Floorstanding Mastering monitor set up vs. rec/mix rooms soffits?

[Fleaman]

Why is it that Mastering studios tend to have floorstanding main monitors vs. recording/mix rooms that go with soffit mounted mains?

I would think the monitoring goals between these two rooms would be the same, no?

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

Why is it that Mastering studios tend to have floorstanding main monitors vs. recording/mix rooms that go with soffit mounted mains?

I would think the monitoring goals between these two rooms would be the same, no?

The monitoring goals between the two rooms are very much the same - but the realities of the layouts and equipment in place between the two are very different. Usually the tracking/mixing control room has a large console, a good deal of racks of gear, and not as much available room length as the typical mastering studio - meaning to get an unobstructed listening path to mains they very often need to use soffit mounted speakers - where as in the mastering studio the console size can be kept to a minimum (or even done away with in some cases) and equipment can be placed in a way to allow for an unobstructed listening path to the mains. While there are indeed some mastering studios using soffit mounted speakers the option to use floor standers enables to use speakers that the mastering engineer might greatly prefer over soffit mounted options.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Fleaman]

I've thought about that, yet there are still mastering studios with large-like consoles and floorstanders, like Gateway here> Gateway Mastering & DVD

Most of what needs to be unobstructed is the mids to highs, as long as you can get the mids/tweeters in the line of sight, it should be fine, no? Floorstanders are either high enough to do so or can be easily raised to the correct height.

I do understand the value of having many floorstanding options out there. I myself have a pair of Paradigm Studio 60v.3's that I like quite a bit.

I just get the impression that Mastering rooms tend to lean to the hi-fi world side of things while rec/mix rooms lean to the clinical monitors that may not be that much fun/pleasurable to listen to. I guess that since the recording will ultimately be played on a home system (maybe even Hi-fi'ish), a mastering room with it's different perspective of monitoring adds yet another dimension/view to the final mix.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

I've thought about that, yet there are still mastering studios with large-like consoles and floorstanders, like Gateway here> Gateway Mastering & DVD

That's true... but they also have one thing a lot of mixing rooms don't. Space. Lots of it.

I believe that, if room size and thus wall proximity is no concern, a free standing sonud source is usually preferrable to a soffit mounted one. Opinions may vary, of course.

[Bob Olhsson]

As it happens, the very best sounding, most obviously accurate and best measuring speakers I've ever heard happened to be floorstanders. That said, I seriously doubt that it was because they were floorstanders.

The common denominator of great speakers to me has always been extraordinarily well matched drivers and the treatment of the surfaces around the drivers for diffraction. There's no reason this couldn't be done with soffit-mounted speakers. I've just never run into any.

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

I just get the impression that Mastering rooms tend to lean to the hi-fi world side of things while rec/mix rooms lean to the clinical monitors that may not be that much fun/pleasurable to listen to. I guess that since the recording will ultimately be played on a home system (maybe even Hi-fi'ish), a mastering room with it's different perspective of monitoring adds yet another dimension/view to the final mix.

I think you will find that many if not most mastering engineers choose their monitors because they feel they are flat and clinical. That doesn't amount to sounding bad (unless the material being auditioned is bad of course). That these are produced and sold to the "Audiophile" market probably has more to do with the amount of money people are willing to spend in that market. Of course there are many "Audiophile" speakers that are anything but flat or accurate. It is a... err... interesting market.

Alistair

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Glenn Meadow's speakers were soffit mounted at Masterfonics and he always maintained that they were the best sounding most true sounding speakers he had ever heard.

[barefoot]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

As it happens, the very best sounding, most obviously accurate and best measuring speakers I've ever heard happened to be floorstanders. That said, I seriously doubt that it was because they were floorstanders.

The common denominator of great speakers to me has always been extraordinarily well matched drivers and the treatment of the surfaces around the drivers for diffraction. There's no reason this couldn't be done with soffit-mounted speakers. I've just never run into any.

I think there is a reason. Assuming flat on-axis response, freestanding speakers have a different power response charateristic than soffit mounted speakers. Soffited speakers radiate into the forward hemisphere over their entire range. Freestanding speakers radiate into the forward hemisphere in their upper frequency range where the wavelengths are small compared to the size of the speaker baffle. In the lower frequencies they radiate into full space. So, if the anechoic on-axis response is flat (a must), a freestanding speaker will put out 6dB more bass into the room than a soffited speaker. This dramatically affects the translation. And of course the vast majority of end listeners have freestanding speakers (car stereos are EQ'd to mimic freestanding power response). So freestanding monitors typically translate much better.

This power response difference can be compensated for in soffited speakers by horn loading the upper frequencies. And you often see this in the soffited mains that are reported to have good translation. But the main point is, there really is a good reason why engineers from tracking to mastering tend to prefer freestanding speakers as thier primary working tools.

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by barefoot

So, if the anechoic on-axis response is flat (a must), a freestanding speaker will put out 6dB more bass into the room than a soffited speaker. .

