Monitors lie?

[Scoobz]

Tell me what you think about this....

My situation is such that I'm fed up compromising and second guessing my setup, maybe I've never identified with the whole monitor speaker ethos. I want it to sound good, eg what comes out of my studio speakers should sound how it's going to sound, not try to make a perfectly flat and even mix which doesn't have any punch or sizzle. So after spending much time and effort on proper acoustic treatment and speaker setup I still was no where near where I wanted to be.
My new solution is to stick an eq on the output bus, using established tunes and making them sound how I want them to sound, then when I'm mixing I just make it 'right'. I then turn the eq off for mixdown, goes back to flat and horrible but translates perfectly.
So is it me not connecting with the 'monitor' mentality or is the room affecting what I hear dramatically (nearly square with a 6ft 6" ceiling)? To get it where I want it we're talking a 6db broad boost around 100hz and a similar top end with a peak at 8k.

Your thoughts?

S

[Scoobz]

oh btw we're talking genelec 1031's with a 7070 (15" sub) and alesis m1 mkII "B monitors" (I like em coz they've got a huge lump at 100hz anyway)

So the genelecs should be giving accurate info, right?

[Scoobz]

No one ever replies to my posts

[MrHope]

I am no expert, but I think it's likely mainly acoustics. Although, I had the privelege of using some Genelecs in a pro studio once, and all of my mixes came out bass-light because the bass of the Genelecs was so strong. It seems like a lot of monitors are bass-heavy, even the expensive ones. But i'm not sure about your issues.

The EQ on the output is intriguing. I tried doing some thing like that once, but I don't quite understand why you switch the EQ off? but then again, if the translation works... then that's the only thing that matters. I guess if you've got a working system, don't question it too much.

[Scoobz]

Hi mrHope

The way it's working is.... commercial songs sound dull, flat, light and lifeless on my system. When I'm working I like to hear the music as I would expect to in the real world, dynamic, with the right low end warmth and sparkle up top. So I make a mix that sounds great in the studio, when I come to master it on a different system it's miles away from where it should be.
What I've been doing is second guessing my system and trying to make flat dull mixes in the hope it will be right and I find that no fun.
So what I'm doing is putting an eq on that makes it sound 'good' but these changes are wrong because commercial songs don't sound 'good' on my system, so I use the corrective eq to guide my engineering decisions, then just before mixdown I'll turn it off making it 'correct' (and similar to commercial releases)

So what I'm saying is have I missed the 'point' of monitors and am I expecting too much for them to sound great? Should I need to put a hifi/boombox eq curve on them to make them sound good or is something fundamentally wrong with my room?

I've done the eq experiment on the last two tunes I've done and it's worked wonders, so yes there's a solution but what's the problem?

[Birdi]

So is your room treated? wild speculation here, is it a case of a null in your mix position and a bit too much HF absorbtion and the EQ you are putting on the monitor buss is correcting these issues?

Bird

[Farshad]

Get a really good pair of headphones.

[Scoobz]

it could be a combination of those factors, a huge null and too much top end treatment, it's such a small room though

this should be a picture of it

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attac...-treatment.jpg

So you're saying your monitors sound fat and crispy? and that I'm not expectiing too much from my monitors, it's more likely the room?

[unclejoe]

quote . (nearly square with a 6ft 6" ceiling)

I feel your pain brother. I have a similar sized room ( but with a vaulted cieling) and have tried similar treatment to you and it still sounds like s**t.
I mix on head phones alot now. Because the room is square, you tend to get nulls in the centre (where you sit), so i do find it helps a bit if you can move your seating position back a bit. this won't solve your problem, but might help.
good luck
joe

[Glenn Kuras]

It is the room and the set up..

- Make sure you are sitting around 38% of the room length.
-Treat as many corners as possible with bass traps.

