Really Expensive Speakers: Overrated For Mixing And Mastering

[nqikz]

If you pay for a speaker with the price of $100-200, then yes, sure, you're not gonna get something great or very ideal for reliable mixing or mastering. They have ports, transient response is probably not that great, etc, etc. But when you spend more than $4000 (and that's probably pushing it) for a pair of speakers, I genuinely believe it's not that worth it. maybe unless it's in the Neumann category and you're just rich. Or maybe if your studio needs very big mains because you want to impress clients or whatever.

most mixing or mastering engineers don't need to break the bank to get a good mix or even be able to master. Engineering has its limits and nothing man-made is perfect, let's be honest. It can get really good, but there will never be "perfect". Objectively, perfect doesn't exist in the Audio world. Its all taste. Those super expensive Neumanns or Genelecs aren't perfect either, but they are very good.

My point is that for most mixing or mastering engineers, even if you have the money, it is unnecessary to spend a fortune on the best Genelecs, ATCs, and honestly, probably even a KH310.
I really think the price of all these speakers comes down to marketing, and sure, the additional benefits the monitors could provide, or how they were engineered. Like the KH310 for example, is a really great piece of gear ill admit that. but for most speakers its the marketing due to the brand name which makes the price so high. For example, why waste $8k on a pair of Amphion Two 18s? or $13K for ATCS? Those prices are nuts. The engineers you see using those Amphions speakers, they didn't buy them. They were given to them by those brands as a product for advertising. Not saying the speakers are bad and such, but the price is a massive stretch and you can get great results for less.

But what do these high end speakers do? Oh, right. They provide "excellent transient response and have an amazingly revealing midrange, ,etc, etc"? Cool. honestly, for most out there mixing, they would benefit and do just fine getting the NS10 which also provides an amazing transient response with a fantastic time domain, paired with their very revealing midrange and typically only cost like $600-800 in total with say, a solid amp like a crown, or a yamaha, etc. And the best part, is countless of mixes and grammies were won mixing with the NS10s. You could argue that it's not as revealing as an ATC or Amphion but so what? why spend thousands more on such speakers unless you're deep in the industry where you're given gear by loudspeaker companies like candy, or you're making like $3000 a mix or more, or maybe you're a gear obsessed audiophile that has a lot of money to spare.

So what I would do is just get a pair NS10s and pair them with a 7 or 8" monitors like say an EVE SC208 or a 207 for example, which has plenty of distortion free low end, with a crisp extended top end and you won't need to spend a fortune to get great results. So in the end, I believe there's a sweet-spot to audio engineering. You need to be smart. Room treatment, NS10s, Maybe a pair of Neumann KH120 or 150s, or some EVEs to check lows and highs, your ears, a pair of solid headphones, and just your overall EXPERIENCE. That's basically all you need to get a good mix or master. And a better mix will result in having less to do in mastering so it's a win-win.in the end.

 

[Curvature]

So what I would do is just get a pair NS10s and pair them with a 7 or 8" monitors like say an EVE SC208 or a 207 for example, which has plenty of distortion free low end, with a crisp extended top end and you won't need to spend a fortune to get great results. So

NS10s are pretty bad and EVE speakers are mediocre.

If you don't want to spend too much, I think a Neumann KH120II is probably a good middle point. You'll still need a way to measure and EQ the response at your listening position, and headphones or IEMs to check below 300Hz, since that region will be heavily impacted by the room.

At that point, mix away.

I also generally recommend reading books. Experience has a way of being simultaneously too specific and unfocused, and many important lessons come late when they could've come early with a bit of learning.

 

[nqikz]

NS10s are pretty bad and EVE speakers are mediocre.

If you don't want to spend too much, I think a Neumann KH120II is probably a good middle point. You'll still need a way to measure and EQ the response at your listening position, and headphones or IEMs to check below 300Hz, since that region will be heavily impacted by the room.

At that point, mix away.

I also generally recommend reading books. Experience has a way of being simultaneously too specific and unfocused, and many important lessons come late when they could've come early with a bit of learning.

Why are NS10s bad? And please don’t say “measurements” because their time domain is excellent and they are great for getting the balance or midrange right to translate. They aren’t flat, but so what? They are of course not perfect but they do what they are meant to do just fine. Also why are EVE mediocre? You have experience with them?

