Login / Register
 
Upgrade Monitors...help me narrow down
New Reply
Subscribe
#31
24th December 2012
Old 24th December 2012
  #31
Just Another Old Guy
 
Harvey Gerst's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Sanger, TX
Posts: 1,441
My Recordings/Credits

Harvey Gerst is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
Looks like $6k USD... more than I'm wanting to spend.
Nope, $3,500 here:

PMI Audio - B Stock - USA
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#32
24th December 2012
Old 24th December 2012
  #32
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey Gerst View Post
Nope, $3,500 here:

PMI Audio - B Stock - USA
Thank you, Harvey. I'll give a call when the offices open up again.
Do you know if there are any in Nashville to audition?
#33
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #33
Gear Head
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 38

wasserwerk is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
These are what I use.
I know it :-)


Quote:
They were reviewed in the November Sound On Sound and the reviewer said they "punched well above their weight" and didn't want to give the review samples back.

You can download the PDF of the review HERE.
Thanks for the link but I discovered this already few days earlier in another post from you.
__________________
regards
wasserwerk
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#34
20th February 2013
Old 20th February 2013
  #34
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
I'm demoing a pair of Emotiva Stealth 8's and they are quite impressive. I wanna shot 'em out against some others, though.

Emotiva Professional, LLC
#35
20th February 2013
Old 20th February 2013
  #35
Gear interested
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2

billys is offline
I just ditched my ProAcs for a pair of small Westlakes , BBSM-4's. WAY preferable to me than the ProAcs (which I have been using for many years!) I used the BBSM's at RPM in NYC a long time ago, and found them to be wonderful monitors. Much tighter focus than the Studio 100's, IMHO. And much better low end. They are pricey when new, but I grabbed a clean used pair for $1K and could not be happier. As soon as I can get into my shed and grab the boxes, my ProAcs will be sold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphereman View Post
Sal,

I just switched over to the Pro Ac Studio 100s. Excellent. Better mid range detail than my PMC TB1s. Of course Bryston amps all the way around. Power Pac 120s.
#36
21st February 2013
Old 21st February 2013
  #36
Gear nut
 
ac55's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: about to fall into the pacific
Posts: 149

ac55 is offline
If you can, find a pair of Spiral Groove Studio Ones to listen to before you make your final decision - bear in mind they are great "mixing" tools and if you do some research right here on GS you will find people who sold Barefoot MM27's for these.

I have a pair and they are one of the all time best additions to my studio - I will not draw a comparison to any of the other speakers you are looking at - wouldn't matter. It's a simple matter of easily making mixes that translate. Good luck in your quest!
#37
21st February 2013
Old 21st February 2013
  #37
Gear maniac
 
NickNagurka's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 296

NickNagurka is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by billys View Post
I just ditched my ProAcs for a pair of small Westlakes , BBSM-4's. WAY preferable to me than the ProAcs (which I have been using for many years!) I used the BBSM's at RPM in NYC a long time ago, and found them to be wonderful monitors. Much tighter focus than the Studio 100's, IMHO. And much better low end. They are pricey when new, but I grabbed a clean used pair for $1K and could not be happier. As soon as I can get into my shed and grab the boxes, my ProAcs will be sold.
Please do send me a PM if the ProAc's aren't already spoken for, I'm in the market for something to replace my long-gone Digi RM1's!
Nau
#38
21st February 2013
Old 21st February 2013
  #38
Nau
Gear interested
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Location: DK/LT
Posts: 18

Nau is offline
Consider quested too. They sound very simple(not so hi-fi'ish) and flat enough.
__________________
Recycle!
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#39
24th February 2013
Old 24th February 2013
  #39
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
The stealth 8's are a very nice monitor, but were too big for my room.
#40
24th February 2013
Old 24th February 2013
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Location: France
Posts: 503

priko is offline
Psi a17m
#41
24th February 2013
Old 24th February 2013
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 555

asiandude is offline
Equator Audio Q series at Equator Audio Studio Monitors, I own an Q8 and very happy with the sound better than most popular Adam or even some Focal line series. Great designs and clear wide imaging and the low end is super tight with no fatigue after many hours of mixing. I own Yamaha NS-10, Event Precision 8, and Adam A7. Cost less too compare to other on par with the sound.
#42
24th February 2013
Old 24th February 2013
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 2,161

RyanC is offline
I would throw the seos kits on the list:

Alpha-12 Zephyr - Waveguide Speaker Kits DIY Sound Group

For the price you can have something comperable in every spec to this:

Georg Neumann GmbH - Professional Monitoring

Equal or better distortion (below .1%!), equal or better horizontal directivity, better vertical directivity, higher max spl, higher sensitivity...Seos stuff is SOOO good. I have the fiberglass 18's and the BA750's working on some bigs. When finished these will easily run with any of the big dogs (augsies, atc 300 etc). Dynamics are stunning on the speakers, you will never have to guess at the setting of a compressor.