See the following pages for help

GIK Acoustics presents Acoustics Primer: Some Basics on Acoustics.
GIK Acoustics: Room Setup

Glenn

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Scoobz

Hi mrHope

The way it's working is.... commercial songs sound dull, flat, light and lifeless on my system. When I'm working I like to hear the music as I would expect to in the real world, dynamic, with the right low end warmth and sparkle up top. So I make a mix that sounds great in the studio, when I come to master it on a different system it's miles away from where it should be.
What I've been doing is second guessing my system and trying to make flat dull mixes in the hope it will be right and I find that no fun.
So what I'm doing is putting an eq on that makes it sound 'good' but these changes are wrong because commercial songs don't sound 'good' on my system, so I use the corrective eq to guide my engineering decisions, then just before mixdown I'll turn it off making it 'correct' (and similar to commercial releases)

So what I'm saying is have I missed the 'point' of monitors and am I expecting too much for them to sound great? Should I need to put a hifi/boombox eq curve on them to make them sound good or is something fundamentally wrong with my room?

I've done the eq experiment on the last two tunes I've done and it's worked wonders, so yes there's a solution but what's the problem?

that says that your monitoring environment is flawed - in the acoustics area.

Sort that out.

[Duardo]

Also, I'd say that your room is way to small for the sub you're using...you may get better results mixing without it, and just kicking it on once in a while to make sure there's nothing going on down there you're not hearing that will blow someone's car up if they put your CD in with trunk-mounted subs.

[donsolo]

I find it funny that you find your genelecs sounding dull and lifeless. To me, they seem to have a real "Make everything sound good" vibe.

You want monitors that point out all of the problems. Also, if you listen to your music flat, you'll get used to mixing it flat. If you turn up your bass constantly, it's creating upward masking which makes your top end sound dull and lifeless.

Monitors are NOT supposed to sound like a car stereo, home boom box or headphones. That's why you bought them. They are supposed to be the most ideal listening environment possible. They should also translate if this is true. If you have a good, solid bass on a flat system, it'll be a rockin bass when someone hits that bass-boost button on their cheap home stereo.

If your mix sounds good on the genelecs and then sounds too bass heavy in the car, stereo, tv etc, it means you need to turn your woofer up just a pinch (so you'll back the bass off in the room) But every system is different so you're trying to get the most true mix possible that is a compromise amongst all of them.

Strapping an EQ across the 2bus adds a new set of electronics in the mix which makes your mix even less true. The subwoofer's crossover can't be helping either.

take a measurement microphone and run white noise in the room to see where your deviations are. Address it with measurement, not your ears (Though your ears are important, true monitoring is a scientific endeavor). Then, if your mixes sound bad, it means you're trained to listen to too much bass or something.

You do have to learn what music sounds like on flat monitors. It is a totally different experience. Flat and in-phase are the way to go.

If it sounds good on that but doesn't translate, you need to re-evaluate your concept of "good." A good mix is about clarity of instruments on all systems, not bass that kicks you in the chest.

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by donsolo

Strapping an EQ across the 2bus adds a new set of electronics in the mix which makes your mix even less true.

Agreed, EQ is usually a bad idea. Glenn gave some good links, and there's much more here:

RealTraps Articles

--Ethan

[donsolo]

You know where some of the best information regarding monitors is on this site?

The mastering forum. Gotta filter out some noise but there are some super-knowledgable cats on there.

I've had to have the "what monitors do you think I should get" conversation and my responce is always "Super High Fidelity full range monitors usually from the Audiophile companies rather than traditional Gear Manufacturers like Mackie or KRK."

It never, ever, ever hurts to have a great listening environment. It's more important than your live room (which you can dampen and record more dry), your microphone locker (whole albums have been recorded with 57s), your preamp selection, your plugin count or your collection of vintage tube amps.

Your job is to listen and make corrections in a mix. If you can't hear everything, you can't find all of the problems and you can't do your job.

B&W, Some Klipsch, SOME vintage JBL, Some Paradigm...

And, powered monitors are a bad idea. Amps are your biggest problem with monitors. If you have a pair of NS-10s with a cheap amp, they sound bad. You can replace the amp in that situation, you can't replace the amp on a Mackie HR824 (without modifying the monitor)

[Scoobz]

Hi,

Thanks for the sage advice, yeah I hear where everyone's coming from. It's seems like some are saying it's the room, others are saying it's the treatment and others are saying I'm not using the speakers right.

