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
Barefoot MM27 VS ATC scm25 VS Focal SM9 Studio Monitors
View Poll Results: Which ones would you say is the best for mastering?
Barefoot MM27
72 Votes - 33.64%
ATC scm25
79 Votes - 36.92%
Focal SM9
63 Votes - 29.44%
Voters: 214. You may not vote on this poll

Old 28th September 2012
  #61
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by t_d View Post
buying SCM25 based on liking SCM200 is sort of like buying adam A5 because you love the A4x and thinking you'll get the same performance.
Yeah, but...>>>

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn sullivan View Post
He now is the proud owner of ATC SCM25 Mid fields and has never looked back.
Old 28th September 2012
  #62
Went from Barefoot MM27 to ATC 150ASL. No comparison in natural presentation, soundstage, translation. Barefoots are still nice but the ATCs sound like music.

Even if you go to the audiophile world, you won't see people with anything negative to say about the 150s... and the mid-priced line has the same sound except for extension and power handling.
Old 28th September 2012
  #63
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeloocproducer View Post
Went from Barefoot MM27 to ATC 150ASL. No comparison in natural presentation, soundstage, translation. Barefoots are still nice but the ATCs sound like music.

Even if you go to the audiophile world, you won't see people with anything negative to say about the 150s... and the mid-priced line has the same sound except for extension and power handling.
+ 1 !!!

Note that the ATC 25 and ATC 150 have identical midrange drivers..... The midrange drivers that ATC is justifiably famous for.

:-)
Old 29th September 2012
  #64
t_d
Lives for gear
 
t_d's Avatar
yea... it is a good point

but.. for the 25a you still need a sub.. which does add some $$$$ to the equation...

wonder how he thought the bass extension was on the ATC and if he added a sub. i could imagine going from the barefoots to the 25a he'd be missing that bass.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleaman View Post
Yeah, but...>>>
Old 29th September 2012
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Either way it didn't matter for 'him'.

I have yet to hear the SCM25's, but the MM27's (which I have heard/shot out) don't quite have the low end you would expect. Yeah it has dual 10" woofs, but they're in a tiny sealed cab. Hence, BF uses a LOT of power to make up for that. Even so, it does not sound like 4x 10" woofers at all. Barefoot actually makes a separate sub for the MM27's. Saw a pic of 2 of them set up below ea MM27 attached to the same stand(s). And now BF even has a newer bigger monitor.

When I shot out MM27's, Twins and 0300's, the MM27's did have more extended bass than either, but not astonishingly so. It was of course noticeable, but not in a 'Mains' sorta way. I think I coulda crudely replicated the MM27 low end with a +2db (or 3db) 50hz shelf on either monitor.
Also wasn't very punchy either. Sorta had the NS10m's w/sub feel to them. Coulda been the room, setup, but it was a well treated medium size control room.

Bottom line, I'm guessing the SCM25's don't have the bass extension of the MM27's, but I doubt there was a drastic difference and more importantly the feel of the bass (transients, roll off, etc.) was probably the biggest difference, and I'm guessing they preferred the SCM25's low end feel vs the MM27's.

I ended up with Opals, lol.
Old 29th September 2012
  #66
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
+ 1 !!!

Note that the ATC 25 and ATC 150 have identical midrange drivers..... The midrange drivers that ATC is justifiably famous for.

:-)
not true the 25's use a different midrange - check the specs

they also do not use the SL spec bass drivers
Old 29th September 2012
  #67
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CeretoneAudio View Post
not true the 25's use a different midrange - check the specs .....
They are both the same size, and i'm pretty sure I was told they are identical midrange drivers.

ATC Loudspeakers. ATC Monitors. ATC SCM. ATC Speakers. Manufacturers of speakers, monitors, drive units and amplifiers.

ATC Loudspeakers. ATC Monitors. ATC SCM. ATC Speakers. Manufacturers of speakers, monitors, drive units and amplifiers.

