it offers in performance. Ask the manufacturers about the overhead in work required by the FDA or similar stately offices world wide and you know why it's so expensive.

 

[Deleted member 27948]

That's one thing you can't really do with powered monitors--blocking the port! Can cause the amps to overheat lol.

Other downside I see is idle noise can be an issue in low ambient noise levels in the nearfield. This gets even worse with analog input sources. With passive speakers, a receiver will usually have a set of multichannel inputs specifically for analog use that have the lowest noise levels that you can use, and actually one reason I love low sensitivity hifi speakers--low noise level with analog sources. One thing you will notice immediately between passive speakers--hook up some high efficiency 98db Klipsch speakers, and the passive noise floor goes up compared to hooking them up to some extremely low efficiency 82db Salk or Usher monitors. This tends to be great for quality of life nearfield that you just cant achieve with powered monitors.

No, there is no overheating due to the port blockage, and AFAIK should not be.

There is no "idle noise" per se because amps sense the signal and turn on only when the signal is detected, and release 10+ min after the signal ends, to save power. The noise level of modern op-amps is astonishingly low, with a dynamic range > 120dB.

 

[atsmusic]

The first theorical quality of the speaker pro is the lake of ear fatigue.
The less distortion, with the bigger not with the nearfield and budget monitor.

The ancestor of the K+H O300, The O198 has plenty of distortion in bass.

Lots of mastering studio use hifi speakers. Some EDM producers use laptop speakers or budget monitors.

A lot of mastering engineers will use all different types of speakers and try to make the recording sound good on all. Much easier said than done of course. Most EDM producers are mixing, not mastering, at least the successful ones.

 

[atsmusic]

I guess what I meant was
Can a studio monitor compete with such a beast with:
Multiple drivers vs 2-3 max of studio monitors , much bigger than the average monitor, and obviously much more expensive.
View attachment 154045

wouldn't it be nice if you could buy little $300 bookshelf speakers and $500 sub and compete with that.

 

[echopraxia]

wouldn't it be nice if you could buy little $300 bookshelf speakers and $500 sub and compete with that.

Of course not, if only due to SPL and bass extension. But, I would bet a pair of Revel F328be + Rythmik GP25HP subs would be likely to match or outperform those Focals at a fraction of the price.

Either that or a pair of Genelec W371A’s towers with 8351B tops. Very pricey but still a fraction of the price tag of those Focals.

That said, I could be wrong since I haven’t seen measurements of those Focal’s. Focal makes very good stuff, so maybe they are worth the lofty price. But I highly doubt it. They do look very cool though.

 

[Deleted member 27948]

I guess what I meant was
Can a studio monitor compete with such a beast with:
Multiple drivers vs 2-3 max of studio monitors , much bigger than the average monitor, and obviously much more expensive.

Actually, yes. In the 2000s, Focal has been producing Utopia and Electra lines. Both lines have been using exactly the same drivers, and have been designed by the same people. Any difference in sound shall have been superficial. Utopia was priced in the 150+K range, while Electra was < 10k. One line was designed to impress guests, while another was to please the ear. Also, Focal produces a lot of rebranded drivers, thus in many cases, the distinction between brands / loudspeaker / monitor is ... questionable.

 

[Walter]

IMHO, the best deal is to buy a Focal automotive driver set and put it into a cabinet of an old loudspeaker from craigslist, kill cabinet vibrations by glueing linoleum flooring tiles and hang it on a soft amortization to make sure the floor does not vibrate on heavy bass.

I did the reverse of this in the 90s, before Focal made car speakers, along with active crossovers and PEQ. Sounded great.

 

[daftcombo]

Not even close.
Just check Stereophile or any other measurements and you'll see that there's less conformance between customer speakers (i don't like term "hi-end") than between monitors. Monitors at least must be flat on-axis, while there's no standards for home hi-fi at all. I mean, vendors can sell weirdest crap in high gloss laquer and still have sales.
The incredible example of typical "sounding furniture" is this ... (use translation, it's worth reading).
http://www.la-vega.ru/index.php/projectskz/69-pinoccio

Boy that frequency response!

 

[kuf]

I don't know the answer to the title's question
but
regarding the listening fatigue that active monitors provoke,
it is not true

I recently bought a pair of Genelec 8020 for near-field listening in my desktop,
I listen to them in my free time in the weekends,
sometimes for 4-5 hours continuously and when my free time runs out I'd like to have more time to listen,
despite the fact that the majority of what I listen to are poor recordings (old rock and such).

I'm totally happy with my active monitors for listening pleasure and relaxing and
now I'm trying to figure out If I should change my passive floor-standers in the living room with active monitors+subs.

 

[aac]

Monitors at least must be flat on-axis, while there's no standards for home hi-fi at all.

Just look at s&r measurements and you'll be surprised.
You don't need to go far to look for obscure stuff even - yamaha ns10 might be the most popular studio monitor ever.

 

[lowkeyoperations]

I never heard of studio monitors that are made to magnify flaws. You want an accurate speaker to monitor, not one that magnifies anything. I been making music for over 20 years and never heard this before in my life.

You have never used Yamaha NS10s or Avantone Cubes??? Both are great at focusing on various frequencies at the expense of accuracy.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Just look at s&r measurements and you'll be surprised.
You don't need to go far to look for obscure stuff even - yamaha ns10 might be the most popular studio monitor ever.

Funny comparison

 

[lowkeyoperations]

That video is the perfect example of why the NS10s were so popular in the studio FOR MIXING. They really focus on the mid range. And when you are balancing multiple tracks, setting eq, compression and getting the vocal to sit “in the mix” being able to focus on the midrange is critical.
Producers didn’t listen to them for fun :lol:
And they were very rarely the only pair of speakers in the studio.