Klein & Hummel o300 DISSAPOINTED

[sage691]

WHAT I WANT IS A SPEAKER THAT SLAPS ME IN THE FACE WHEN THE SOUND IS SHITTY.... and make things shine when a mix is really good.

Try Auratones for this. You'll get a swift kick to the balls if your mix is anything short of spectacular sounding.

For that high price those speakers should have those qualities!!

Nope, that's not what they are designed for. Just look at major mixing studios: they have 3 or 4 sets of speakers. The "mains" might cost $100,000 alone ! Then they'll have Auratones ($300 per pair) up there on the console as well. And they don't expect that $100,000 system to do the same job as the Auratones.

One thing about this whole music biz thang has never changed since its' inception: THE ROAD TO FAME IS A RICH MAN'S GAME !!!!

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by Arksun

If you're hearing issues with professionally well mastered tracks too, then I think you answered your own question there. Did you ever consider the reason why even huge budget big mainstream artist releases also sound bad on a particular speaker system and acoustic space was because... that particular speaker system and acoustic space was inherently bad?.

Point I'm making is, you wan't a mix that translates well to most systems yes, but it is absolutely impossible to make a mix that translates well to ALL systems and the acoustic spaces they sit in. You find the best middle ground, but you cannot accomodate every eventuality cause that would require an individual mix for each setup!

Lets say you're listening to a mix in a tiny square room that sounds super boomy at 120hz, you can create a mix that compensates for that, but then it sounds really thin in that area on most other systems. You could have mixed the track on the most perfect speakers on the planet, but nothing is going to get around the fact that that square room you listened in, any mix will sound shitty in that area.

No speaker can ever scream at you problems which are specific issues to certain setups and acoustic spaces out there, sometimes those distortions you hear are just down to the poor quality of the car speakers or whatever, their own inherent ITD and THD issues. No, all you can do is find a good middle ground. I think the O300D are fairy good for their price point, they just can't go very loud before the woofer limiter kicks in.

Hi Arksun Actually the funny thing is I tested those tracks on multiple systems and the do sound crap everywhere ... Try this track and you'll see """LIONEL RITCHIE - ZOOMIN' ""

Everytime he says ZZZZZZOOOOOOming ... it should do something very sweet to your ears lol.

Multimillion budget mixing/mastering facilities are SUPPOSED(In theory) to be absolutely stunning ... but maybe their speakers don't show some of those things that tend to show up on some speakers and at certain high volumes

As I said I would be very comfortable to use the KH or Twins as leisure speakers ... but this is serious work .. and it is supposed to help me to find the troublesome frequencies ... so that when the song plays in a club , people don't need to hurt their ears :P :D

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by sage691

Try Auratones for this. You'll get a swift kick to the balls if your mix is anything short of spectacular sounding.



Nope, that's not what they are designed for. Just look at major mixing studios: they have 3 or 4 sets of speakers. The "mains" might cost $100,000 alone ! Then they'll have Auratones ($300 per pair) up there on the console as well. And they don't expect that $100,000 system to do the same job as the Auratones.

One thing about this whole music biz thang has never changed since its' inception: THE ROAD TO FAME IS A RICH MAN'S GAME !!!!

Even though I don't have balls , this is exactly what I would want my monitors to do with regards to normal or bad mixes :D

[deft_bonz]

Originally Posted by alecsribet

I have actually posted a thread on this topic , you know as I have said again those speakers are very detailed ... but after months with working with them I started to realize that there were things they were hiding...which show their ugly faces on big PA systems and other consumer speakers.

Momentary/not momentary harsh, sometimes sibilant hard incisive sounds... which is a very big reason why people don't/can't listen to a track many times, even though the music might be amazing.


The only speaker I have come across that reveal those problems clearly are the NS-10 and the ATC 150(which costs a fortune).

I am actually looking for a cheaper alternative that can show me those flaws... because I saw how critical they are for the success of a song.



Maybe you won't believe me, that's fine but what i'm telling you that I wish that they showed me those flaws in a more aggressive manner so that I could take action immediately ... just like I hear on the ATC 150 of my friend.



I also had a conversation with Harvey ... the speaker designer for TRIDENT .. and he told me that effectively , many speakers don't show those flaws clearly because the designers favour LONG HOURS OF LISTENING... I just don't think that a monitor speaker should pat you on the back when there are flaws in a track ...specially at those price ranges.

That's my opinion If you like speakers that pat you on the back , good for you and all the best

I believe you, since everyone has his own experiences. Only because I can hear the flaws with the K&H, does not mean everyone else must hear the same

I also have NS10 and a PA system to cross check. I even still check the mixes in my car

[Silver Sonya]

Here is something to note: If there was a universally accepted "perfect monitor," we'd all have a pair of whatever brand that was.