AND you still have $$ left over for some avantones or whatever.
#43
25th February 2013
Old 25th February 2013
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,259

spencerc is online now
Get the Spiral Grooves. You'll thank me later
#44
25th February 2013
Old 25th February 2013
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,990

Killahurts is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Focals for sure. but perhaps a good option might be contacting Earthworks and. Seeing if they have any Sigma 6.2 left. they discontinued these years ago but they were and still ARE the best 2 way system under $10k. I'll qualify that with an "in my opinion".
Best sounding near fields I ever heard. They actually were revealing and precise, while still sounding pleasant.. something I can't really do with my ADAMS. My mastering engineer friend was waiting for a new room to be finished, and had these out in his untreated lobby with brick walls, and still I was floored when I heard my mixes through them. No sub.

Why EW stopped making these is a mystery to me..
__________________
As you can imagine, the audio that came out did not sound like the audio that went in. Silly analog.- Steven Slate
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#45
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #45
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by spencerc View Post
Get the Spiral Grooves. You'll thank me later
I wish there were a pair in Nashville to audition rather than purchase/trial.
#46
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,259

spencerc is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
I wish there were a pair in Nashville to audition rather than purchase/trial.
Trust me...I owned/own focal twins, Adam S2As, ns10's and now just sold my Barefoot MM27's cause of these speakers. They're SERIOUSLY underpriced for what they are. They're on a totally different plant than anything in the $2k-4k range. Quality wise they're in the $7-9k range if not more (especially with a good amp).

I'm not affiliated at all with them...I just feel like it's a disservice to the audio community to not spread the good news about them. They are a new startup company making a killer product and people should know about it.

Again, only catch is if you need a loud "main" style monitor, these aren't gonna work. But once you hear them every other speaker in the $2-4k range is gonna sound broken when comparing detail/depth/3D-ness/imaging/tone/transient detail etc...they even have a crazy amount of bass which seems impossible for their size. I'm hearing bass articulations/notes I never heard on the MM27's!
#47
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
3-way JBLs and the new adcom 555. haven't heard the new stuff, but the originals are KILLER. You'll never use puny desktop monitors again and wonder how you ever could have been so naive to think that any amount of detail below 500hz could be heard from a desktop sized speaker box. You'll use eq maybe once a session.

Honestly I've used many different monitors and listened to many different speakers. Never have I heard something more CORRECT than a set of JBL 4412a and an adcom gfa555 for any amount of money in a small-medium sized room.

I turned my proacs into B monitors after hearing and purchasing. goodbye effects, hello proper recording technique.
#48
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #48
Gear nut
 
ac55's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: about to fall into the pacific
Posts: 149

ac55 is offline
Ears are like snowflakes - no two are alike. What may be the "holy grail" of nearfields for me, or Bob, or Jim, or Ted may be the absolute opposite of what you are looking for - you won't be mixing with "our ears". So yes, listen to our recommendations, but listen to the speakers also !!

Your ears are the only decision makers here. Consequently, you "absolutely" must listen to your choices in your room, when you commit to your final choices.

My room is mostly private, but a good number of what I consider qualified ears have listened to the SGS1"s - and it's been nothing short of reassuring to hear comments such as "damn!!! WTF are those little shits?"

And who really cares about your final choice?? Nobody!

I bought the SGS1's on the blind - on only Brian's recommendation and a very small amount of owner recommendations, risky to say the least, but he and they were credible and at that time they were only $1950 for the pair - so I gambled a bit!!! And now my damn long quest for a great pair of mixing speakers is over. Period!!

I would not hesitate to purchase them again at today's price - $3,250 knowing what I do now - but I'm sure glad I was an early adopter at $1950!!!

Do give your ears a test run of these

P.S. No offense to you spencerc - but he'll have to thank me first.....lol

Last edited by ac55; 26th February 2013 at 09:03 AM.. Reason: addition
#49
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #49
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac55 View Post
Ears are like snowflakes - no two are alike. What may be the "holy grail" of nearfields for me, or Bob, or Jim, or Ted may be the absolute opposite of what you are looking for - you won't be mixing with "our ears". So yes, listen to our recommendations, but listen to the speakers also !!
"lies from the pit of hell" as they say in texas. it's either correct to principle or incorrect. period. it's like any other instrument. i have a $230 guitar with perfect fret spacing and hence perfect intonation, and it's simply more correct and thus sounds way better than my friend's $3000 guitar which has poorly spaced frets.

a speaker that plays 20-20 is not neccessarily full range, thus speakers "sound different" when really they're simply MISSING or ADDING something. the speaker that gets closer to the math used to design the concept is the better speaker everytime... just like the guitar whose frets were properly proportioned and measured will always sound better than one that is slightly off no matter what the electronics. the better the math, the better the measurement and application of the math, the better the speaker. There's one equation that most leave out of speaker building and that is cabinet DENSITY and the soundboard effect.
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#50
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #50
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
Yeah... But... Music ain't math... Monitors fall into the subjective category.
#51
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
Yeah... But... Music ain't math... Monitors fall into the subjective category.
If music wasn't math, we couldn't make music with computers. i edited my post. i think it's more helpful now. i can also explain further here.