I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Old 29th September 2012
  #68
Lives for gear
 

50,100.150 etc
ATC 75mm "Super Dome" mid driver

25
ATC hand built 2"/75mm soft dome mid driver

Same size, different driver - its been covered before, check the other thread
Old 29th September 2012
  #69
Lives for gear
 
Hermetech Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
SL is for "super linear". The 25's don't have that.
Old 30th September 2012
  #70
Gear Maniac
 

From your experience guys and when comparing those speakers which is the best instrument to brutally reveal hi-mid harshness, annoying sibilances and ear piercing problems ?

If the SM9 sounds soft and forgiving like the focal twins, they won't be suitable to reveal those problems ... but i'd like to hear your opinions guys.
Old 30th September 2012
  #71
Lives for gear
 
sdbmastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet View Post
From your experience guys and when comparing those speakers which is the best instrument to brutally reveal hi-mid harshness, annoying sibilances and ear piercing problems ?

If the SM9 sounds soft and forgiving like the focal twins, they won't be suitable to reveal those problems ... but i'd like to hear your opinions guys.
The SM9s are definitely not soft or forgiving, and definitely not alike to the Twins.

I do understand that an ATC may perform better than a SM9, after all the cheapest pro model costs 2-3 times more than the SM9 so the weird thing would be if it didn't outperform the Focal.

Again, the SM9 has almost nothing to do with the Twins apart from the Focal brand. They are incredible speakers that people should consider demoing if they're looking to purchase a pair of speakers.

But like everything in this industry, there's always better stuff out there if you can afford it.
Old 30th September 2012
  #72
Lives for gear
I used the barefoots for a few years, then I heard the ATC's and I wasn't blown away. Both super high quality monitors but different. Nowadays I'm back on my Genelec 1031a's and couldn't be happier. They were made for my ears I guess. One brand I suggest is digital phase. They are like the opposite of Genelecs in terms of sound presentation. Like genelecs are studio monitor vs. Digital phase are more like listening speakers. However they are spec'd like a studio monitor and have super flat frequency response and the sound is just so damn natural.
Old 30th September 2012
  #73
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegel View Post
I used the barefoots for a few years, then I heard the ATC's and I wasn't blown away. Both super high quality monitors but different. Nowadays I'm back on my Genelec 1031a's and couldn't be happier. They were made for my ears I guess. One brand I suggest is digital phase. They are like the opposite of Genelecs in terms of sound presentation. Like genelecs are studio monitor vs. Digital phase are more like listening speakers. However they are spec'd like a studio monitor and have super flat frequency response and the sound is just so damn natural.
what about which is the best instrument to brutally reveal hi-mid harshness, annoying sibilances and ear piercing problems ?
Old 1st October 2012
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet View Post
From your experience guys and when comparing those speakers which is the best instrument to brutally reveal hi-mid harshness, annoying sibilances and ear piercing problems ?
.
Just get a pair of NS10ms.
Old 1st October 2012
  #75
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet View Post
what about which is the best instrument to brutally reveal hi-mid harshness, annoying sibilances and ear piercing problems ?
I would say Genelec 1031A's for that and everything. Here's my overall opinion on monitors. Firstly my main criteria for monitors is sound aesthetic. Meaning what sounds natural to my ears. That is assuming that of course all other criteria needed for studio monitors is met like flat frequency response, dynamic response, etc... Keep in mind these are some of the best monitors in the world and I'm being ultra critical. Great mixes can be made with any of these fine tools:

Focal - too bright and hard.

ATC - clinical and uninspiring

Barefoot - a little bit on the clinical side but lets you really see inside the mix

Digital Phase - Very natural sound. Like the speakers aren't there. Very similar to PMC sound aesthetic but a notch or two up in terms of clarity and naturalness. Does not let you see into the mix like barefoot

Genelecs - These monitors were just made for my ears

To me the biggest plus about the barefoots is how they let you see into the mix. Its like the sound is in 3d. However for balancing levels I work much faster on my Genelecs and Yamahas.
Old 1st October 2012
  #76
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegel View Post
I would say Genelec 1031A's for that and everything. Here's my overall opinion on monitors. Firstly my main criteria for monitors is sound aesthetic. Meaning what sounds natural to my ears. That is assuming that of course all other criteria needed for studio monitors is met like flat frequency response, dynamic response, etc... Keep in mind these are some of the best monitors in the world and I'm being ultra critical. Great mixes can be made with any of these fine tools:

Focal - too bright and hard.