 

[Puddingbuks]

Relax man, nobody gives a dime about what you think, people make their own choices. Compared to the rest of a studio with equipment, location, room, acoustic treatment and labor costs, a pair of speakers is peanuts.

 

[nqikz]

Relax man, nobody gives a dime about what you think, people make their own choices. Compared to the rest of a studio with equipment, location, room, acoustic treatment and labor costs, a pair of speakers is peanuts.

Cool. I’m just sharing my thoughts. A pair of speakers is peanuts for people that are already in the industry sure. Not for people starting up.

 

[vsch]

I agree that spending a fortune on speakers often yields minimal returns, but would add the following based on my (limited) experience: room correction makes a huge difference—especially in less-than-ideal rooms. With that in mind, I think the sweet spot for achieving high-quality, full-range nearfield sound at a reasonable price might look something like this:

• Genelec 8330 + 7350 or 7360 + GLM
• Neumann KH 120 II + KH 750 + MA-1
• Genelec 8030C or Kali LP-6 (if on a budget) + competent hifi subwoofer (e.g., Rythmik, SVS, Arendal, depending on where you live) + miniDSP Flex or software-based correction (e.g., Equalizer APO) + simple measurement mic (e.g., UMIK-1)

Options 1 and 2 land slightly above $3k, while Option 3 can be put together for a bit less.

For another ~$100, I’d also recommend adding a pair of budget-friendly IEMs (e.g., Truthear x Crinacle Red) and a simple DSP-DAC (e.g., Moondrop FreeDSP). When EQ’d to the Meta or Harman target, these IEMs offer reference-level clarity—which could be quite handy for mix checks.

[Edited to clarify what I agree with, as the discussion was already in full swing when I hit the "post" button.]

 

[Curvature]

Why are NS10s bad? And please don’t say “measurements” because their time domain is excellent and they are great for getting the balance or midrange right to translate. They aren’t flat, but so what? They are of course not perfect but they do what they are meant to do just fine. Also why are EVE mediocre? You have experience with them?

Measurements.

Funny how the time domain is as measurable as anything else.

We've already had an exchange what's important and why in the Amphion thread.

Listen, when I started mixing more than 20 years ago I did it in the most budget way possible, with computer speakers like the ones below. I remember they were just this off-white color popular back then, but not the exact model.

The reason I learned all this stuff about measurements was that experience taught me that I couldn't stop making mistakes when relying solely on my hearing after cycling through different gear.

Anyway, the choice is yours.

 

[Dialectic]

So what I would do is just get a pair NS10s and pair them with a 7 or 8" monitors like say an EVE SC208 or a 207 for example, which has plenty of distortion free low end, with a crisp extended top end and you won't need to spend a fortune to get great results. So in the end, I believe there's a sweet-spot to audio engineering. You need to be smart. Room treatment, NS10s, Maybe a pair of Neumann KH120 or 150s, or some EVEs to check lows and highs, your ears, a pair of solid headphones, and just your overall EXPERIENCE. That's basically all you need to get a good mix or master. And a better mix will result in having less to do in mastering so it's a win-win.in the end.

Please do your reading about loudspeaker engineering before opening threads with nonsensical suggestions like this.

 

[nqikz]

Please do you reading about loudspeaker engineering before opening threads with nonsensical suggestions like this.

Okay, right. That’s why you haven’t explained what’s nonsensical about anything I said.

 

[wwenze]

The idea is that if your mix sounds good on NS10 they will sound good on everything.

It's a horrible idea to do only that nowadays, you want a main mixer that sounds as accurate as possible (including room correction) and then have a grot box as a secondary.

 

[JiiPee]

One man's really expensive speaker is another man's reasonably priced speaker. (And some third man feels that he must spend at least twice as much to get speakers that fulfill his minimum quality criteria). What is expensive to one is subjective, and so is what sounds good to him.