Speakers are a subjective choice. Always. Always. Always.

And, as Tchad Blake once said, monitoring is one of the most personal choices you're going to make in your career.

- c

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by deft_bonz

I even still check the mixes in my car

If only we could get that 'car system sound' on a pair of monitors. It's impossible I know, since it's the space of the car that has a HUGE effect.

I have a car that will probably go by-by within a year or two, and the MAIN reason I've been keeping it alive is due to it's sound system! I know it SO well and checking mixes in there has become essential to me. It's a hybrid system, only about 30% of it is original, the rest I built. I'll be taking the system out of the car when it gets junked and if I can't install it in my next car (possible due to the size of the system), I'm seriously considering installing it in a super small room, like a big closet, etc.

But then I'd have to sacrifice a closet

How many here hold onto cars longer than they wanted ONLY due to the sound system?

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Here is something to note: If there was a universally accepted "perfect monitor," we'd all have a pair of whatever brand that was.

Speakers are a subjective choice. Always. Always. Always.

And, as Tchad Blake once said, monitoring is one of the most personal choices you're going to make in your career.

- c

Now let me ask you a question, if you had to do a drag race and had to win it(cause you bet your house on it), what would pick ??

A Porsche Cayman , cause you like the feel, the smell, the looks of it(SUBJECTIVE) ?? Or a Bugatti Veyron (cause it's simply the best in terms of acceleration/torque/grip/power and the sure way to win) ?

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

If only we could get that 'car system sound' on a pair of monitors. It's impossible I know, since it's the space of the car that has a HUGE effect.

I have a car that will probably go by-by within a year or two, and the MAIN reason I've been keeping it alive is due to it's sound system! I know it SO well and checking mixes in there has become essential to me. It's a hybrid system, only about 30% of it is original, the rest I built. I'll be taking the system out of the car when it gets junked and if I can't install it in my next car (possible due to the size of the system), I'm seriously considering installing it in a super small room, like a big closet, etc.

But then I'd have to sacrifice a closet

How many here hold onto cars longer than they wanted ONLY due to the sound system?

The funny thing or the big co-incidence in the story that in the family house we have there are 3 different cars in the garage that have supposedly different spaces ... but each of them can say if a mix sucks or is great ... specially the mids and highs ... cause the lows have different characters. So I think the space is not really the cause of this phenomenon :D so you don't need to worry :D

It might be a mere co-incidence or simply the fact that car speakers are designed to sound a particular way , but finally it's an eye opener for us engineers and it works(it's a very common thing for mixing engineers to test mixes in cars even though they all might have different cars).

[Andy_bt]

Originally Posted by alecsribet

Now let me ask you a question, if you had to do a drag race and had to win it(cause you bet your house on it), what would pick ??

A Porsche Cayman , cause you like the feel, the smell, the looks of it(SUBJECTIVE) ?? Or a Bugatti Veyron (cause it's simply the best in terms of acceleration/torque/grip/power and the sure way to win) ?

This is one more example that car analogies don't work
A.

[Arksun]

Originally Posted by alecsribet

Multimillion budget mixing/mastering facilities are SUPPOSED(In theory) to be absolutely stunning ... but maybe their speakers don't show some of those things that tend to show up on some speakers and at certain high volumes

That's the point I'm making, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make a montoring system that highlights every conceivable issue that other speakers out there may have, especially at high volumes, because each lesser speakers freq response, phase, power handling, ITD, THD etc is wildly different!. All you can hope to do is aim for the flatter middle ground as statistically this should yield the widest coverage of good sound.

It sounds like you want sibilant issues specifically to scream out at you, the problem here again is that different frequencies scream sibliance on different speakers/headphones. But perhaps a more mid-forward monitoring system would suite your ears better?, maybe the old NS10s?

[alecsribet]

Either I am not expressing myself well or you are not really getting my point.

Ok let's try again , I don't expect the mix to sound the same on all the systems ... but there are characteristics of a track ...for example the ear braking sibilance that sticks out on many systems ... not only 1.

I really thought a lot about it and tried to wrap my mind around it, and at the end , the sibilances sounded bad on many home-ststems(some were more harsh than others) , I tried in cars , and it is particularly strong on PA systems(I tried 2). I asked my friends if they liked the sibilances... and they said no.