ATC - clinical and uninspiring

Barefoot - a little bit on the clinical side but lets you really see inside the mix

Digital Phase - Very natural sound. Like the speakers aren't there. Very similar to PMC sound aesthetic but a notch or two up in terms of clarity and naturalness. Does not let you see into the mix like barefoot

Genelecs - These monitors were just made for my ears

To me the biggest plus about the barefoots is how they let you see into the mix. Its like the sound is in 3d. However for balancing levels I work much faster on my Genelecs and Yamahas.
Focal bright and hard ? I find them really soft and forgiving, smoothing out the harsh frequencies :S and considering selling my pair :O

I love the clinical nature of the ATC though when there is **** ...you hear **** :D
Old 1st October 2012
  #77
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by alecsribet View Post
Focal bright and hard ? I find them really soft and forgiving, smoothing out the harsh frequencies :S and considering selling my pair :O

I love the clinical nature of the ATC though when there is **** ...you hear **** :D
Its that beryllium tweeter. I don't know how else to describe it. Not for my taste.
Old 1st October 2012
  #78
t_d
Lives for gear
 
t_d's Avatar
the more i wanted this thread to help inform my decision on these 3 monitors the more i realized it's completely futile. for some people to judge a speaker as "too soft" and others to say "too hard" makes it completely clear that this decision should be made PURELY on one's own opinions and that threads like this do nothing but confuse and misinform.

i don't mean "misinform" in the sense that people's opinions aren't valid or well researched.. but in the sense that one person's opinion is just that... an opinion, and should not be used at all to make your own decision.

maybe with monitors it's trickier to ask for GS help.. than, say... a synthesizer...monitor opinions reflect the room as well as what people are playing through them, and, of course, personal preference.

but i think this thread has now proven that nothing objective can be gained here. i should probably do myself a favor and unsubscribe from this one and fly out to VKLA to hear all 3 (and more) for myself!
Old 1st October 2012
  #79
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by t_d View Post
the more i wanted this thread to help inform my decision on these 3 monitors the more i realized it's completely futile. for some people to judge a speaker as "too soft" and others to say "too hard" makes it completely clear that this decision should be made PURELY on one's own opinions and that threads like this do nothing but confuse and misinform.
This is absolutely correct.

Monitors are extremely personal and subjective. One man's 'harsh' is another man's 'detailed and revealing'. One man's 'smooth and non-fatiguing' is another man's 'soft and veiled'.

At best, what you should look for in monitor threads is comparison opinion, i.e., Focal Twins sound like 'this' compared to 0300's. Pretty much everyone would agree that Twins are mid-forward compared to 0300's.
So, if there are monitors that you are familiar with, then try to find threads that compare those monitors with the monitors you're interested in.

I always try compare monitors against each other when making comments about any particular monitor model. I wouldn't say Twins are 'mid-forward' w/o mentioning what monitor I'm referencing, like say 0300's. Because Twin's are not mid-forward compared to NS10ms.

