Palmer ORBIT 11 Cardioid Coaxial 3-way studio monitor (MSRP 799€/899$)

[amirm]

What I think a lot of people are missing is that the creative process is not a monolithic one where everyone that records, mixes and masters music or post (sound to picture) benefits equally from having "the best" measuring speakers.

No two speakers measure identically so there is no one best. There are many bests with different compromises. Measurements and research into speaker performance tells us that we want neutral speakers. I have not seen anyone in the Pro industry demonstrate with their research, that they want a colored one.

I have 25 years as an engineer, starting with recording and mixing music for post and then focusing on the non-music post portion and in my experience there is a lot more to it than just what measures best.

First, welcome to the forum and don't take this personally. But this kind of experience does not lend itself to the prediction you are agreeing with and making. If in that 25 years, you had spent 2 years of it, performing bias controlled experiments into what makes a speaker best for production of music, we would be all ears. But you didn't.

Your everyday job has no grading built into it. You produce a product that is the sum of what you do, what the artist delivers, and what the label forces on you. We can't parse this out in any reliable way to figure out the role that the speaker played as to enable you to know which speaker does the job best for you.

I have been trying to upgrade my everyday tools. I watch videos of people doing exactly what I need doing with the same tool. An electrician takes 5 different wire strippers and shows how each one works on wires. That, is useful. Telling us that he has wired houses for 25 years, is not.

What is good news is that your industry has massively shifted toward the same goals we have in sound reproduction. Dominant players in your field are producing neutral speakers with good directivity. We are here with so much excitement because the Palmer may also be doing so, but at a very attractive price. This is proof that measurements have started to play a strong role in decision making. As is the fact that we have so many Pros here.

Here is the key thing: if you are not able to do the best work you possibly can with these properly designed speakers, then I say the arrow points back at you, not the speaker! It in a way invalidates your argument that it is you that is important, not the speaker.

Finally, let me repeat again: we need a standard. Video has one. Same standard is used for color and grayscale in production. When we use the same to design and calibrate our display, the colors and picture overall that we get, has a very high chance of being the same as your counterpart in production. It is time that we moved in this direction by adopting the same standard in speakers (CEA/CTA-2034).

 

[Audionaut]

This discussion is going nowhere, especially in a Thread to the Palmer Orbit 11.
The fact is: an objectively better device, an objectively better speaker—they are better.

This is completely unrelated to the user level, because someone who is hard of hearing will not hear better on the best speaker, and a very good film director will not lose any of their talent on a CRT monitor.

Would be better to discus here

Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

Seems like so many review threads get challenged with: 1. Measurements are not everything. 2. You all never listen. 3. I trust my ears, not graphs. 4. I don't listen to graphs. I listen to music. 5. You all must not listen to music at all. 6. Why don't you all buy the best SINAD gear? 7...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Ogremic]

Even with the most perfect monitor, in the best room, you still need to adapt your ears to it. That's what every sound engineer does with its work, first establishes a frame of reference with known good songs and then works around its "sound". You learn how to use the tool for the job and you're understanding it's deficiencies, after some time. That's why some great albums were made on flawed speakers. They don't sound like that because of the speakers, but in spite of them. Good set of ears and experience, listening on a bunch of other systems, etc.

If you put me to mix today straight on a D&D 8c, I'd probably not have my best sounding mix, it would be decent, but I have no idea how the bass should sound on it.

So yeah, we can work around defects, or not so linear response, but it's good to strive to have fewer and fewer problems. When I first listened to Kh120 mk2 I didn't liked the sound. But the mixes I did on them were very good after learning them. The Yamaha NS-10 were terrible and I hated when I heard them. Always had to check the bass on the small PA installed to see what happens on the bass, also to impress clients. But you could mix on them and have very good results.

 

[sidechain]

Here is the key thing: if you are not able to do the best work you possibly can with these properly designed speakers, then I say the arrow points back at you, not the speaker! It in a way invalidates your argument that it is you that is important, not the speaker.