I've tried really hard with the acoustic treatment, ripped down all the foam and went over many forums and ethan whiners site, I've got corner traps (vertical and alot of wall/floor), reflections tamed (all the way down to about 250hz)and a 'cloud' above the mixing position as shown in the above post. The acoustic treatment was a benefit in the 'clarity' sakes but not for the tonal balance necessarily.
I know the room is a bad size, another option would be to see how all the equipment behaves out of that room (it's been in there since day one)
And I think I'm probably expecting a little too much (not alot) of my speakers, I know 'good' bass is different to loud bass.
The low end, how people struggle to get it right, the trouble for me is the 'focus' is in the wrong place (meaning a big old dip somewhere). I'll coerce the bass into the area I want it sit in to find it's jumped up the frequency range upon exit of the studio and is wrecking havoc in the low mid area, all that warm 'solid' vibration that 'makes' the bass has gone. With the 'corrective' eq on it sounds as I made it.
Btw the eq I'm using is the massenberg plugin (best option available to me) for the d8b and I'm turning it off before mixdown so it won't introduce any phase issues in the final mix
I think, as suggested, the option now is to get some firgures for my room, some solid measurements. I know there's a cheap measurement mic @ digital village, run that straight in my soundcard yeah? play white noise and use a frequency analyser to see what's lacking? I know there's another way, making individual incremental 1hz tones and charting the repsonse on a piece of paper, would this be a better way to do it?

[Scoobz]

Couple of things I missed, I do stick my head in the door of mastering every now and again, got some good advice from in there. You're right about the 'noise' tho! ;)
And I used to use some ns10's (almost daily at one point) the great things about those were the mid range for me, always came out nice if I'd been using those as a reference.

Thanks again to all that responded

[T_R_S]

The X factor, I spend thousands of dollars on my acoustical design and construction.
Hire a pro, it will save you 10 times the cost in second guess your monitors and recordings. Anyone can come into my room and record or mix and know what they taking away.
You will not regret it.
It fails to surprize me how people will spend thousands on gear and zero on a proper room to put it in.

[narcoman]

exactly.

IT is undoubtedly 100% your room (which, by the why - IS the treatment too). Your listening environment is flawed. Any treatment you have is either insufficient or flawed in implementation or design.

[Scoobz]

Update : Been looking into what I can do to modify/improve the current treatment I have in there. It would seem that what separates a home build "bass trap" (which is really a broadband absorber) and a professional trap is the 'mysterious' limp mass membrane. I say mysterious, I had a lot of trouble tracking the info down and then someone kindly told me.

Apparently all this membrane consists of is a thin layer of plastic, spray mounted to the front of the trap. Which would return a little more of the highs to me and add emphasis to the low end absorption. This whole membrane thing is new to me, so tell me if I'm off on anything.

Well that's plan A anyway, take the traps down, add a facing behind the fabric, put them back up and remeasure. Talking of measurements, I finally made an attempt to measure my room. It's confirmed what I thought, the hole at 100hz certainly. I won't know what to do if the membrane thing doesn't work.....

What do you think of the graph?

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by Scoobz

What do you think of the graph?

Typical of all small mix rooms.

--Ethan

[donsolo]

+1

Knowing your problem is 90% of the battle on solving them.

That dip in the high mids is concerning. That's gotta be a reflection causing phase cancellation or too much dampening.

But the whole point is that if mix flat, you'll know what you have.

If not, you can learn your room but noone else will know it.

[Scoobz]

Yeah you're right, I didn't know what the problem was as the beginning, that was the frustrating part. Knowing it's not my ears or speakers is a relief frankly!