 

[MAB]

If you pay for a speaker with the price of $100-200, then yes, sure, you're not gonna get something great or very ideal for reliable mixing or mastering. They have ports, transient response is probably not that great, etc, etc. But when you spend more than $4000 (and that's probably pushing it) for a pair of speakers, I genuinely believe it's not that worth it. maybe unless it's in the Neumann category and you're just rich. Or maybe if your studio needs very big mains because you want to impress clients or whatever.

most mixing or mastering engineers don't need to break the bank to get a good mix or even be able to master. Engineering has its limits and nothing man-made is perfect, let's be honest. It can get really good, but there will never be "perfect". Objectively, perfect doesn't exist in the Audio world. Its all taste. Those super expensive Neumanns or Genelecs aren't perfect either, but they are very good.

My point is that for most mixing or mastering engineers, even if you have the money, it is unnecessary to spend a fortune on the best Genelecs, ATCs, and honestly, probably even a KH310.
I really think the price of all these speakers comes down to marketing, and sure, the additional benefits the monitors could provide, or how they were engineered. Like the KH310 for example, is a really great piece of gear ill admit that. but for most speakers its the marketing due to the brand name which makes the price so high. For example, why waste $8k on a pair of Amphion Two 18s? or $13K for ATCS? Those prices are nuts. The engineers you see using those Amphions speakers, they didn't buy them. They were given to them by those brands as a product for advertising. Not saying the speakers are bad and such, but the price is a massive stretch and you can get great results for less.

But what do these high end speakers do? Oh, right. They provide "excellent transient response and have an amazingly revealing midrange, ,etc, etc"? Cool. honestly, for most out there mixing, they would benefit and do just fine getting the NS10 which also provides an amazing transient response with a fantastic time domain, paired with their very revealing midrange and typically only cost like $600-800 in total with say, a solid amp like a crown, or a yamaha, etc. And the best part, is countless of mixes and grammies were won mixing with the NS10s. You could argue that it's not as revealing as an ATC or Amphion but so what? why spend thousands more on such speakers unless you're deep in the industry where you're given gear by loudspeaker companies like candy, or you're making like $3000 a mix or more, or maybe you're a gear obsessed audiophile that has a lot of money to spare.

So what I would do is just get a pair NS10s and pair them with a 7 or 8" monitors like say an EVE SC208 or a 207 for example, which has plenty of distortion free low end, with a crisp extended top end and you won't need to spend a fortune to get great results. So in the end, I believe there's a sweet-spot to audio engineering. You need to be smart. Room treatment, NS10s, Maybe a pair of Neumann KH120 or 150s, or some EVEs to check lows and highs, your ears, a pair of solid headphones, and just your overall EXPERIENCE. That's basically all you need to get a good mix or master. And a better mix will result in having less to do in mastering so it's a win-win.in the end.

Nice manifesto. You went from "I’m not the best at reading measurements" to full anti-measurement expert in a weekend.

You are right, it's not necessary to spend a fortune to get good and accurate sound. For many of us the used price of NS-10 are quite off-putting. They myth of it's unique transient response isn't mythological, it's a bog-simple sealed woofer with limited bass extension who's response (transient or otherwise) matched by many other speakers. And many of the other mysteries like tissue paper over the tweeter are indeed mysterious due to the response errors originating in the woofer.

So yes, an introductory doesn't have to be expensive, in fact probably half the cost of a used pair of NS-10.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

If you pay for a speaker with the price of $100-200, then yes, sure, you're not gonna get something great or very ideal for reliable mixing or mastering. They have ports, transient response is probably not that great, etc, etc. But when you spend more than $4000 (and that's probably pushing it) for a pair of speakers, I genuinely believe it's not that worth it. maybe unless it's in the Neumann category and you're just rich. Or maybe if your studio needs very big mains because you want to impress clients or whatever.

most mixing or mastering engineers don't need to break the bank to get a good mix or even be able to master. Engineering has its limits and nothing man-made is perfect, let's be honest. It can get really good, but there will never be "perfect". Objectively, perfect doesn't exist in the Audio world. Its all taste. Those super expensive Neumanns or Genelecs aren't perfect either, but they are very good.

My point is that for most mixing or mastering engineers, even if you have the money, it is unnecessary to spend a fortune on the best Genelecs, ATCs, and honestly, probably even a KH310.
I really think the price of all these speakers comes down to marketing, and sure, the additional benefits the monitors could provide, or how they were engineered. Like the KH310 for example, is a really great piece of gear ill admit that. but for most speakers its the marketing due to the brand name which makes the price so high. For example, why waste $8k on a pair of Amphion Two 18s? or $13K for ATCS? Those prices are nuts. The engineers you see using those Amphions speakers, they didn't buy them. They were given to them by those brands as a product for advertising. Not saying the speakers are bad and such, but the price is a massive stretch and you can get great results for less.