The funny thing that is that the second track of the album is mixed differently and to my great astonishment it sounded good on all those other systems. Try it yourself the album is called TIME-LIONEL RITCHIE ... test the track 1 and 2 It's like it's mixed by 2 different people

Now ,does it mean that Lionel Ritchie's mixing engineers suck big time ?? does it mean that the mastering engineer who made this cd is an incompetant person that cannot hear awful sibilances ??

Or maybe that their super hi-end gears actually didn't show those problems enough even though experienced mastering engineers spend so much time with their speakers(THAT THEY OBVIOUSLY CHOSE) and are supposed to know them by heart ?

Now when I test those on my monitors , Twins and K&H ... I hear the sibilances but not in a "HEY BREAK THE ALARM" way... it's more like "ehhhhhh that can do, let it pass".

I think that's eactly what the thread maker wanted to say , and i'm not the first person who hears this about KnH and Twins. They have different sounds, they have different imaging, the level of details are astonishing ... BUT harshness doesn't make them scream.

[Tone Laborer]

Originally Posted by alecsribet

Now when I test those on my monitors , Twins and K&H ... I hear the sibilances but not in a "HEY BREAK THE ALARM" way... it's more like "ehhhhhh that can do, let it pass".

Don't "let it pass". Learn the speakers. Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with just about everything you've said on this thread. Whatever, Typical monitor thread.

I'm catching sibilance just fine with the Twins. FWIW. You might try slapping a limiter on when you check for problems, which can exacerbate these things.

Sorry, don't own any Lionel Ritchie.

[Tone Laborer]

Originally Posted by Arksun

That's the point I'm making, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make a montoring system that highlights every conceivable issue that other speakers out there may have, especially at high volumes, because each lesser speakers freq response, phase, power handling, ITD, THD etc is wildly different!. All you can hope to do is aim for the flatter middle ground as statistically this should yield the widest coverage of good sound.

Amen.

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by Tone Laborer

Don't "let it pass". Learn the speakers. Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with just about everything you've said on this thread. Whatever, Typical monitor thread.

I'm catching sibilance just fine with the Twins. FWIW. You might try slapping a limiter on when you check for problems, which can exacerbate these things.

Sorry, don't own any Lionel Ritchie.

1. thanks a bunch for the limiter trick that sounds very handy, will try it

2. I didn't buy expensive speakers to indulge in guess-work, so when it sucks it should sound like it. Good for you if you like shitty sounds to sound good.

3. Some people just like to disagree on everything without any good reason nor explanation... like on all threads.

4. People don't like to change or admit that there are things that could improve... "in a bubble syndrome"

5. For a "constructive argument and sharing of ideas" sake ... at least try the LIONEL RITCHIE test on your twins ... Then talk , it would be very useful for everybody...and maybe for you.

[just_manu]

The K&H don't reveal when something sounds bad. Everything on them sounds great, and that's NOT the function of mixing monitors. Since I'm using other monitors my mixes have became incredible. It would be impossible for me to get those mixes with the o300

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by just_manu

The K&H don't reveal when something sounds bad. Everything on them sounds great, and that's NOT the function of mixing monitors. Since I'm using other monitors my mixes have became incredible. It would be impossible for me to get those mixes with the o300

Amen Manu!!!!

Would you tell me which speakers you are using ??

[just_manu]

Hi.

Well, the monitors I'm using are Smart Audio, they are a couple of old monitors. I never heard about them. They were hand made by a german engineer 20 years ago, and he gave them to my boss, it was a present. I have not found any info about them in internet. I want to sell the K&H, and I'm going to try too many models before buying. I think that I can possibly end buying a pair of Focal. I produce music for clubs, but I've realised that the best is to have a 6" bass woofer to have good transients presence, and get the sub bass from bass reflex. A cone of 8" doesn't deliver good transients when you are listening at normal volume.

Enviado desde mi GT-I9000 usando Tapatalk

[musicl]

Manu, do you mean you prefer to have a subwoofer rather than a larger monitor?

Doesn't testing your music with bigger cones help through mixes translate over to big club systems which are much bigger speakers moving at different rates?

This is more just a post of interest to find out what people want in monitors and if smaller cones are really better for transients

[just_manu]

Hi.

I will try to explain with my english.

First, there is a big difference between main speakers and near field speakers. The bigger the bass cone is, the louder you will have to push them to make them give you a good transient response.

Said that, if you have a near field monitor with a cone of 8", set up at 1'5 meters from you, you will have to push it really hard to get the best sound from them, and it is not a good idea to have near field monitors pushing hard at 1 meter from your ears. But if you have monitors with smaller cones, it will be easier to hear the transients at a lower volume.

