Best studio monitors (flattest response) for $300-500

[meneedit]

Just out of curiousity, do you guys think that being closer to your speakers/monitors makes any difference in an untreated room?

I am fairly close to mine and my speakers are facing a big soft couch. I dont have the option of treating my room because I am renting.

Also.... as for people saying that it is pointless having flat monitors in an untreated room, surely having flat monitors instead of cheap computer speakers would be better...?

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by meneedit

Just out of curiousity, do you guys think that being closer to your speakers/monitors makes any difference in an untreated room?

I am fairly close to mine and my speakers are facing a big soft couch. I dont have the option of treating my room because I am renting.

Also.... as for people saying that it is pointless having flat monitors in an untreated room, surely having flat monitors instead of cheap computer speakers would be better...?

Renting never gets in the way of acoustics and a good mixing environment.
Stands can be built or bought!!
I use gorilla hooks and stands. In each corner I use two 2x4 4" panels.

[meneedit]

Originally Posted by DR Music

Renting never gets in the way

It does in my case..... take my word for it

[RMS09]

I am by no means an expert on this. But I am very happy with my Mackie MR5 mkII($300)....even when doing quick mixes they come out very punchy and believeable compared to "Pro" mixes...I did some station ID for a friends internet metal station...again did it quick and and didn't really sweat it...compared to the "pro" recorded and mixed songs...I stood up suprizingly well...Made the more indy and low budget stuff sound... well indy and low budget...I think for the price range the Makie's are worth every but penny...might not be the "Flatest"....but I don't think your gonna find what your looking for in that price range...gonna be getting some small M-Audio's for my portable laptop rig..so I excited to try those...But, try the Makie's...

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by meneedit

It does in my case..... take my word for it

Stands???

[Samuelito]

Originally Posted by meneedit

I dont have the option of treating my room because I am renting.

Do some acoustic panels and hang them. Is practically the same as hanging a painting, frame, etc.
There is always "mastic" to refill the holes.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by Samuelito

Do some acoustic panels and hang them. Is practically the same as hanging a painting, frame, etc.
There is always "mastic" to refill the holes.

Exactly

[meneedit]

Originally Posted by DR Music

Exactly

...and when they see them hanging (or the nails) upon routine inspection?

[kasmira]

Build free standing ones. Problem solved!

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[piper]

Originally Posted by meneedit

...and when they see them hanging (or the nails) upon routine inspection?

Does your lease prohibit nails? Mine always just wanted the nails removed when I left.

You could use small pieces of lumber ( think sticks) to hold the panels up ie resting on the floor.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by piper

Does your lease prohibit nails? Mine always just wanted the nails removed when I left.

You could use small pieces of lumber ( think sticks) to hold the panels up ie resting on the floor.

It's an excuse!! Let the GSlut be...

[kludge]

Flatness in monitors is SO overrated. There's an awful, awful trend in audio to rate gear by numbers that are relatively easy to measure - frequency response and THD in particular. Frequency response graphs are done in an anechoic chamber - not exactly realistic! And THD is measured on 1khz sine waves. When's the last time an album of static sine waves won a Grammy?

Music is DYNAMIC. It's about change - it IS change, in a very deep way. These scientific-method isolation measurements tell us almost nothing about how a piece of gear responds to complex, real-world conditions, except that it basically works correctly.

Consider the phase response of a speaker. Issues are caused by the physical separation of the drivers and overlapping frequencies coming from both, and from phase anomalies introduced by the crossover circuit (crossovers work by phase cancellation). Consider the differences in dispersion patterns between cone-shaped woofers and dome-shaped tweeters. This stuff matters WAY more than frequency response, and gives each speaker its characteristic voice. But it's difficult to measure and even more difficult to measure in a way that can be causally tossed into a sentence in a magazine review or internet flamewar, so it's ignored. (btw, this is why I LOVE my Tannoys! Concentric drivers solve a lot of problems!)

And of course there's room response anomalies, giving us the stock answer of "room treatment". And room treatment is very important. But short of an anechoic chamber, all rooms will still have their own sound.

Beyond that, our ears are nowhere near flat, and their frequency response is volume-dependent. How many of us actually get the SPL meter out and check test tones when mixing to mix at consistent volumes?

To me, the correct answer is to find some monitors you find listenable and reasonably accurate for the things that matter to you, and then spend a LOT of time sitting in your mix position, listening to reference recordings. Constantly adjust your ears to material you know very well and love. Go back to that reference regularly while you're mixing, to know where you are relative to it. That will solve more problems than flat frequency response, elaborate room treatment, etc. The biggest problem isn't what's going into your ears, it's what's between your ears! It's very easy to get lost in the woods without a map to guide you. Reference recordings are that map.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by kludge

Flatness in monitors is SO overrated. .

True but what you don't want are monitors with dips in the response because they can cover up problems.

My experience has been that there are monitors you can learn and monitors that you simply can't. For this reason I always choose from among the ones used by people whose work I respect. I also have a strong preference for sealed cabinets and a strong dislike of passive radiators.

[kludge]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

True but what you don't want are monitors with dips in the response because they can cover up problems.

My experience has been that there are monitors you can learn and monitors that you simply can't. For this reason I always choose from among the ones used by people whose work I respect. I also have a strong preference for sealed cabinets and a strong dislike of passive radiators.

Yeah, you don't want monitors that are un-flat enough to be inaccurate. But my point is that frequency response flatness isn't even the best criteria for a monitor, much less the only criteria. It's a popular number because it's easy to measure, and measurements sound scientific and thus enjoy the benefits of the Appeal to Authority fallacy.

I think it's much more important to find monitors whose sound doesn't grate on you, get the basic room issues under control, and then learn THOSE monitors in THAT room. And that's why reference material is so important! You know how the reference material makes you feel, and what its details and balances are. If I'm mixing and I start to doubt my relative position, I can just throw on Wilco's Sky Blue Sky or the Flaming Lips' The Soft Bulletin or Fleetwood Mac's Rumours or some other record that I know intimately and love, and know how things SHOULD sound. Then I can go back to my mix and grok it relative to that known quantity. In this case, choice of monitors is FAR less important than choice of references.

The big problem with small, inexpensive two-way ported boxes (most budget speakers, including budget studio monitors) is that they're blurry and harsh, and lack fine detail. Sweetness, detail, and precision require expensive drivers, sturdier cabinets, and sometimes exotic designs. But mixing doesn't require either comfort or massive detail. It's about balance, and even cheap speakers can present that. Excellent mixes can be done on just about any speaker actually sold as a studio monitor, no matter how cheap (and likewise, bad mixes can be done on any studio monitor, no matter how expensively, and much more easily than excellent mixes!). So when buying budget speakers, it's just about finding something that isn't too annoying to listen to for a few hours at a time, within the available budget and whatever convenience kismet provides. "Best" doesn't enter into it, any more than debating which fart smells best.