NS10's were used NOT because of their great frequency response, the main reason actually was their great phase response. I still use a pair here in the studio along side my large Questeds.


MC

I agree about the phase response (although some have suggested in the past that some have suggested the atypical freq. response was useful also) - just using it as an example of a situation where something far from flat was still very popular. Still have to do some more research on the Sonar works thing - thanks for the comments

I agree and the future standard for checking mixes may be the most popular headphone, bud, or desktop speaker instead of big monitors. Great speakers in a commercial studio will, of course, be a must because of the power they have in having a a client enjoy their work.

So.. Those of you who bought this a while back. Are you still using it? Does it translate well to your speakers?
It's currently on sale for $17 which is a no-brained price. But I don't want to buy it if it's going to sit there unused.

Beware the CPU

I did try it out back when it was released but didn't get a chance to do any real work with it then. I know the camera head tracking was a huge CPU hog, but when used in a fixed position I think it was quite easy on the resources.

Hello World, I need this because i"m going to move to a different space where I don't get to play my music loud at night..

Is this a good product? I will be using my DT 880 headphones.

I ended up buying it. For the price I paid it's a useful tool, but I liked the old Focusrite VRM much better to be honest.
I don't feel like I can have it on the output all the time while mixing because it alters the sound too much and causes phase issues at times, but it's useful for checking stereo placement every now and then. I wish that they included some emulations of different speakers and rooms in it like the VRM.

I use it without the head tracker as I see that feature as more of a gimmick and it's not very useful without a bluetooth tracker.

The whole point behind "reference" quality tools (flat response, etc.) is to produce a mix that is compatible on as many reproduction devices as possible. Open ear cans, closed, cans, earbuds, home stereo speakers, aurutones, etc. The argument above while it seems intuitive falls short because what you will in fact be doing, is mixing with a bias towards the colored reproduction method you are listening to. I suppose you could say the philosophy is, it's better to have a mix that sounds really good on hundreds of different speakers/cans/earbuds, as opposed to having a mix that sounds REALLY FANTASTIC on one specific make and model of headphones, but that sounds awful on everything else.

Now, that said... the infamous NS10m (personally I didn't care for them at all... not that that's of any importance as many hit records were mixed on them and I've mixed approximately zero hit records ) was a speaker that MANY engineers became intimately familiar with. They have TONS of flaws, but for whatever reason, people wanted to put up with them and learn all of their flaws. This allowed them to make educated guesses as to how a mix should sound. Now, NS10(m)'s weren't the only tool used. Aurotones (aka Horrortones) were frequently found in many studios, and then you'd also have a pair of room monitors and sometimes even a second pair of near-field monitors. So, people were mixing on the NS10(m)'s and then checking in with other monitors for second and third opinions to make sure the assumptions (and you have to make assumptions with the NS10's as they are really horrible sounding) they were making were correct by checking with more capable monitors.

I encourage you to do this test if you ever have the opportunity. Get a blindfold. Now get 4 or 5 different speakers and listen to a mono mix through just one of them. Set them all up so a friend can quickly swap them out. Have your friend select a few pieces of music, all of which should be different genres. Maybe classical, jazz, rock, and dance. Play the classical piece and listen to speaker A, then listen to speaker B, then listen to speaker C... etc. Mark down which speaker you thought sounded the best for that clip of music. Then move on to the second clip and repeat... A, B, C, D, etc.

Once you go through this exercise, you will understand why having a reference monitor (and despite the 'M', the NS10M was never really a reference grade monitor IMO but folks are certainly free to vehemently disagree) is a good idea (and it's actually a really fun exercise if you've never done it before, the results may not be what you expect).

Who tested the new eq calibration feature?? I hesitate a lot between NX and Sonarworks...
Thank you!