If you want to know the feel of the music like in a club, the best option would be to have main monitors at, let's say, 4 meters distance; but it is impossible for the majority of producers due to space and pricing matters, so the best option (for me, of course), is to have near field monitors, with a cone of 6" and with the best bass reflex system possible to hear the sub freqs until, let's say, 40hz, and always helped by a good pair of headphones and a spectrum analyzer. If you still need to feel those subs, then add a good subwofer.

Resuming: you buy some monitors of 8", waiting them to give you a good sub bass response and a good punchy kick. You won't get any of them, why? The cone is too small to give you a real sub bass at a normal volume (the volume you play when producing and mixing), and at the same time, while these are busy trying to play sub bass freqs, they loose a lot of the hability to show the transients of the sound (question of physics). Best to go to good transients with a smaller cone, and get the sub bass from a dedicated system, built only for that.

And of course, always try to test the songs in clubs or main pa systems, that's the key.

Regards

Enviado desde mi GT-I9000 usando Tapatalk

[sage691]

Just got a pair of Twins (used, already broken in) & did my first rough mix on them.

It took me a little while setting them up. At first I tried them on the console as nearfields, and everything sounded just sounded weird; no way I could mix like that. I had mopads underneath them too. To me, like this they are just not far enough apart to get a workable stereo field of sound for me.

So then I placed them on top of my JBL LSR32s which are on stands and MUCH farther apart from each other -- about 13 feet to be exact. The tweeters were about my ear height like this with me standing up, which is how I prefer to mix anyway.

Yeah baby !!! Like this there was a night and day difference; the bass opened up and was very round, punchy and forward sounding. What suprised me the most was that I found the Twins to be almost ruler flat compared to my JBLs (powered by a QSC RMX2450) which are so powerful that they force you to scoop out mids. On the Twins a mix that I thought sounded decent on the JBLs sounded muddy, cloudy, and just generally scooped out in the mid range, yet very bass and top heavy.

In case anyone is wondering, I left the tone controls all at unity. The Twins instantly forced me to construct a very different mix, much more mid forward. Many EQ decisions made on the JBLs had to be changed ! I also found them to inspire confidence in making EQ decisions rapidly. When I switched back to the JBLs and cranked them I could hardly believe my ears; have never heard them sound that exciting before !

It's funny because my experience so far is opposite of what many say here about the Twins. If anything, I found them almost ruler FLAT across the spectrum and bordering on brutal in their honesty; in other words, if something sounded muddy, scooped and cluttered it would be painfully obvious on these speakers.

I'm convinced some of you guys are struggling with placement, room issues, or a bit of both concerning monitors. Like I said, they were absolutely WEIRD sounding as nearfileds on top the console ! I can't see how anybody could have them that close (to each other and to your ears) and be able to make any productive mixing decisions. Like that I'd be chasing my tail all day in circles and getting nowhere.

Oh yeah, I was equally blown away by how that mix translated to the car ! Night and day from mixing on the big JBLs.

[deft_bonz]

A little OT:

I saw David Guetta yesterday in an interview, where he said, that he produces and mixes everything himself on a MacBook with headphones.

Independent from what David is truely doing, it made me thinking, if we are just looking way too far and spending way too much money for monitors?

[Arksun]

Originally Posted by just_manu

Said that, if you have a near field monitor with a cone of 8", set up at 1'5 meters from you, you will have to push it really hard to get the best sound from them, and it is not a good idea to have near field monitors pushing hard at 1 meter from your ears. But if you have monitors with smaller cones, it will be easier to hear the transients at a lower volume.

Over generalising a bit there. Transient response will depend on many many factors, not just woofer size, but design, material used, size of voice coil, sealed or bass reflex, any movement detection system, cabinet, type of cross-over, the tweeter, phase linearity, step reponse, amp design etc. A very well built monitor with 8" woofer will easily out class a lesser 6" design, even nearfield 1m distance at low volume.

Originally Posted by deft_bonz

A little OT:

I saw David Guetta yesterday in an interview, where he said, that he produces and mixes everything himself on a MacBook with headphones.

Independent from what David is truely doing, it made me thinking, if we are just looking way too far and spending way too much money for monitors?