Respectfully, although I agree with some things you said this is where your argument falls flat (no pun intended) when applied to a music mixer/producer/mastering engineer's perspective. His "best work" is absolutely subjective as all art is, and part of the job is to translate your work into the "real" world where nobody listens to "flat" systems. Speakers got better since NS10s and Auratones but some would argue that mixes didn't get better, but again it's a subjective matter.

 

[Matt_Holland]

No two speakers measure identically so there is no one best. There are many bests with different compromises. Measurements and research into speaker performance tells us that we want neutral speakers. I have not seen anyone in the Pro industry demonstrate with their research, that they want a colored one.


First, welcome to the forum and don't take this personally. But this kind of experience does not lend itself to the prediction you are agreeing with and making. If in that 25 years, you had spent 2 years of it, performing bias controlled experiments into what makes a speaker best for production of music, we would be all ears. But you didn't.

Your everyday job has no grading built into it. You produce a product that is the sum of what you do, what the artist delivers, and what the label forces on you. We can't parse this out in any reliable way to figure out the role that the speaker played as to enable you to know which speaker does the job best for you.

I have been trying to upgrade my everyday tools. I watch videos of people doing exactly what I need doing with the same tool. An electrician takes 5 different wire strippers and shows how each one works on wires. That, is useful. Telling us that he has wired houses for 25 years, is not.

What is good news is that your industry has massively shifted toward the same goals we have in sound reproduction. Dominant players in your field are producing neutral speakers with good directivity. We are here with so much excitement because the Palmer may also be doing so, but at a very attractive price. This is proof that measurements have started to play a strong role in decision making. As is the fact that we have so many Pros here.

Here is the key thing: if you are not able to do the best work you possibly can with these properly designed speakers, then I say the arrow points back at you, not the speaker! It in a way invalidates your argument that it is you that is important, not the speaker.

Finally, let me repeat again: we need a standard. Video has one. Same standard is used for color and grayscale in production. When we use the same to design and calibrate our display, the colors and picture overall that we get, has a very high chance of being the same as your counterpart in production. It is time that we moved in this direction by adopting the same standard in speakers (CEA/CTA-2034).

If I may, I just wanted to add a couple of additional thoughts to what Amir writes.

1. Recording engineers who use tonally inaccurate speakers (for whatever reason) are intentionally or unintentionally now part of the artistic process as their work will be influenced by the speaker, rather than just by their ears.

2. Suggesting that an engineer knows what the best tool for them when said tool is an inaccurate loudspeaker is a misnomer. The engineer might prefer to use a particular speaker for whatever reason (how it looks and other bias may even be a factor), but the best tool for the job might not be the one you enjoy the most. A perfect parallel would be Formula 1 racing where there have been plenty of example over the decades where the fastest car was difficult to drive.

 

[sidechain]

1. Recording engineers who use tonally inaccurate speakers (for whatever reason) are intentionally or unintentionally now part of the artistic process as their work will be influenced by the speaker, rather than just by their ears.

You would be right if the speaker was the only variable, a room is a major part of how things sound.

 

[sidechain]

2. Suggesting that an engineer knows what the best tool for them when said tool is an inaccurate loudspeaker is a misnomer. The engineer might prefer to use a particular speaker for whatever reason (how it looks and other bias may even be a factor), but the best tool for the job might not be the one you enjoy the most. A perfect parallel would be Formula 1 racing where there have been plenty of example over the decades where the fastest car was difficult to drive.

Another parallel is driving a Honda Civic knowing an overwhelming majority of people drives them or worse, creating music is all about translation.

 

[Matt_Holland]

You would be right if the speaker was the only variable in a world where a room is not a major part of how things sound.

Other flaws in the setup do not excuse poor speakers. Particularly when we know that speakers with good directivity perform much more consistently in different environments.
Highest possible quality should be strived for in all areas.

 

[Matt_Holland]

Another parallel is driving a Honda Civic knowing an overwhelming majority of people drives them or worse, creating music is all about translation.

