It seems to me that the focus of this post was to counter the hate B&Ws get in this forum (rightfullly or not, is up to everyone to think), by showing
the preference of famous, world-renowned studios.
Noting some speakers, (mostly from the list of https://www.billboard.com/photos/7997296/top-recording-studios-2017
) this list of famous classical and not studios
: Augspurgers, ATCs
: ATCs, Dynaudio's
: Augspurgers, Genelecs
: Duntechs (..)
: Altec, Genelec, Urei's (..)
Providing some extrapolate discussion on OPs (assumingly by me) point on lack of ASR popular speakers (no JBLs or Harman speakers), and the fact that many of these speakers would get probably a decapitated ASR review (Looking at PMC, BW), i would note that:
- Most of these speaker brands used are a result of partnerships/contract. However, it is extremely naive that a huge studio would pick a subpar system to work with.
- Piggybacking the above with a hot take: Is studio success (as indicated by the bands/title success) related to equipment and specifically speaker performance (whatever that is, on/off axis, dynamics, phase etc..) ? Maybe not a directly correlated, but i would expect a strong relation to exist
- Studio systems may have slightly different priorities that home systems. Dynamics should play more important role that directivity, considering that their are considerably more ac. damp that homes.
- I believe that many/most mastering/mixing pros will still prioritize their subjective preference (in comb. with their room) ahead of measurements.
- With all the spread of acoustics knowledge from the internet and the nowadays cheap tools to perform measurements, i get we have reached a paradox where sometimes amateurs (ASR included) will put more weight on a speaker's objective performance than a professional whose work is critically impacted by it.