A little update. I've taken down all treatment . I've taken the front corner traps and spray mounted a very thin sheet of plastic to the face and replaced fabric. I'm also experimenting hanging barrier mat 30mm behind the back of the trap (between the two pieces of rockwool, it can vibrate freely).
There was a similar trap running along the floor wall corner, faced that, even though it doesn't really see many reflections being on the floor.
Back corner, same as front, but no barrier mat.
Previously I had 3 big bin(trash) bags full of off cuts stacked in the corners (making the traps stick out a bit), I've now made much smaller bags (200mm x200mmx800mm) and lined them along the floor wall corner (all the way down the sides) This leaves one full upright panel behind each corner trap.
So I've taken stuffed corners and redistributed it along the back wall and long wall, does this (and the other ideas) sound ok?

Although it was late when I was done I had another quick listen. It's changed alot, last night I couldn't decide if it was for the better! All I know for sure is that commercial tracks sounded very different to each other, I could tell those which had been engineered in a top studio. The low LOW end seemed alot fuller, walking around the room the bass was alot more even, there was still a collection of bass in the top left and right front (speaker end) corners, felt like I was walking into a big ball of pressure! Everywhere else tho was, my instincts tell me, loads better.
Right, I've got this behringer measurement mic today, I'm looking into which software to use ETF (RplusD) or EAW or maybe there's another option I'm unaware of.
I'd like some feedback please if you get time

[Crash]

Originally Posted by donsolo

That dip in the high mids is concerning. That's gotta be a reflection causing phase cancellation or too much dampening.

If you are referring to the graph, it only reads up to 300hz. The dip I see is at 100hz. Are we looking at the same thing?

[Scoobz]

So I got the mic, got the software, convinced it to work ;) set the mic up, calibrated everything...... and finally hit the test button






























This is what I got......












SURELY this can't be right? :(
(would explain alot though! ;) )





Good news is....

The hole @100hz has gone ;)

[guitarwes]

Originally Posted by Scoobz

Apparently all this membrane consists of is a thin layer of plastic, spray mounted to the front of the trap. Which would return a little more of the highs to me and add emphasis to the low end absorption. This whole membrane thing is new to me, so tell me if I'm off on anything.

This is what's causing the uneven response in the high end. Comb filtering is the root of all evil. It's a tradeoff between comb filtering and a dead room.

[Scoobz]

I tried turning the traps around so the membranes were on the back, didn't seem to make any difference?!!

[Ethan Winer]

Check your test procedure by putting a washcloth over the microphone. If the highs are not reduced as you'd expect, maybe ETF is connected wrong?

--Ethan

[donsolo]

Also, have you factored your microphone's Freq responce in?

Comb Filtering is definitely a reflection issue.

[Scoobz]

Thanks for that ethan, I'll try it. Donsolo, I found a mic calibration file for the ecm8000. I reckon something might be out to be honest. I'd like to know if there's a flaw in my measuring with etf (like I said I had to convince it to work)
I have a motu2408mkII lightpiped into a d8b, so i was doing all the routing required in the mackie (left channel back to the program, right channel to the speakers>microphone>program) etf couldn't use my motu mixer and kept wanting to use the virus ti as a soundcard (I don't use it as such) So I was feeding it the right thing at the right input and it seemed to be working but I don't know if the round trip of having to go thru the mackie and back would mess with it's timing and give the skewed response seen above, what do you think ethan?

I'm at the stage now where i want to know I've done all I can, I was expecting the top end to be smooth, given that I've addressed the relfections but I was in there last night and my ears told me the tweaks were a big improvement over what I had. For example, the proper lows (30-60) really seem full now and provide a solid bedrock for the frequency spectrum, still haven't got all the 100hz I'm looking for but I'm going to have to accept that unless I move room I'm probably not going to get much better.

I have one final plan though, I'm going to change the back wall from 'diffusion' if you can call it that lol to absorption. I'm going to make a panel, floor to ceiling which juts out 45degrees top and bottom (to make corner traps for ceiling/wall and floor/wall) 4 inches thick, 4 from the wall, with a membrane on the back (unconventional I know but it's working for me!) I'm gonna take the sheet out behind the corner traps and super chunk them, then put the trap back, for all four corners.

That should increase my room/absorption ratio quite alot. I might put some 4" foam tiles (studiospares) I have lying around on the ceiling in the rear of the room too, given that I only have a thin carpet and no treatment on the roof.