But what do these high end speakers do? Oh, right. They provide "excellent transient response and have an amazingly revealing midrange, ,etc, etc"? Cool. honestly, for most out there mixing, they would benefit and do just fine getting the NS10 which also provides an amazing transient response with a fantastic time domain, paired with their very revealing midrange and typically only cost like $600-800 in total with say, a solid amp like a crown, or a yamaha, etc. And the best part, is countless of mixes and grammies were won mixing with the NS10s. You could argue that it's not as revealing as an ATC or Amphion but so what? why spend thousands more on such speakers unless you're deep in the industry where you're given gear by loudspeaker companies like candy, or you're making like $3000 a mix or more, or maybe you're a gear obsessed audiophile that has a lot of money to spare.

So what I would do is just get a pair NS10s and pair them with a 7 or 8" monitors like say an EVE SC208 or a 207 for example, which has plenty of distortion free low end, with a crisp extended top end and you won't need to spend a fortune to get great results. So in the end, I believe there's a sweet-spot to audio engineering. You need to be smart. Room treatment, NS10s, Maybe a pair of Neumann KH120 or 150s, or some EVEs to check lows and highs, your ears, a pair of solid headphones, and just your overall EXPERIENCE. That's basically all you need to get a good mix or master. And a better mix will result in having less to do in mastering so it's a win-win.in the end.

Main monitors are capable of very high peak levels across the entire frequency domain and with very low distortion and minimal compression. It's impossible to achieve this cheaply.

 

[DVDdoug]

If you have a home studio or bedroom studio you can get-by with affordable monitors. But you're not going to get "realistic" bass you can feel in your body from a $100 monitor. For decent sound, you'll need to spend a bit more, add a subwoofer if the monitors are "small", and measure and acoustically-treat your room.

They don't have to be "perfect". As long as they are decent with no gross defects you can learn what a good mix sounds like in your studio.

Bass is the biggest "room problem" and bass traps are expensive. A lot of people just use monitors with small woofers to avoid bass issues but that's just hiding the problem until your listeners find-out.

If you are doing audio production it's important to know what the production REALLY sounds like. It doesn't matter if it sounds good on your setup if it sounds bad on your listener's systems. Bass is particularly difficult. If your monitors can't accurately reproduce bass, or if it can't reproduce deep bass at all, the mix can end-up to too much or too-little or with other weird bass problems.


------------
"Real main monitors" used for recording, mixing, and mastering are big, good, expensive, and they go loud. The studio is also acoustically treated, measured, and EQ'd. And of course, recording studios are soundproof. (Soundproofing isn't as important for mixing & mastering.)

Most pro studios also have smaller monitors for various purposes. A lot of editing isn't that critical and doesn't need great monitors, and they like to make sure the production is going to sound OK on cheaper systems. The NS-10 became popular to check what the mix would sound like on an average-cheap stereo but most engineers will check their mix on a few different speakers (and headphones) that they are familiar with.

If you see a picture of a pro mixing desk you'll often see small monitors in the picture with the "real monitors" out of the frame.

Bob Katz is a famous mastering engineer and here is some information and photos about his Studio-A and Studio-B where some pre-mastering work is done. If you do a bit of research you'll find that all pro studios have expensive monitors.

This is from Floyd Toole's book:

Main monitors -
Large, usually in-wall installed, powerful full bandwidth systems capable of very high sound levels.

Mid-field Monitors-
Medium-sized loudspeakers that may be full bandwidth or may use subwoofers, localized at moderate distance in front of the main console, positioned to minimize reflections from the working surfaces.

Near-field monitors-
Small loudspeakers placed on the meter ridge of the recording console. The reflection for the working surface is part of the sound heard from thee loudspeakers, and their locations may cause them to interfere with what is heard from main or mid-field monitors. Listeners are in the acoustical near field of the source, meaning that the small changes in head location cause changes in the sounds arriving at the ears.

Here are some quotes about the NS-10 and NS10M:

Bob Katz-

Most times I can tell a Yamaha NS-10 nearfield mix when arrives for mastering.