The soundboard effect is counteracted in proacs for example by layering the inside with bitumen. On B&W's it's done by bracing. The JBL 4412a take a different approach by using a low excursion woofer. All are attempts to solve the mathematical problem of cabinet density and soundboard effect. Some manufacturers use aluminum. Most don't address this basic principle at all.

The best instrument to represent this concept is the Xylophone. One could become an expert in acoustics by studying the xylophone.
#52
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #52
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,990

Killahurts is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by psykostx View Post
If music wasn't math, we couldn't make music with computers.
If music was math, we couldn't make music without a computer.

Everything is mathematically quantifiable after the fact..

Recording is math, but that's not the same thing as music.

Still, your comments about precision and using mathematics to make better monitors, is well noted.
#53
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #53
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psykostx
If music wasn't math, we couldn't make music with computers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killahurts View Post

If music was math, we couldn't make music without a computer.
Which came first, the eukaryote or the prokaryote? Serpent or the egg? Womb or baby? Yin or Yang? Very interesting paradox we have stumbled across, wouldn't you say?
#54
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #54
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
In a way, an instrument IS a computer.... hmmm... maybe not such a paradox afterall...
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#55
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #55
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac55 View Post
Ears are like snowflakes - no two are alike. What may be the "holy grail" of nearfields for me, or Bob, or Jim, or Ted may be the absolute opposite of what you are looking for - you won't be mixing with "our ears". So yes, listen to our recommendations, but listen to the speakers also !!
Quote:
Originally Posted by psykostx View Post
"lies from the pit of hell" as they say in texas. it's either correct to principle or incorrect. period. it's like any other instrument. i have a $230 guitar with perfect fret spacing and hence perfect intonation, and it's simply more correct and thus sounds way better than my friend's $3000 guitar which has poorly spaced frets.

a speaker that plays 20-20 is not neccessarily full range, thus speakers "sound different" when really they're simply MISSING or ADDING something. the speaker that gets closer to the math used to design the concept is the better speaker everytime... just like the guitar whose frets were properly proportioned and measured will always sound better than one that is slightly off no matter what the electronics. the better the math, the better the measurement and application of the math, the better the speaker. There's one equation that most leave out of speaker building and that is cabinet DENSITY and the soundboard effect.
My point was that no matter what "math" is applied, people's tastes vary and that's the subjective nature of listening and making music.

ac55's point about listening for one's self and making that judgement is one I agree with wholeheartedly.
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#56
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #56
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
BTW, I did send an email to Spiral Groove and hope to hear back from them soon.
#57
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #57
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 873

psykostx is offline
People's taste is irrelevant when trying to playback source material accurately. taste only comes into play when comprimises are made in the design. taste is a matter of which comprimises you can live with ...within your musical "style" which is really just instrementation and tempo.

It's all about the xylophone. I'm telling you. Xylophone is a pefect application of all the fundamental mathematics behind acoustics. It's a swiss army knife of mathematical formulas.
littlesicily
Thread Starter
#58
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #58
Lives for gear
 
littlesicily's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,033

Thread Starter
littlesicily is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by psykostx View Post
People's taste is irrelevant when trying to playback source material accurately. taste only comes into play when comprimises are made in the design. taste is a matter of which comprimises you can live with ...within your musical "style" which is really just instrementation and tempo.

It's all about the xylophone. I'm telling you. Xylophone is a pefect application of all the fundamental mathematics behind acoustics. It's a swiss army knife of mathematical formulas.
Wow, thank you for this enlightenment. I guess there was no need for this thread in asking for opinions. Please tell me which monitors to purchase so I can be mathematically happy.
#59
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #59
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 209

bluejbill is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlesicily View Post
Yeah... But... Music ain't math... Monitors fall into the subjective category.
Music ain't math? I can think of few things that are as mathematical in so many ways as music. Chord progressions, sound waves, rhythmic timing- it's all math.

And it applies not only to music but also to room acoustics, speaker design...if you apply some simple math to your listening situation it will help you to solve your monitoring situation. Like what wave frequency tends to be reinforced or hurt due to your room dimensions.

Liking music is subjective, getting it to sound that way is math. IMHO.
#60
26th February 2013
Old 26th February 2013
  #60
Gear nut
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 107

PoundTound is offline
The crearor of Melodyne sure thinks music is math. And hes a whole hell of a lot smarter than me, thats for sure.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
James Roper-Kum / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
48
cowboycurtis / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
0
el cochino / Live Sound
0
racemize / Music Computers
9

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.