The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Most neutral Monitor speakers Studio Monitors
Old 11th August 2014
  #31
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

'Fast' doesn't really mean anything to me except an umbrella term for a whole bunch of very measurable and very quantifiable aspects of a speaker's performance.

Group delay/phase coherency can be easily measured - hence some speakers measure much better than others.
Resonances can be easily measured and quantified. Some speakers have very significant issues with extended low-frequency decay (particularly passive radiator designs and many ported speakers). Again, easily quantifiable and measurable.
Amplitude response and power response can be easily measured and quantified.
Harmonic distortion can be easily measured and quantified.
IM distortion can be easily measured and quantified.

I am at somewhat of a loss as to which aspects of a speaker's performance cannot be measured and compared to a 'theoretical ideal' (which does exist).
Old 11th August 2014
  #32
Lives for gear
Force, mass and acceleration are quantifiable and measurable, and F=ma. With T/L parameters of a driver we know the force (BL) and we know the total moving mass (MMS) and we know that if F=ma then a=F/m. While the potential acceleration of the driver in one way defines how high of a frequency it is capable of, it also defines how much control the motor has over the inertia of the total moving mass. (this is an oversimplification of course not taking into account the mechanical resistance of the driver suspension system).

More to the overall point, an ideal speaker would have no stored energy, no distortion, no phase shift, no resonances, no mechanical noise, no points of diffraction, have linear frequency response both on and off axis, able to achieve high spl and be point source with the smallest possible point relative to the smallest desired wavelength so about 20mm. Because this ideal doesn't (and arguably can't) exist, at best we could rate something on a scale of 1-10 per category, but who get's to decide which categories are more important than others?

Even more to the point, what is the ideal polar pattern? I say cardioid with narrowing directivity at HF, but that's because I'm thinking about my room, setup and tastes. Others would say omni, and for the right room (IE that oval shaped studio) that would be the better choice. Would an *ideal* speaker be capable of interfering with the other one given stereo? Is stereo ideal?

This question is similar to "what is the most neutral microphone"? Many (myself included) find that superflat measurement omni's don't always give the strongest impression of being right there in the room, so what does that mean?

IMO with all these transducers it's easy to get caught up in the concept of comparing them to a real acoustic event, which they are not. IMO at their best, these devices are merely good at being what they are, and perception and even taste then come into play.
Old 11th August 2014
  #33
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post

Even more to the point, what is the ideal polar pattern? I say cardioid with narrowing directivity at HF, but that's because I'm thinking about my room, setup and tastes. Others would say omni, and for the right room (IE that oval shaped studio) that would be the better choice. Would an *ideal* speaker be capable of interfering with the other one given stereo? Is stereo ideal?

This question is similar to "what is the most neutral microphone"? Many (myself included) find that superflat measurement omni's don't always give the strongest impression of being right there in the room, so what does that mean?

IMO with all these transducers it's easy to get caught up in the concept of comparing them to a real acoustic event, which they are not. IMO at their best, these devices are merely good at being what they are, and perception and even taste then come into play.
Indeed, indeed! Nice to read someone with skills say he prefers a somewhat directional delivery, as I do myself, too. I much prefer being able to 'stick my head outside the stream' for a listen 'from the side' to a speaker that follows me around the room. Good info to be had from the various side angles.

And also indeed, best at what they are, i.e. ideally effective tools to get a job done, is the best you can aim for. Which like you say is rather personal. And also fluctuates as people go through their audio development and go through different phases of paying attention to different parameters more than before. Hence even with one person there will be a time curve of moving through tools as perceptions and evaluations of what's important change.
Old 11th August 2014
  #34
Lives for gear
To the O.P. - based on this and the converter thread you seem to be intent on spending a lot of money. Take a small amount of that money and get on a plane to London or L.A. for a few days and listen to all of this gear for yourself. Be straight with the dealer and offer to pay for their time and effort.

Buying gear on this level based on internet opinion is, well....not a good idea.
Old 11th August 2014
  #35
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Force, mass and acceleration are quantifiable and measurable, and F=ma. With T/L parameters of a driver we know the force (BL) and we know the total moving mass (MMS) and we know that if F=ma then a=F/m. While the potential acceleration of the driver in one way defines how high of a frequency it is capable of, it also defines how much control the motor has over the inertia of the total moving mass. (this is an oversimplification of course not taking into account the mechanical resistance of the driver suspension system).

More to the overall point, an ideal speaker would have no stored energy, no distortion, no phase shift, no resonances, no mechanical noise, no points of diffraction, have linear frequency response both on and off axis, able to achieve high spl and be point source with the smallest possible point relative to the smallest desired wavelength so about 20mm. Because this ideal doesn't (and arguably can't) exist, at best we could rate something on a scale of 1-10 per category, but who get's to decide which categories are more important than others?

Even more to the point, what is the ideal polar pattern? I say cardioid with narrowing directivity at HF, but that's because I'm thinking about my room, setup and tastes. Others would say omni, and for the right room (IE that oval shaped studio) that would be the better choice. Would an *ideal* speaker be capable of interfering with the other one given stereo? Is stereo ideal?

