PMC result6 Monitor Review

[Bubblegamma]

You want me to do your homework?

So you don’t have any research data on near field monitoring in mixing studios?

 

[amirm]

Well, if you had any experience in studio work, you would know for example that 200-400hz peaks and 1khz dips are quite common in studios when near field monitors are used

Go create a new thread and prove that with data. This is a review thread and not a generic argument thread.

 

[Bubblegamma]

I’m waiting for data on near field monitoring in studios from you first

 

[amirm]

So you don’t have any research data on near field monitoring in mixing studios?

What research? That a colored speaker sounds right because there is a desk in there? If so, as I mentioned, that is your job to reference, not mine.

 

[amirm]

I’m waiting for data on near field monitoring in studios from you first

Your world is full of folklore and myths some of you believe in. Sadly you don't believe in proper experimentation to figure out if any of them are valid. So we are left with laughable claims such as a desk reflection counteracting colored response of a speaker. Go create a new thread and prove this point instead of derailing a review thread.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

It would be nearly impossible for a manufacturer to predict these exact conditions, so building in a non-flat response to compensate for desk reflections doesn't make sense.

 

[crappypanther]

the vast majority of monitors have much better graphics. no roller coasters. it is assumed that you will use them in an acoustically prepared room

 

[Mnyb]

So you don’t have any research data on near field monitoring in mixing studios?

You missed the point nobody seems to have this data , due to lack of research ?

BBC did some way back in time , maybe some brands do research but it stays inside the company ? Genelec and Neumann possibly ? Their products align well with the research for home speakers ? possibly different choices of directivity and general tonal balance, but still flat fr with controlled directivity . Pro speakers have the luxury of having listeners at a defined distance for example nearfield it’s possible to optimise more i would guess

 

[MaxwellsEq]

I don't feel like the debate will go anywhere. In my experience, recording studio control rooms are all slightly different shapes. Mixing consoles have different physical profiles. Main monitors are some distance from the mixing engineer, may be soffit mounted, are "far-field" and closest to an equilateral triangle, whilst medium monitors and "aurotones" are "near-feld", often sit on the console or stands behind it, and are placed wider than an equilateral triangle. There are racks of FX units. The control rooms are often quite acoustically dead, but not always. Mixing engineers need to move around and so are never in fixed sweet spot MLP. People pop in and stand or sit listening to progress, themselves acting as acoustic absorbers briefly. There's sometimes a sofa at back, but often there's another table!

A studio control room has none of the normal characteristics of a domestic lounge or desktop listening setup.

No one has any data, or if they do, it's secret.

 

[nabuc]

So you don’t have any research data on near field monitoring in mixing studios?

Yes i basic room it's common, cos it's not treated well a least for the bass dip, phase cancel with wall. and home studio sometime they are in corner on a desk so dips are bigger

But in this case the goal will be to increase it like this when you get phase cancellation it go back to flat , not create a bigger dip, but to complicate cos don't know how they will be place. and 1khz dips not common.
The base it's to creat the best monitoring respect the most the source, so for this you need to be flat, like neuman or genelec. It's for be place in the best acoustic room,...
And after there is ton of research for best sound , harman did test with complex system ,.... and peoples preferred the flat. And advantage when it's flat you can eq as you want easily if you prefer 1-2 db more bass,...
So PMC fail, and not only on this model, an all theirs model, issue in woofer, and tweeter.

 

[Purité Audio]

PMC are at least consistent.
Keith

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

Actually he was talking about Result6 not having any options of FR correction at all.

I'm aware but maybe he's really saying that the speaker has to be equalized because he feels guilty about all of his lies and its a way of justifying them

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

"No one has any data, or if they do, it's secret."

It appears that Bubblegamma might be guarding the secret - If you share here, I wont tell anyone!

 

[Miley_B]

Wide dispersion in high frequencies? Great as well, because when using a lot of treatment to fix the bass problems you inevitably overdamp the highs

These PMC Result 6 have narrow dispersion in the high frequencies....

 

[Jimbob54]

Since @amirm blocked me here after failing to provide any data to support his claims (very adult and 'scientific' approach ), I created a new account

Yeah-yeah, right. Thats why the-best-ever-sounding Genelecs have switches for desk reflections compensation. As well as many other monitors. And no @nabuc , I'm not talking about SBIR issues. Please read carefully


with acoustically transparent desk or console, right?


Exactly, thank you. Thats what I was talking about. But Amir started to arguing that its not the case

So, I gave you a clear example of how PMC's kind of FR could actually be a benefit for my specific case. What's the problem with that? Am I pushing someone to buy these speakers? Or is it somehow better to have a 'non-flat' FR from a 'flat' speaker at listening position instead of the other way around?

Again, different rooms, different listening positions, different use cases. There's no one speaker that is perfect for every situation

Easiest block ever. Thanks .

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

I think you mixed me up with Amir. He mentioned the research data first, not me

You need to show evidence for your claim. we don't need to show evidence that someone's claim that's void of evidence is false.

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

With a little more time he might understand! I'm hopeful but maybe that's being silly on my part

 

[ssashton]

The idea that a non-flat speaker response might compensate for common acoustic issues like a mixing desk reflections is not crazy. However, it would not be built in to the speakers default response. If PMC had intended that, they would have an EQ switch on the back to enable or disable it, maybe adjust the level of the compensation.

Regarding RT60 - there is nothing wrong with wide dispersion, but it should still be smooth and consistent with frequency. If a room has too low RT60 at 2lhz when using a speaker with consistent directivity it points to the room absorption being unbalanced. The room should have some work done, maybe cover a few absorbers with slotted wood. It's not really the right approach to use a speaker with un-even dispersion pattern to compensate as this will cause other issues beyond the RT60 figure.

 

[roog]

When will U.K. loudspeaker manufacturers enter the 20th Century, so very poor.
Keith

Having spent some time at the Bristol HiFi show in the UK yesterday I would say that many brands are still trading on their heritage value. Some even seem to be regressing I noted at least three companies using drivers with the old Tannoy concentric driver concept.
Kef were absent and very few DSP based active speakers on show. The surprise for me being the Harbeth (very traditional company) playing their little active speakers. NLE-1.

 

[uwotm8]

but maybe he's really saying that the speaker has to be equalized because he feels guilty about all of his lies

Or maybe you're seeing signs and omens as some very religious people do?
Or maybe an experienced guy who had tested a lot of studio monitors really thinks they are good? Yet not ideal and have in-house sound, this is what's clear in his review and you don't need to imagine anything. These are better PMC for those who likes PMC. An outdated speaker by modern standards and not flat, but I easily imagine a person who get used to work with such sound and simply wants no changes except refinement.

In my work I - as rather conservative person - get mad every time Autodesk "improves" 3ds max in a way that you have to fix some very basic hotkeys because they changed them for I don't know what reason. If it works, don't fix.