Ethan Winer-

Adding too much low end is a common problem with mixes made on the popular Yamaha NS-10 loudspeakers.

Floyd Toole-

The NS-10M was admired because of its "tight" bass, a consequence of the deficiency of bass fundamental frequencies.

"Bad" sound cannot be standardized, as was attempted with the Auratone and continued in the NS10M and others.

 

[EERecordist]

There are several topics on ASR discussing studio monitors and my comments on them.

As the OP said, some of it is having the popular monitors of the time. You will find variations by country and region.

Most studios have visiting engineers and producers working there. They are paying customers, so you have to please them. Larger studios will have a choice of monitoirs and a list of friends to borrow the visiting engineers' favorites.

Studio monitors have low production volumes, and if they build their own drivers rather than using off the shelf drivers in higher production, that increases the cost. Active monitors will have a higher price than a monitor with a passive crossover. Some professional monitors have a distribution chain, adding costs.

One of the most important deciding factors is translation, which is engineer-specific. If you go to a pro audio dealer, like Vintage King, you will find about 10 brands popular in the US. The studio audio dealers are concentrated in NY, Nashville, and LA. Some of the brands have different distribution for their larger farfield models.

If you look at the cost to buy or build a professional studio, the cost of the monitors is very, very small in relation to the total cost.

Home listeners and audiophiles are not the target customer for studio monitors, though some home listeners use them.

The big expensive monitor developers have or rent anechoic chambers as part of their development process. Even so, the pro monitor yearly revenues are low. The volume now is home studios and desktop producers with nearfield monitors. Prince, Billie Eilish, and thousands of others have been breakout home producers.

Present Day Productions, a studio in London, is controversial on ASR. But they have several longer YouTubes on their studio monitor development process the OP may enjoy. They could not afford a spatial audio expansion with ATC. They went for direct distribution. They were motivated by Dolby ATMOS mixing speaker requirements. Dolby revenue is intellectual property. Dolby expense is R&D-they hire well, and marketing. Studios have to spend real expense on that proliferation of translatable speakers.

I think the OP is asking what speakers they should buy for home studio production. I always suggest for that question to select the speakers on review lists, sort by preference score, go to your price point, and start reading reviews to understand frequency response, including corrected, distortion across frequency, and the directivity pattern. Then consider your room conditioning and electronic room correction. If your art is good, the star-making machinery will find you. Your choice of monitors won't matter.

 

[nqikz]

Please do you reading about loudspeaker engineering before opening threads with nonsensical suggestions like this.

Okay, right. That’s why you haven’t explained what’s nonsensical about anything i

If you have a home studio or bedroom studio you can get-by with affordable monitors. But you're not going to get "realistic" bass you can feel in your body from a $100 monitor. For decent sound, you'll need to spend a bit more, add a subwoofer if the monitors are "small", and measure and acoustically-treat your room.

They don't have to be "perfect". As long as they are decent with no gross defects you can learn what a good mix sounds like in your studio.

Bass is the biggest "room problem" and bass traps are expensive. A lot of people just use monitors with small woofers to avoid bass issues but that's just hiding the problem until your listeners find-out.

If you are doing audio production it's important to know what the production REALLY sounds like. It doesn't matter if it sounds good on your setup if it sounds bad on your listener's systems. Bass is particularly difficult. If your monitors can't accurately reproduce bass, or if it can't reproduce deep bass at all, the mix can end-up to too much or too-little or with other weird bass problems.


------------
"Real main monitors" used for recording, mixing, and mastering are big, good, expensive, and they go loud. The studio is also acoustically treated, measured, and EQ'd. And of course, recording studios are soundproof. (Soundproofing isn't as important for mixing & mastering.)

Most pro studios also have smaller monitors for various purposes. A lot of editing isn't that critical and doesn't need great monitors, and they like to make sure the production is going to sound OK on cheaper systems. The NS-10 became popular to check what the mix would sound like on an average-cheap stereo but most engineers will check their mix on a few different speakers (and headphones) that they are familiar with.

If you see a picture of a pro mixing desk you'll often see small monitors in the picture with the "real monitors" out of the frame.

Bob Katz is a famous mastering engineer and here is some information and photos about his Studio-A and Studio-B where some pre-mastering work is done. If you do a bit of research you'll find that all pro studios have expensive monitors.