Sorry I don’t agree with that parallel because there is no overwhelming majority using the same car/speaker. It’s the Wild West and using flawed monitors just makes the situation worse.

 

[zequence]

In controlled testing, such a divide does not exist. In subjectivist, opinion based world, yes. But not in fact based one.

I have such a hi-fi speaker. But if I had to do it again, I would have been seriously tempted to get the Genelec 8361A.

My understanding is that people regard those speakers more on the analytical side.

Yes, I agree that it is subjective. And, that is in fact the point that some of us are making. Measurements do not change how you experience what you hear. We have different ears, different brains.
So, if you are using the speakers as tools, measurements alone are not going to help you in finding the best speakers for you.

What I do think measurements are good for is finding problems!

 

[sidechain]

Other flaws in the setup do not excuse poor speakers. Particularly when we know that speakers with good directivity perform much more consistently in different environments.
Highest possible quality should be strived for in all areas.

You're missing the point, most people we're making the music for use poor speakers. The most used speaker in 2026 is the built in iPhone/smartphone speaker, followed by bluetooth speakers (some mono), car/tv systems etc. I'm not saying a flat frequency system doesn't have it's place in a music making context but it's just one tool among so many others.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

And yet no engineer mixes primarily on iPhone speakers. Go figure.

 

[Matt_Holland]

You're missing the point, most people were making the music for use poor speakers. The most used speaker in 2026 is the built in iPhone/smartphone speaker, followed by bluetooth speakers (some mono), car/tv systems etc. I'm not saying a flat frequency system doesn't have its place in a music making context but it's just one tool among so many others.

Accurate speakers should be the primary tool in addition to headphones and other consumer devices to check translation. A substitute for these consumer devices is to apply EQ to the monitors. My brother owns some Barefoot monitors that have an NS10 mode for example.

 

[sidechain]

And yet no engineer mixes primarily on iPhone speakers. Go figure.

Tell that to Audiomovers, mix2mobile and other stream to mobile plugins. Translation is more important than a flat line in a world where nobody hears anything flat.

 

[Karmacoma]

since that's not reality we're living with compromises.

Based on your experience, why do you think so many famous mastering studios are ready to pay the extra cost to get some Genelecs for instance? They seem to not like compromises.

we're dealing with creative people that (hopefully) create art, or at least something tangential to it.

It seems like you're implying mixing with non neutral speakers could be part of that creative process, that'd be a bit disturbing to me, as an artist I'd likely ask from you to "know your place".

 

[caught gesture]

Surely this discussion is now off-topic and belongs in countless other threads going in the same circles!

 

[Purité Audio]

My understanding is that people regard those speakers more on the analytical side.

Yes, I agree that it is subjective. And, that is in fact the point that some of us are making. Measurements do not change how you experience what you hear. We have different ears, different brains.
So, if you are using the speakers as tools, measurements alone are not going to help you in finding the best speakers for you.

What I do think measurements are good for is finding problems!

Measurements completely characterise a loudspeaker.
Keith

 

[amirm]

Surely this discussion is now off-topic and belongs in countless other threads going in the same circles!

There is nothing related to the OP to discuss until I get the review samples. Might as well use the time and resources to discuss the importance of what this speaker can do. Otherwise the measurements would be moot.

 

[amirm]

Yes, I agree that it is subjective.

No, it is subjective bias. Unless you evaluate a speaker blind, you don't know if you are using just your ears or ears+eyes.

And, that is in fact the point that some of us are making. Measurements do not change how you experience what you hear. We have different ears, different brains.

Yet peer reviewed and extensive research proves that is not the case. 50 years of it. It shows that listeners with wildly different backgrounds, age and sex, have remarkably similar preference for a neutral speaker. And we know what a neutral speaker is when it comes to measurements.

No, measurements are not a 100% predictor but far, far closer than any subjective opinion.

 

[Karmacoma]

We have different ears, different brains.

But we all live in the same world, and we have to agree on what is real and what isn't following logic and rationality.