Quote:
Originally Posted by peeder  This common point of view I'd like to declare as obsolete. The way to get mixes sounding good on the enormous range of playback systems out there is to get them sounding as good as possible on the most revealing monitors you can afford.
Each monitor and room provides you a different subset of the mix, a different perspective. Only if you get every detail in the mix as good as you can are all the subsets also going to be good. If you mix through a subset, no matter how "typical" you feel that subset might be, you are going to miss many problems that will be all too apparent to too many of your listeners.
I had a quick listen to Yamaha's HS80M and I was impressed, but it was a terrible combination of not using reference material and not having anything to compare them to. So my opinion of them is worth next to nothing.
I always suggest people invest in a great set of headphones if they can't afford great monitoring, so they can fix things. A headphone that I think sounds pretty damn poor but reveals tons of problems in a mix extremely well is the Ultrasone Proline 750. This is closed back so it can be used for tracking too. You would prefer the sound of the ATH-M50 or Sennheiser HD600 certainly, but I have started turning to the Ultrasones nearly exclusively for checking mixes. Even though I think they sound pretty awful.  |
Yes all very true.I mix on the 50s and love them, they very much translate to the real world.Mixing on completely flat monitors is boring to me.I own p22s to check my mixes,or if the band wants to hear it louder.I run a sub with both monitors no matter what.The P22s have a very nice top/mid and a tight bass responce.I dont mix rock or metal on these just checking for something the Yammies missed.I however mix country,classical,poop(pop),worship and other clean sounding genres on the P22s