This is from Floyd Toole's book:



Here are some quotes about the NS-10 and NS10M:

Bob Katz-


Ethan Winer-


Floyd Toole-

interesting quotes. “I can tell when someone used NS10” maybe he can in the low end? he can tell by Midrange? He didn’t explain. but like I said, it’s best you pair NS10 it with a speaker that you can check low frequencies with reliably or headphones.

 

[nqikz]

There are several topics on ASR discussing studio monitors and my comments on them.

As the OP said, some of it is having the popular monitors of the time. You will find variations by country and region.

Most studios have visiting engineers and producers working there. They are paying customers, so you have to please them. Larger studios will have a choice of monitoirs and a list of friends to borrow the visiting engineers' favorites.

Studio monitors have low production volumes, and if they build their own drivers rather than using off the shelf drivers in higher production, that increases the cost. Active monitors will have a higher price than a monitor with a passive crossover. Some professional monitors have a distribution chain, adding costs.

One of the most important deciding factors is translation, which is engineer-specific. If you go to a pro audio dealer, like Vintage King, you will find about 10 brands popular in the US. The studio audio dealers are concentrated in NY, Nashville, and LA. Some of the brands have different distribution for their larger farfield models.

If you look at the cost to buy or build a professional studio, the cost of the monitors is very, very small in relation to the total cost.

Home listeners and audiophiles are not the target customer for studio monitors, though some home listeners use them.

The big expensive monitor developers have or rent anechoic chambers as part of their development process. Even so, the pro monitor yearly revenues are low. The volume now is home studios and desktop producers with nearfield monitors. Prince, Billie Eilish, and thousands of others have been breakout home producers.

Present Day Productions, a studio in London, is controversial on ASR. But they have several longer YouTubes on their studio monitor development process the OP may enjoy. They could not afford a spatial audio expansion with ATC. They went for direct distribution. They were motivated by Dolby ATMOS mixing speaker requirements. Dolby revenue is intellectual property. Dolby expense is R&D-they hire well, and marketing. Studios have to spend real expense on that proliferation of translatable speakers.

I think the OP is asking what speakers they should buy for home studio production. I always suggest for that question to select the speakers on review lists, sort by preference score, go to your price point, and start reading reviews to understand frequency response, including corrected, distortion across frequency, and the directivity pattern. Then consider your room conditioning and electronic room correction. If your art is good, the star-making machinery will find you. Your choice of monitors won't matter.

Yep like I said, For most people working from home they don’t need huge expensive speakers to get a good mix unless they want to buy that and they have the space then cool do what you want. If you’re in studios then big mains are gonna be necessary for clients, yeah. I’ve heard about that “present day productions” mum speaker. I wouldn’t call it reasonably priced but it’s not too bad either. It’s expensive, sure, but if they are proven to be good, then it’s not that bad of an investment for your studio. But could be all a scam too who knows.

 

[DVDdoug]

interesting quotes. “I can tell when someone used NS10” maybe he can in the low end? he can tell by Midrange? He didn’t explain.

I don't have the full quote handy but I think he was taking about the midrange. In any case, he was saying it's BAD and when someone sends him a mix done on them he has to fix it.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yep like I said, For most people working from home they don’t need huge expensive speakers to get a good mix unless they want to buy that and they have the space then cool do what you want. If you’re in studios then big mains are gonna be necessary for clients, yeah. I’ve heard about that “present day productions” mum speaker. I wouldn’t call it reasonably priced but it’s not too bad either. It’s expensive, sure, but if they are proven to be good, then it’s not that bad of an investment for your studio. But could be all a scam too who knows.

Measurements here,

PresentDayProduction MUM-8

Can a direct sales model and high‑tech components make top‑level monitoring affordable? Present Day Productions believe so.

www.soundonsound.com

Keith

 

[nqikz]

I don't have the full quote handy but I think he was taking about the midrange. In any case, he was saying it's BAD and when someone sends him a mix done on them he has to fix it.

Bad in what way? Bad is subjective especially to a mastering engineer. If NS10 made the midrange translate “bad” then nobody would be using them. There’s plenty of amazing songs either that topped charts, or underground that NS10S were used to carve out the midrange and it sounds PHENOMENAL.