Are All Monitors Absolutely Bloody Brilliant?

[PeteJames]

I've never had the pleasure of reading a critical monitor review! This extends way beyond the scope of monitors, but I'll focus on the monitors aspect.

Check musicradar.com where all monitors mysteriously score 4.5/5 Future Music is terrible for this.

SOS where even the negatives are made into positives and all have exactly the same positives. All have, Detailed Mid Range, Superb stereo image, great bass extension, tonally balanced, smooth hi's and best of all are non-fatiguing. That is after they've spend over 2/3's of the page replicating manufacturer specs. There are enough adverts in these magazines without them dominating 'expert reviews'.

What a Fuking Cop Out! Why bother to review god damn equipment if your going to conclude that it is all equally fantastic!

Is there a great monitor conspiracy to keep us buying new gear? Is it standard practice for reviewers to take bribes or at least try to keep on manufacturers good side?

or

Are all monitors just absolutely bloody brilliant?

I know there are some seriously experienced people on here so it'd be great if you could do some reviews (even if they are brief) on your experiences with various monitors, particularly on budget - mid level ones that most of us have to go for.

[Drkovorkian]

First i would say that most reviews are gonna be price related, ie my old pair of tannoy reveals cost me £80 pounds. And for that they are a 6 out of 5. I i have heard some particularly shocking monitors in the under £200 (new). I'm sorry i can't remember the exact models but M-audio and Behringer where two of the makes.

Its not something i've ever searched for but i am sure there is many hours worth of people slagging monitors off on here! As for magazine reviews we all know they don't slag stuff off directly. Also if it sounds like reviews are trying to make bad features sounds good its probably cause they want you to read between the lines and realise the flaw without it being too obvious.

I'm sure i'm not much help but thought id give it go with my 2p.

[Tim Abraham]

Just keep in mind the phrase "damned by faint praise." If folks aren't gushing, it's probably not that great. Same goes for records.

[hazelmossobrien]

Originally Posted by Tim Abraham

Just keep in mind the phrase "damned by faint praise." If folks aren't gushing, it's probably not that great. Same goes for records.

this is also my rule when reading reviews, except for mercenary - they will tear apart great gear, and make focusrite look like radio shack!

[rackdude]

Hint, don't read "professional reviews", read reviews by professionals who have tried it.

[hello people]

There's so many monitors in that creamy middle Thursday night shopping mall price range that it must be hard to come up with new things to say about them. I mean, if some manufacturer produces a set of monitors with built in clock radio...then look out!

[Yago]

Originally Posted by hello people

There's so many monitors in that creamy middle Thursday night shopping mall price range that it must be hard to come up with new things to say about them. I mean, if some manufacturer produces a set of monitors with built in clock radio...then look out!

Lol or ones with a digital camera and wifi enabled :P

[cooker]

I met some guy one day using m-audio tiny crappy monitors at his home studio. I didn't say anything until I listened to his music there. I was impressed with what he did with those crappy monitors (he had been using them for years), went back home, listened again and with some decent mastering the songs would sounded great.

He's a very talented composer and educated. So I realised good stuff could be done with cheap stuff (if you have talent to craft music and time to know the monitors) so I never took serious about monitor reviews.

This sure doesn't mean go buy cheap stuff couse if he had the money he would buy better monitors but since those guys that review have them like for 1-2 days, I wouldn't blame them to say anything good or bad easyly (specially bad couse if you say that and someone does good stuff with it then he's blamed-but the opposite means he's the only one with good hearing to work on those monitors and understand their value )

[Ciozzi]

Originally Posted by PeteJames

I've never had the pleasure of reading a critical monitor review! This extends way beyond the scope of monitors, but I'll focus on the monitors aspect.

Check musicradar.com where all monitors mysteriously score 4.5/5 Future Music is terrible for this.

SOS where even the negatives are made into positives and all have exactly the same positives. All have, Detailed Mid Range, Superb stereo image, great bass extension, tonally balanced, smooth hi's and best of all are non-fatiguing. That is after they've spend over 2/3's of the page replicating manufacturer specs. There are enough adverts in these magazines without them dominating 'expert reviews'.

What a Fuking Cop Out! Why bother to review god damn equipment if your going to conclude that it is all equally fantastic!

Is there a great monitor conspiracy to keep us buying new gear? Is it standard practice for reviewers to take bribes or at least try to keep on manufacturers good side?

or

Are all monitors just absolutely bloody brilliant?