Of course there are producers out there that achieve incredible mixes on very little, no question. However, with regard to Guetta specifically, bare in mind that there's at least 2-4 engineers *cough producers cough* for each David Guetta track made today

[musicl]

Manu, you're English is great. Thanks for sharing

Arksun, so basically a well built 6 is better than a cheap 8? Saying that I felt the KH120 sounded boxy compared to the KRK RP-10s (hides for flames) although the 120's were very clear, they didn't have the weighty bottom and suffered from 'small speaker syndrome'

[syberxa]

Is the listening room properly acoustic treated, that makes a huge difference. we are using the K&H O300 for mixing for the past 6 months, switched from a pair of Dynaudio BM15A. In the beginning we thought there was not much difference between the BM15A and the K&H O300. However once the room was acoustically treated well and after using the K&H O300 solely for a few weeks, switching back to the BM15A was like night and day difference. Bad mixes sound bad on the K&H O300. They are very neutral and natural sounding, it really challenges you to work on your mixes. The translation on other systems (home cinema set, car audio, Ipod, computer speakers, getthoblaster) is very good. But for final mastering we tend to listen on B&W 800 series, just for fine tuning the low end especially.

Maybe your set K&H O300 were not 100% right, but they are great monitors, cannot go wrong with those.

[syberxa]

Btw about the remarks of producers claiming to mix complete albums on a mac book, like David Guetta. Honestly, who with common sense believes those remarks? These guys are earning cash by promoting certain brands in interviews, please don't forget that. Probably the demo or idea has been created on their mac book with their headphones, but its not the final commercial release product. The real recording and mixing is done by professional audio and mastering engineers in 200k plus studios. Equipped with the best of the best outboard equipment and mastering tools. With great sounding listening and control rooms. That's the comfort of having a record deal with a company like EMI in the case of performer David Guetta.

[Silver Sonya]

The MacBook Pro has cool-sounding speakers, so it doesn't seem crazy to me. I don't know about other people. I have a pair of Klein & Hummel 300's and a pair of Genelec 1031A's [which I have used forever and thus know very well], but I often spend a lot of time auditioning prints out of my 2007 macbook pro speakers, which are VERY telling about midrange balances. I feel I could mix on these for most of the mix and then check where I am on the K&H's and Genelecs. Unfortunately, workflow-wise, I have yet to set that up.

Sadly, my 2011 macbook pro is worse than the 2007 model, and I cannot tell anything on that one. Somehow Steve Jobs didn't care about me and my need to monitor professional audio when they did the redesign. Bastard. So the old one is still in use, despite being significantly slower as a computer. I'm gonna keep it as long as it lasts.

I think it's normal to spend a lot of time on cheap consumer systems during your mixing process. I haven't ever relied on it entirely, but I feel that I get a lot of information about energy and proportion via inexpensive monitoring.

This is not to dismiss the K&H's... on the contrary, I find them to be fantastic at what they are.

[All that being said, I've said before that I wish K&H implemented stronger amps! I have sometimes thought of contacting K&H and getting them to make a Chad Clark Edition with more robust amps, capable of blasting when needed. But I'm not quite famous enough for that yet. Maybe next year... ]

- c

[huarez]

You´re right when you´ve got the feel, that those monitors have the potential to sound too good. so you are satisfied in the studio but might have problems on other systems. AFTER SPENDING SOME TIME WITH THEM I like them more and more. I´ve a pair of ADAM S3X H to compare next to them for midfield , and I tend to switch them on less and less. OD 300 show very good everything and translate fantastic. It takes a litlle time to deal with the fact that it shouldn´t sound good over them, it should sound awesome.

[syberxa]

Exactly, thats what mixing and mastering is about. Mix and master on really good monitors, like the K&H O300, B&W 800, make the mix sound great on those speakers, so you end up with a mix that will sound good on a broad variety of speakers and acoustic environments. Mixing & mastering is all about making compromises, which is best done on good quality monitors, in an acoustically good room, with good (outboard) gears. No GIGO here.

[just_manu]

It's good to see so many different opinions. Thank you so much guys for making this thread really interesting for future buyers.

I must say that we are using the o300 as third pair of monitors. They sound like Hi-Fi compared to the rest, so they are great to impress to the clients with their huge sound, but we find them to be absolutely unusefull for making a good mix. I would spend 3 weeks mixing a song on o300 which I would do in only 2 days with other monitors.

Here is the only truth for me.

[alecsribet]

Originally Posted by deft_bonz

A little OT:

I saw David Guetta yesterday in an interview, where he said, that he produces and mixes everything himself on a MacBook with headphones.

Independent from what David is truely doing, it made me thinking, if we are just looking way too far and spending way too much money for monitors?

That's right man ... it's well said ... he PRODUCES everything using headphones

But man do you think he is really stupid enough not to work with top mixing and mastering engineers ? lol

He even uses other producers(joacchim garraud for LOVE IS GONE) and just acts like an artistic director.

He also said that he did the mixing with the track called LOUDER ... man .. come on do you believe in everything he says LOL