So, my advice is to take special note about opinions/comments that reference other monitors when the poster is talking about a particular monitor.
Old 3rd October 2012
  #80
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_d View Post
the more i wanted this thread to help inform my decision on these 3 monitors the more i realized it's completely futile. for some people to judge a speaker as "too soft" and others to say "too hard" makes it completely clear that this decision should be made PURELY on one's own opinions and that threads like this do nothing but confuse and misinform.

i don't mean "misinform" in the sense that people's opinions aren't valid or well researched.. but in the sense that one person's opinion is just that... an opinion, and should not be used at all to make your own decision.

maybe with monitors it's trickier to ask for GS help.. than, say... a synthesizer...monitor opinions reflect the room as well as what people are playing through them, and, of course, personal preference.

but i think this thread has now proven that nothing objective can be gained here. i should probably do myself a favor and unsubscribe from this one and fly out to VKLA to hear all 3 (and more) for myself!
And when you come back from there you can come by my place and check out my genelecs and Digital phase monitors. Looks like you are only an hour and a half away from my place
Old 27th March 2013
  #81
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
I know the ATC 25 well

I own ATC 150s

How would Focal SM9 sound. Compared to what I know and own?
Old 30th March 2013
  #82
I have the Twins in my studio and really like them. I heard the SM9 and thought they were good, but the more clinical Barefoots I loved. Clearer and less colored than the SM9's
Old 30th March 2013
  #83
t_d
Lives for gear
 
t_d's Avatar
after debating and researching speakers.. the ones in this thread mostly, i ended up selling my Twins and getting a pair of MM27s because i got a great deal locally.

i could not be happier with the barefoots. they are so unbelievably revealing. as someone above said.. **** in, **** out. the only problem is that so much music i've been listening to for years now sounds horrible because the barefoots are so unforgiving of bad mixes. but i've never felt more confident in a mix once it's sounding good on them.

my speaker searching is done for a while!
Old 2nd April 2013
  #84
Quote:
Originally Posted by t_d View Post
after debating and researching speakers.. the ones in this thread mostly, i ended up selling my Twins and getting a pair of MM27s because i got a great deal locally.

i could not be happier with the barefoots. they are so unbelievably revealing. as someone above said.. **** in, **** out. the only problem is that so much music i've been listening to for years now sounds horrible because the barefoots are so unforgiving of bad mixes. but i've never felt more confident in a mix once it's sounding good on them.

my speaker searching is done for a while!
But remember that your old mixes sound just fine on other sources. You only hear these issues on the Barefoots. You need monitors this good to hear this issues.
Old 25th May 2013
  #85
Here for the gear
 

Just got my MM27s after trying the ATCs and the Focals. They're just A-M-A-Z-I-N-G.
I'm comparing them right now to my 1032A and I'm so happy!
3D has arrived in my studio and the image is so balanced.
SM9 were too soft and forgiving for my taste. ATC would have been my second choice, but coming from Genelec, I feel much more at home with the barefoot. Thanks for making these !!!!!
Old 12th September 2013
  #86
Lives for gear
 
GYang's Avatar
I'm closer toward ATC these days.
Over K+H and Barefoot, at least.
Need few more sessions with different models, but so far ATC sounds at the best balance of qualities.
Old 13th September 2013
  #87
Quote:
Originally Posted by bendermastering View Post
The SM9s are definitely not soft or forgiving, and definitely not alike to the Twins.

I do understand that an ATC may perform better than a SM9, after all the cheapest pro model costs 2-3 times more than the SM9 so the weird thing would be if it didn't outperform the Focal.

Again, the SM9 has almost nothing to do with the Twins apart from the Focal brand. They are incredible speakers that people should consider demoing if they're looking to purchase a pair of speakers.

But like everything in this industry, there's always better stuff out there if you can afford it.
I believe the tweeters and 6" woofer on the Sm9 is the same as the Twins. Amps are different of course.
Old 14th September 2013
  #88
Lives for gear
 
Fleaman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason rocks View Post
I believe the tweeters and 6" woofer on the Sm9 is the same as the Twins. Amps are different of course.
Whether they are or are not, they are certainly voiced differently, which matters in the end.
Old 14th September 2013
  #89
Lives for gear
 
sdbmastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason rocks View Post
I believe the tweeters and 6" woofer on the Sm9 is the same as the Twins. Amps are different of course.
No, they are different. But most importantly, they sound a lot different which is what matters.
Old 14th September 2013
  #90
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
The SM9's are built from the ground up, totally different.
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