I know there are some seriously experienced people on here so it'd be great if you could do some reviews (even if they are brief) on your experiences with various monitors, particularly on budget - mid level ones that most of us have to go for.

brilliant post and you made me laugh too. Needless to say I quite agree.

[kooz]

Originally Posted by PeteJames

Are all monitors just absolutely bloody brilliant?

I know mine are. Aren't yours?

The problem is that you are reading reviews rather than formulating your own opinion. From listening to your stuff or stuff you know really well. In your room. With your own ears.

get it? good.

[plexisys]

I find most funny about these and most "pro" reviews is they talk about frequency response and how good they "sound" but not a word about accuracy. I care more about accuracy than anything else.

[nick-the-sax]

it could be because they don't want the companies to stop sending them stuff to review..?

if they are too critical then manufacturers will start getting scared no?!

i agree with Tim Abraham, good point there!

[xj32]

I think it is a number of things...

1. was covered above, price, is this a good or decent monitor for said price. I see the opposite happen here on GS all the time...essentially once you can afford monitor X at $4000 of course you think its better than $300 monitor Y. But can you remain objective enough to recommend the best monitor Y to some one who can only afford $300?

2. Also covered above, there are soo many monitors out there in every price range, but especially the $1000 - $2000 range and they are all pretty nice by todays standards. I am also a firm believer that once you get into the upper range of $3000 - $7000 per pair like Barefoots, KRK E8b's, K+H, Upper level Genelecs and such...none of them suck or are bad. which goes down to number...

3. Personal taste, you may like one set better than another, you may have a brand preference, one set may be better suited to your room, you might even find a set which is not your ideal...but you find your mixes translate better than any other, maybe you even like yur cheap monitors better than expensive ones. Point being, your taste and preference does not mean the others suck or are bad. I don't like Genelecs personally and I can't stand Mackies...does not mean that either are bad speakers or that they deserve to get slammed. It just means I have heard monitors I like better for me.

4. Most of the time I would guess that 90% of us here on Gear Sluts get a pair and we learn to love them. Its what we can afford or the 1st brand we had, ect.

5. We as Gear slutz are alos biased look at trends here...popularity rises and falls like Britney Spear's career. We love something one minute and regurgitate how great something is, even though 90% of the time we have never lived with and used they item we are hyping.

6. Like Steve Albini mentioned in an interview I saw online, paraphrased of course it was that if you have some reference CDs you know like the back of your hand, after about 20 min of adjustment a good engineer can mix on almost anything.

Just some thoughts,

XJ

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by plexisys

I find most funny about these and most "pro" reviews is they talk about frequency response and how good they "sound" but not a word about accuracy. I care more about accuracy than anything else.

[bold added]

A bedrock measure of accuracy -- but only one measure -- is frequency response.

If a monitor doesn't respond more or less in a fairly flat, linear fashion across a good part of the spectrum, it can hardly be considered "accurate."


I'm with others in a couple things: one, there is a naturally occuring and all but unavoidable relationship between publications and their advertisers that tends to make flat-out honesty -- as delivered by fallible humans who, just occasionally, overstep the boundaries of their own knowledge and expertise (no, really, could happen) -- extremely tricky to deliver consistently, while hanging on to advertisers, who the pub is ultimately dependent on.

For that reason, some nuance in reading between the lines -- if one choses to read them at all -- is necessary if one is to derive whatever value can be pulled from a given set of reviews.

[warhead]

Monitors are just the worst thing to even rely on other people's testimony before buying. It's the most personal decision you can make. There are plenty of terrible monitors out there though in my opinion...!

War

[plexisys]

A bedrock measure of accuracy -- but only one measure -- is frequency response.

If a monitor doesn't respond more or less in a fairly flat, linear fashion across a good part of the spectrum, it can hardly be considered "accurate."

One could assume you would not buy a monitor that was only good from 200 Hz to 1 KHz. You would buy a reasonably full spectrum monitor for a studio.

But that still does not determine the accuracy of the monitor.

[msm07]

IMO A serious monitor should only be judged on a few things...

-Translation (results)

-Accuracy when recording...ie can you hear the difference between mics, preamps clearly etc

-Whether they give you ear fatigue.

-Sweet Spot

I can't see how simply listening can test a speaker. In the real world, monitors are just tools to get a mix sounding as good as possible, on as many systems as possible. Also you don't want to go through pain while recording/mixing (hence the need for minimal ear fatigue)

Thats the problem i'm having with my HS80's. Ear fatigue. A couple hours mixing and i've got a headache. They translate well though, but having owned Focal Twins for a month, I realise I AM in need of an upgrade.