This question is similar to "what is the most neutral microphone"? Many (myself included) find that superflat measurement omni's don't always give the strongest impression of being right there in the room, so what does that mean?

IMO with all these transducers it's easy to get caught up in the concept of comparing them to a real acoustic event, which they are not. IMO at their best, these devices are merely good at being what they are, and perception and even taste then come into play.
Spot in in my opinion, except that we cannot ignore that there are many speakers (which may 'feel' neutral to a particular engineer) which in reality show some really serious issues when it comes to their acoustic behaviour.

Different designers/companies have different priorities. PMC, ATC, Gethain, Augsperger, Quested. The point is there are some foundations which any good speaker designer cannot argue with as being a requirement for a well-engineered speaker, and yet many designs go directly against this.
Old 11th August 2014
  #36
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
This question is similar to "what is the most neutral microphone"? Many (myself included) find that superflat measurement omni's don't always give the strongest impression of being right there in the room, so what does that mean?
.
It means that we will never really know, since we can't translate/hear what the microphone is picking up w/o that signal being reproduced by a transducer (speaker).

Until a new field comes about in which a 'neutral' package is sold consisting of at least a mic (or stereo mic) + headphones (to take room variables out) as a 'package', tuned and developed to sound as close to what it sounds like standing in the mic position. Then that can be compared to other packaged systems as to which is the most 'neutral' sounding.

Problem with this is that anyone else listening on different transducers will be out of that 'neutral' loop (essentially what we deal with now). So it's really of little benefit to those of us who record/mix for the outside world.

So essentially what we do is of course learn how to mix and translate to the outside world with monitors that best mate with our own personal tastes and best mate with our rooms. The end result is the closest to 'neutral' if 'neutral' is the middle ground of translations to the widest range of playback systems.
Though it usually takes years (many) to fine tune and find that best combo of ears/monitor/room = translation to widest range of systems.
I've left out that experience/skill factor, but of course that would be a given.
Old 12th August 2014
  #37
Here for the gear
 

Guys I appreciate all the valuable comments. I checked out the Eggeleston works speakers. They are too damn expensive I dont think I'm ready for such expensive boxes yet. Rs. 17,00,000 a piece Yes I can afford them but it just isn't the right time for me to own such pricey speakers yet. I need to have allot more experience in mixing and mastering before I can start with such bosses. I recently checked out the Dynaudios in 5.1 at a friends studio. I loved the sound. Very revealing and it didnt seem to have any coloration. They were the AIR series. I guess the BM series is the latest now. Can anyone tell me if the BM is any better than the AIR? Also what about this United Minorities I'm hearing about so much? I saw a guy comment that would never go back to adams, dynaudios, etc after working on them! Are they really that good? If it is so I'm about to get really depressed because if they're not available in the States they will definitely not be available in India. Also the Ginkos on the website show just 1 speaker driver. I don't understand how a speaker can be that precise with just 1 driver? And if they really are I can imagine how accurate the towers maybe. Can anyone post some pics of their tower speakers since they are not on the website. Can anyone give their opinions on comparisions of the Dynaudio BM15a's with Lipinski 707's or 707a's (ofcourse with 2 subs) and the United Minorities boxes? Also are there any other speakers that are in this league?
Old 12th August 2014
  #38
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by yungclyde View Post
Guys I appreciate all the valuable comments. I checked out the Eggeleston works speakers. They are too damn expensive I dont think I'm ready for such expensive boxes yet. Rs. 17,00,000 a piece Yes I can afford them but it just isn't the right time for me to own such pricey speakers yet. I need to have allot more experience in mixing and mastering before I can start with such bosses. I recently checked out the Dynaudios in 5.1 at a friends studio. I loved the sound. Very revealing and it didnt seem to have any coloration. They were the AIR series. I guess the BM series is the latest now. Can anyone tell me if the BM is any better than the AIR? Also what about this United Minorities I'm hearing about so much? I saw a guy comment that would never go back to adams, dynaudios, etc after working on them! Are they really that good? If it is so I'm about to get really depressed because if they're not available in the States they will definitely not be available in India. Also the Ginkos on the website show just 1 speaker driver. I don't understand how a speaker can be that precise with just 1 driver?
Single driver speakers are in some ways better, there is no crossover in the midrange to mess things up and the transition from full space radiation to narrowing directivity at HF is inherently smooth. The trade off is directivity is narrow in the top octaves. Typically single driver speakers are for a listening party of 1 because of this. As mentioned off-axis can be interesting on these, but it's not the "sweet spot" and IME can be an issue with clients in the room ("it sounds muffled").

I haven't heard the UM's but it's not possible for a ~5" full range driver to break this rule (HF directivity is directly related to diaphragm size) so keep that in mind. I keep some tang band 4" full rangers myself, personally I don't see the need to spend a lot on this...I'd check out Karloffs little paper clones to fill that roll. Or DIY, single driver speakers are pretty easy, no crossover to design.