Can you elaborate a little more on this? I've always thought that when soffit mounting just about any speaker, the low end is either extended/or increased by the extension of the baffle area and must be compensated for. Being that a soffit baffle forces the bass freq to radiate only in one main direction (180* vs. 360*), there is no energy being lost radiating backwards and reflecting, etc.

Yet you mention the opposite effect....I'm confused

[Darius van H]

Sort of related:

PSW Recording Forums: Acoustics in Motion => Why soffit mounted speakers so problematic?

[Greg Reierson]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

Glenn Meadow's speakers were soffit mounted at Masterfonics and he always maintained that they were the best sounding most true sounding speakers he had ever heard.

That's the only studio picture I've ever seen where the room looks SMALLER in the picture.

BTW, I think that's Benny's room.


GR

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by Greg Reierson

That's the only studio picture I've ever seen where the room looks SMALLER in the picture.

BTW, I think that's Benny's room.


GR

You are, of course, correct but Masterfonics was designed and built by Glenn and to me it will always be HIS room.

[barefoot]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

Can you elaborate a little more on this? I've always thought that when soffit mounting just about any speaker, the low end is either extended/or increased by the extension of the baffle area and must be compensated for. Being that a soffit baffle forces the bass freq to radiate only in one main direction (180* vs. 360*), there is no energy being lost radiating backwards and reflecting, etc.

Yet you mention the opposite effect....I'm confused

The best way to start thinking about this is from the soffit mounted case. First and foremost, whatever we do, we need a flat on-axis anechoic response. Getting this with a soffited speaker is straightforward (pardon the pun). Since all the sound radiates in the same direction (the forward hemisphere) over the entire spectrum, we just tune our crossovers and we're good to go. The soffited case is "theoretically" ideal since a flat power response yields a flat on-axis response.

A freestanding speaker is a little more complicated. In the high frequencies it behaves like a soffited speaker where the front of the speaker cabinet is the soffit. These short wavelengths only radiate into the forward hemisphere. On the other hand, the low frequencies with long wavelengths simply wrap around the speaker cabinet. They radiate into full space. Therefore, in an anechoic environment half of the sound escapes to the rear. In order to achieve a flat on-axis anechoic response we must put a +6dB low shelf in the signal path to compensate (or a -6dB high shelf for passives). Of course, real rooms are not anechoic. Some of that extra bass energy of a freestanding speaker gets reflected back to the listening position. If you level matched at say 3kHz, up where both speaker types have only forward hemisphere radiation, the freestanding speaker will actually have relatively more bass output than the soffited speaker.

Ok, lets flip the situation around. Imagine we soffit mount a freestanding speaker. In this case the on-axis anechoic (half space) response will have a +6dB low shelf since we're no longer loosing half the bass energy to the rear. In other words, we've gained efficiency in the low end. Of course, we still need a flat on-axis response. But we don't have to just throw that extra efficiency away. We can actually convert it into deeper bass extension. The details of how this works are beyond the scope of a forum post. Anyhow, we can reengineer the system so we end up with flat on-axis response and lower bass extension. This is why soffited speakers can often reach such low lows with such high output.

Make sense?

[Adam Dempsey]

I worked with soffit mounted for over 11 and a half years in a reasonable sized room, then to free standing Duntechs, both similar time-aligned designs and hard dome tweeters (no false "silky" HF's)... The former: a monitoring sweet spot and outside of that it was anyone's guess. The latter: no comparison in response, imaging, efficiency. Bigger and better speakers, room and trapping... of course. Still, to me, musical energy transmission into a room from free standing makes total sense for realistic translation and only re-emphasizes the importance of speaker placement.

Nice summaries, Thomas.

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by barefoot

Ok, lets flip the situation around. Imagine we soffit mount a freestanding speaker. In this case the on-axis anechoic (half space) response will have a +6dB low shelf since we're no longer loosing half the bass energy to the rear. In other words, we've gained efficiency in the low end. Of course, we still need a flat on-axis response. But we don't have to just throw that extra efficiency away. We can actually convert it into deeper bass extension. The details of how this works are beyond the scope of a forum post. Anyhow, we can reengineer the system so we end up with flat on-axis response and lower bass extension. This is why soffited speakers can often reach such low lows with such high output.

Make sense?

It does now. I was confused when (it seemed) you posted the opposite, that a freestanding speaker would have +6dB more bass in the room than if you soffit mounted that same speaker....'cos that wasn't how I understood it. But your last post makes sense.

[212121]

T. Barefoot

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by barefoot

So, if the anechoic on-axis response is flat (a must), a freestanding speaker will put out 6dB more bass into the room than a soffited speaker...

Not if the speakers and rooms are properly designed with flat off-axis response.

Most soffited mains were designed to get really really loud because the market for them was studios wanting to play takes back to artists immediately after their performances at the same volume the artist heard while they performed. That capability required a major compromise in detail and transparency. There was no market for soffited mains that blew up too often!