I mixed an album recently, most of it on the HS80s, and 2 songs on the Twins. Having just got it back from mastering i'm amazed. The Focal mixes stand out in so many ways, dynamic range is impressive yet the overall volume is there, the bass really hits you in the chest yet NEVER takes over, highs are crystal clear and the vocals are the always clear and consistant, always being the focal point of the song.

My point is, that only NOW can I really judge the Twins vs the HS80's. I wish I didn't have the port issues with them...My monitor hunt continues.....

[jelstro]

My experience browsing for monitors and any other gear has been similar to everyone else's...

I've always chalked it up to the fact that no one is going to admit that the piece of equipment they just spent several hundred dollars on is a piece of junk... unless it truly and honestly is and they're set on returning it.

When I'm scouring user reviews of gear I don't bother reading anything that has more than 3/5 stars because they all say the same thing (color! warmth! clarity! response! flat! crisp! BUY THIS NOW!). I look for people who write detailed reviews and then give it less than three stars... If I find two or three of those on a piece of gear then I usually scratch it off my list... unless of course it's just one guy going, "These things broke on me and I had to get them replaced." Sometimes I'll let those ones go and assume that person broke it him/her self or got a single defective unit.

[PeteJames]

Originally Posted by kooz

I know mine are. Aren't yours?

The problem is that you are reading reviews rather than formulating your own opinion. From listening to your stuff or stuff you know really well. In your room. With your own ears.

get it? good.

No mine suck I wish i could go to a properly treated studio and pick, i'd know what i wanted in an instant. I guess I'll have to travel to birmingham or london to hear them in the stock room and endure sales pitches.

Definitely...it's kind of a form of unwritten bribary....we'll give you that KRK exclusive if you tell your readers 'yellow cones have a mindblowingly positive impact on your studio experience'..... Then everyones happy...apart from me!

Any reviewers want to come clean and give us a gearslutz EXPOSE?!

[mattianlaseppia]

Originally Posted by PeteJames

I've never had the pleasure of reading a critical monitor review! This extends way beyond the scope of monitors, but I'll focus on the monitors aspect.

Check musicradar.com where all monitors mysteriously score 4.5/5 Future Music is terrible for this.

SOS where even the negatives are made into positives and all have exactly the same positives. All have, Detailed Mid Range, Superb stereo image, great bass extension, tonally balanced, smooth hi's and best of all are non-fatiguing. That is after they've spend over 2/3's of the page replicating manufacturer specs. There are enough adverts in these magazines without them dominating 'expert reviews'.

What a Fuking Cop Out! Why bother to review god damn equipment if your going to conclude that it is all equally fantastic!

Is there a great monitor conspiracy to keep us buying new gear? Is it standard practice for reviewers to take bribes or at least try to keep on manufacturers good side?

or

Are all monitors just absolutely bloody brilliant?

I know there are some seriously experienced people on here so it'd be great if you could do some reviews (even if they are brief) on your experiences with various monitors, particularly on budget - mid level ones that most of us have to go for.

I totally agree!!!

and

Originally Posted by Drkovorkian

First i would say that most reviews are gonna be price related

I totally disagree!!

I hate to see these "for the price" comments or reviews. They don't make any sense. One thing is good or not or between them.

If you pay one pair of speaker 100$ and that makes them 6 out of 5 than you pay a speaker 2000$ and that makes them 3 out of 6.. but the second is a speaker the first is a megaphone.. !?

if I was in Jules I would ban the "for the price" sentence.. give me the truth.. if I spend few dollars I will know I'm getting something that isn't that good, but I can afford that and I know its limits

with the "for the price" comment I always feel I'm getting a great thing while it's crap

while there are things which are cheap and great compared to the most expensive one, and other things which cost a fortune and aren't better than other that costs 1/10th

price shouldn't be taken in consideration when you review it or comment it, at least that's my opinion

[AlexK]

I remember reading a review of Tapco S5s (probably the worst studio monitor I've ever listened to alongside the cheapo M-Audio stuff) and the reviewer said the overall tonal balance compared favourably to his Adam S3As

We're talking about a (pretty bad even for the price IMO) £100 monitor speaker against a fairly acclaimed £1000 studio monitor.

Just complete and utter nonsense! I never really tend to think reviews mean anything at all...