If it's a rap studio (I do a fair amount of rap) go for something bigger with big coverage area, full bass extension and high max SPL/durability, especially if you have freelancers. Club/car translation is something you will need. Then you can have smaller speakers to fill other rolls.

My short list would be JBL M2 or augspurger 215VS...Although ugly for a studio if 20k is the budget for all speakers maybe Yorkville U215 for bigs, dynaudio air for nearfields and little papercones etc for betties/fullrangers. Something like the U215, M2 or Augs all have a tighter pattern through the mids so there is less of a chance of issues with early reflections and desk diffraction there. Also the U215 is better performer than people would think in a hifi/studio role. So are QSC K15's...not a lot of client appeal there though. Also budget for some sort of good quality monitor controller, a measurement omni, and if you are going to have subs some sort of crossover/bass management and room cal is IMO worth it.
Old 12th August 2014
  #39
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleaman View Post
I've left out that experience/skill factor, but of course that would be a given.
The neon colored 800lb gorilla in the room.
Old 12th August 2014
  #40
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Indeed, indeed! Nice to read someone with skills say he prefers a somewhat directional delivery, as I do myself, too. I much prefer being able to 'stick my head outside the stream' for a listen 'from the side' to a speaker that follows me around the room. Good info to be had from the various side angles.

And also indeed, best at what they are, i.e. ideally effective tools to get a job done, is the best you can aim for. Which like you say is rather personal. And also fluctuates as people go through their audio development and go through different phases of paying attention to different parameters more than before. Hence even with one person there will be a time curve of moving through tools as perceptions and evaluations of what's important change.
Check this out...180 degree horizontal polar in 10 degree increments. 4" beryllium/neodymium comp drivers on 24" CD waveguides and cardioid loaded woofers (ala meg or amphion krypton3).

You might also find this an interesting read on the subject-

http://www.pispeakers.com/Pi_Speakers_Info.pdf
Attached Thumbnails
Most neutral Monitor speakers-seos24radian951be.jpg  
Old 12th August 2014
  #41
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Food for obsessing....thank you.
Old 12th August 2014
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Hjelmevold's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by yungclyde View Post
I recently checked out the Dynaudios in 5.1 at a friends studio. I loved the sound. Very revealing and it didnt seem to have any coloration. They were the AIR series. I guess the BM series is the latest now. Can anyone tell me if the BM is any better than the AIR?
I'm not sure why you would assume that the BM series is better than the AIR series - Is it because the BM series recently has been updated to a third revision? On paper, the AIR series should still have many advantages over the BM series, particularly in surround configurations due to the flexibility that the built-in DSP optimization gives you. And Dynaudio themselves rank their monitors in the following "good-better-best" order: BM series - AIR series - M series.

Nevertheless, you can't really be sure which is better for you, until you've tried the speakers in your own room...
Old 12th August 2014
  #43
Deleted User
Guest
if you want active: i'd go psi (today)
if you want passive: not only the speaker, but also the amplifier play a very important role.

but generally there is not such thing as most neutral speaker, i think.
speakers can be transparent relatively. this means: in comparison to each other, not in comparison to the source,
as no one can listen to the source exactly at same time and at the same place and from the same perspective...
this is impossible.

it's a difficult question you are asking! ;-)
Old 12th August 2014
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yungclyde View Post
Also what about this United Minorities I'm hearing about so much? I saw a guy comment that would never go back to adams, dynaudios, etc after working on them! Are they really that good?
For that 'guy' they were.

For you it could be the exact opposite.
Old 13th August 2014
  #45
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

I have a couple of favorites but honestly this thread is a little too messy with all of the suggestions and banter already. I don't want to add to the noise.

Focus on spending money to dial in your room, also just an observation but it seems to me that you may need more experience before you drop 20 grand on speakers. Just my 2 cents..
Old 14th August 2014
  #46
Here for the gear
 

Hello,
let me modify my originally asked question to y'all. I am looking for the most neutral sounding monitor system with a sub to set up a 5.1 mixing and mastering house for post. I will also be doing stereo mixes (mostly hip hop). I also have a pair of Yamaha HS80m's from back in the day (if someone has an idea if I can club these with a 3 new monitors to make a 5.1 setup using the yamahas as ls and rs). The room's area is 200 sq ft. The height is about 8 ft. The room is acoustically treated with rockwool pannels and insulation wherever needed. Bass traps, early reflection absorbers on the walls and all that. Again guys just to remind y'all, I'm not looking to spend the most amount of cash on speakers just because I have it. I come from a poor family and definitely know the value of money no matter how much I have. I will never spend it on something useless just because I can. All I want is the most revealing and neutral sounding boxes that'll give me the truth and nothing else regardless of its cost. I'm thinking of going for Dynaudios since I've already heard and liked them. Can anyone advie me on which model exactly to go for based on my room size? Active or passive? BM series or AIR? And which sub to put along with it? Any more info about the room or anything else that you need please ask.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump