You'll probably hate my studio monitors
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ค. 2024
- ► Website: woodypianoshack.com
► Podcast: / woodypianoshack
We answer the burning question what amplifier and speakers for my synthesizer or keyboard and I show my own choice of home studio monitors plus discussion on studio monitors vs hifi speakers.
Gear featured:
► behringer umc404hd
► focusrite scarlett 2i2
► nad c316bee
► wharfedale diamond 220 - เพลง
hey, woody, I love your channel so my comment is not meant to offend.
I come from a mixing and mastering background and had the luxury to intern and work in some studio's that had incredible monitoring setups. The old argument of hifi vs studio grade has been going on forever.
The majority rule is that studio monitor's give you as flat a response as possible and hifi systems give you an exaggerated sound. The reason this was done back in the day was to literally make one system sound better than the others. amps and speakers were tuned to give frequency curves that usually bump the lows and the highs. So when a buyer went into a store and listened to different systems they could pick the better sounding system than the others. And this resulted in sales for the HiFi brand.
Studio monitors, on the other hand, were designed to be as flat as possible, the reason for this is that when you are working on audio in a mixing and mastering situation you could make correct decisions with your ears. If at any time the monitoring system was exaggerated you would literally ruin a mix or master.
In saying that I would say that in a recording studio the speakers would be let's say 70% accurate, but in a mastering studio, it would 95% accurate to the original audio signal.
I had the privilege of working in a studio where the owner was a wealthy guy that had a passion for music, resulting in a studio that was incredible, it had every piece of gear and when new gear came out I could phone my boss and say please can we get xyz compressor, etc.
Regards to monitoring in that studio we had a massive ATC system that the owner had a custom built for the studio and I can never ever relay how those speakers sounded, they were literally incredible, but if the audio signal was crap, the speakers sounded crap.
Most of the mixing I did was on a set of NS 10’s which sound bad, really bad.
But if I got them to sound good on those then I knew it was good. They were incredibly midrange speakers, meaning that the frequency would roll off at around 60hz to 75 Hz, depending on the amp, etc.
If I got the mix balanced on the ns 10’s I knew that the bass and treble would be ok. The speakers almost forced you into a smile frequency curve on the song, which is a pleasing sound.
Haha, I remember that those ns 10’s used to scream midrange in your face and it would be harsh as hell, but then you knew it was good.
I then used to transfer the mix to the ATC’s, you would think that the mix sounded better on the ATC’s, but in reality, it sounds close enough to the ns 10’s that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference, what the ATC’s did was let me hear the below the 75hz to properly clean up the mix. It also gave you the benefit of listening to the audio at a louder level.
Now one would argue that that doesn't make a difference, but it really does.
When you use smaller speakers and push them hard you will actually get a totally different sound the using bigger speakers with more headroom. I don't really want to go in depth with regards to how audio changes in the analog world when the amplitude is involved, but in a simple explanation you can max out the audio on your iPhone speaker and it gets to the point where the sound is limited by the amp and the speaker. Now if you had more amp power and push it through that speaker more it will just distort and eventually degrade the audio.
Now imagine having a set of ATC’s which honestly had no limit, you would probably go deaf before those speakers reached their limit.
Anyways, if you are going to make music, play instruments, etc, by all means, do it on your current system, as long as it sounds good to you that's all that matters, but if you are going to do professional audio work stick to the right gear.
PS; have a look at the iloud speakers from IKmultimedia, they are incredible, affordable and you can truly mix on those speakers.
Maybe do a review on them in the future.
Love your channel especially the DX7 videos.
Here is a funny story for you, for months there was something wrong with the NS 10’s they weren't sounding right and it was always when I ran it through the Neve desk, but when running straight through the ProTools HD converters the signal was fine. So through a process of elimination, I literally had the neve desk in pieces, trying to find out what was wrecking the signal. Preamps, EQ’s Compressors, etc, resoldering connections checking cables, it was a nightmare, my boss even came in the one night with his mates to record some music and was horrified to see the desk in pieces. I got really chewed out over that.
Long story short, when the desk was on it was causing a fluctuation in the power (electricity on that circuit). I literally plugged the ns 10’s into a different outlet and the problem was gone.
thanks for the lengthy and insightful comment!
@@WoodyPianoShack no probs, love you channel, im on the notification squad so as soon as i get the notification i dive into your channel. can wait for more content
@@WoodyPianoShack I use Adam A7X monitors with my Nord Stage 2 EX , I love them.... I also just use them for regular speakers too.
I'm used a Focusrite 2i2 like you previously, but it's a single mono input, not stereo. So, I upgraded to the Yamaha AG06, which is still a single channel but has stereo. It's nice. But, I need to upgrade again since I'm got more gear. I'm going to use the Zoom Livetrak because it has a lot of inputs. But, it also offers a class compliant mode, I only use Linux, so I need to use devices that will just work as nobody makes Linux drivers for these audio things. But it functions as a 12 or 20 channel input.
TruthTraderAudio This is great. It’s normal for people (myself included) to believe what they like most, but still.
The reason for buying monitors instead of HiFis were the assurance that the mix would sound great on most systems instead of the most expensive systems - that was my impression of it.
Yet last time I raised the question on r/audiophiles I was chewed to death :(
They insisted that non of the HiFi system would color and tune the sound to make them pop and exciting... If that’s true I don’t understand why would a pair of speakers be 10x more expensive than the next pair if they sound the same.
I mean, most studio monitors falls between a much more consistent, narrow price range than speakers, doesn’t it? The maths... checks out, I guess?
@@gordonh2223 I guess what the audiophile group is saying is actually true, I'll explain. Audiophiles are a special type of group, they are purists and their goal is to ultimately recreate exactly what the original audio signal was or is.
But understand, the audiophile market is probably less than 1% of the audio consumption industry, the other 99% of people that listen to music are not purists, they don't care, they want an exaggerated sound. You can see this with the recently rising market of Bluetooth speakers.
Look at the Bluetooth speaker market, the price increases with the increase of volume and increase of bass frequency.
This is important to note, people like bass try to listen to a normal hifi system where you remove the bass frequency with an EQ, I promise you will only listen to the audio for 10min until you get sick of it.
So what is the difference with audiophile speakers and studio monitors, without going into too much depth the answer is simple. Studio monitors are used to create the sonic quality of audio, while audiophile speakers are used to relay the quality of audio.
There are some pretty complicated maths regarding the production of the two, but to be honest, I'm not an electrical engineer and to compare the two is enough content for a book that can be published.
Ill try make it simple,
Studio monitors are used to create music,
Mastering monitors are used to refine music,
Audiophile speakers are used to replicate music,
So think of speakers on a scale where studio monitors are one end of the spectrum, mastering monitors and the middle and audiophile speakers are on the other end.
I hope this sheds some light on the question
Thank goodness I am not the only one using a hifi for monitoring. For almost 20 years I have been using a Sony CPX11 for my sound setup. It sounds great and clean!
I use a 5.1 Yamaha receiver with all speakers hooked to it (sub and central speaker included) and I love it.
I used to be a skeptic about isolating speakers but after putting my KRK monitors on stands and decoupling, I am now a believer, they sound completely different and 300% better. That said, studio monitors are for critical listening not fun listening. They can certainly do the job but they may highlight things you dont like.
That being said, however, proper studio monitors could just as well be EQed/audio-processed to sound just the way that you would like them to! :-)
Great video Woody thanks for this!
I have a Yamaha MG12XU mixer that it also a great audio interface. And Yamaha HS8 monitors with MS8S subwoofer. Love the setup to bits.
Re studio monitors, I've been using Yamaha HS7s for the last 2-3 years and they sound great! Mostly used for nearfield casual listening rather than much music making
Thanks for sharing. I'm glad I'm not the only one using hifi gear! I have a few synths so I run them through a Yamaha MG10XU mixer which then goes into a 14 year old Denon AV amplifier (AVR-3805 ) which in turn feeds a pair of even older Castle Avon floor standing speakers. It works fine for my use in the house :)
That’s great to here! I keep reading I’ll blow my hifi speakers if I plug a synth into it! I have moog in the house and want to plug it into my hifi.
Thanks. This was very insightful.
I agree with you. I have both types of monitors in my studio. In the early 80’s hifi vendors were selling flat powerful amps. It was in the late 90’s that DSPs started showing up in hifi amps, and they are not flat at all. That’s why I have a ‘80 Kenwood KA701, like your NAD. I have big Klipsch La Scala speakers @ 4ohm on the floor, 5” studio monitors on my desk, and a large studio sub-woofer under the desk, when rarely use it. I’ll argue the Klipsch speakers powered by the Kenwood is more accurate and flat than the studio monitors. For recording and producing the studio monitors are great, while I’m fixing mistakes, adding effects, and composing a song. For mixing and mastering, I prefer the flat response of my old-school hifi setup. Lastly, I’ll add the sub woofer for certain types of music. Some experts tell me passive studio monitors and a good amp is better than powered/active monitors because the amps used in new monitors are lower quality. This makes sense. To buy a comparable integrated hifi amp with the specs of my Kenwood KA701 is costs over $1000. Passive studio monitors will be at least $600. Surprise! - a $1600 investment sounds better than a pair of small studio monitors for $600 - $700.
Final thought. Look at the specs for distortion, power, frequency response, slew rate. Now compare to say, popular Yamaha HS7s. Not even close! If your NAD is like my Kenwood, it has 2 power transformers inside, 2 turn-over EQ circuits, loudness control, db pads on the preamp, as the L and R channels are well separated, just like studio monitors with 2 amps. Today, we ignore slew rate because of integrated circuits, but slew rate measures how quickly an amp can deliver 80 watts for loud sounds, during quiet parts using 10 watts. Speakers @ 4 ohm or 2 ohm are naturally capable of delivering this change in power, while speakers at 8 ohm or 6 ohm will struggle. The faster the slew rate, the more accurate the sound.
Can't go wrong with NAD & Wharfedale! #respect I get your argument for the multi-use scenario, whereas I have a study / studio where the speakers are only a few feet away. Got some Nekkst K8's (on sale with a ESI Maya44 USB+) and are _majorly_happy_ with them :) Great quality budget setup.
Many years ago I had Yamaha NS10M's - lovely looking monitors but I was actually able to 'tune' a much cheaper pair of 8" Wharfedale HIFI speakers to sound extremely close, through a decent spec (late 90's) Sony amp and equalizer. After much A/B testing I concluded that I could sell my NS10M's ( I needed the money for more synth purchases!)
These days, I use Presonus eris E'5 in my hardware room, and little (but amazing) iLoud Micro Monitors with my VST set up. Negates having to have an amp and equalizer.
I'm considering upgrading my studio monitors and I've heard that the new Adam T5V active monitors are excellent for the money, coming in at around £250 GBP a pair.
For more advanced uses (not just playing in a sound amplification way) such as recording, you're more likely to find something between the keyboards and the speakers, such as a mixer. But the end of the signal chain is going to be a speaker or headphone, and the answer actually isn't all that complicated. Your best choice is to use a speaker you understand how it sounds. The whole point of studio monitors is to provide a "sound" that you understand and can translate into results. They're made for people who are producing music for other people. A home stereo is made for people who want a pleasing listening environment. And that's it really. Home stereo's are made to be pleasant to listen to or some other listening environment. Studio speakers are meant to provide a sound that you know how to translate to other systems, like home or car or apple earbuds. Everything else is up to personal taste.
Hello Woody, excellent and entertaining video as usual, thanks.
I would like to point out that one reason to use monitors instead of hi-fi speakers for instruments is that monitors tend to be a bit more robust - instruments and particularly synths can give an output that is very different to the spectrum of a mixed music track eg. A single high pitch, continuous tone.. the amplifiers will happily put their whole power into that one frequency which could result in blown speakers even if they with spec.
So long as not abused and treated with some care, a hi-fi setup is perfectly ok otherwise.
Excellent point Dave, I've found that certain notes loudly using a pure and solo piano sound can really stress loudspeakers when you find the point at which the speaker resonates. can lead to some pretty unpleasant buzzes and rattles, but you'll never hear it just playing a mix. studio monitors might handle that better.
The important thing is to recognize that all speakers are filters (even audiophile). You need to know what each set of speakers tells you and what they omit. For translatability the mids need to be your focus and cube speakers like Auratones have no crossover frequency to mask stuff. Cellphone speakers can give good information about the upper mids. We all know to check the lows in the car.
for some reason I ended up having a few different sets of satellite speakers laying around and one day i decided to set up a calibration microphone (a superlux which is similar to the t-bone one) and played some pink noise to see which frequency spectrum meter looked the best. i then just kept the speakers with the most obviously accurate (matching) pink noise frequency spectrum profile, which i compared to the in-the-box spectrum analysis of the same pink noise source i used. that drastically simplified my selection process and just put to rest any doubts. also i recently acquired some beyerdynamic dt-770 250 ohm headphones and they need a strong amp so I also use an old A/V receiver, a Yamaha Natural Sound RX350. They do not disappoint, and I am picky. I have owned the Yamaha HS50 studio monitors and although they did not sound like a million, they didn't seem to flatter what I did and I remember getting reliable work done with them. You'll need a subwoofer with them if you ever need to do pro work, but if you do enough pro music work you'll probably either need to build or rent a proper studio anyway right? So all in all, i do recommend getting a calibration mic for a few hundred kronor from thomann or wherever and try the pink noise speaker analysis! it's fun!
it sounds like a blast, no seriously, i would enjoy messing around with that, thanks for sharing.
Totally agree mate, if it sounds good them it sounds good! I worked in QA for Celestion and Kef for a while, some £200 speakers are great....some £20,000 speakers are OK. Some of the little Mackie active speakers are quite good...not huge amount of bass but the top-end is lovely. My personal studio monitors are a pair of Turbosound Milan M10s....good enough for a gig of 200 people and quite the best small active speakers I have ever listened to....they sound so nice even at low levels in my house...and only £220 each..........£440 for a pair of speakers that do the lot!....mine often get used at our annual pantomine and people are shocked at how good they are.
I’ve got a pair of Sterling Audio MX8’s from Guitar Center that were open box for only $199. Got lucky since they are normally $179 each. They sound great with pretty good bass response. But I totally agree with you Woody. Running through HiFi is definitely fine and sound great too. I used to do that back in the 90’s with my keyboards.
That what you guys are missing studio monitors are not supposed to sound good there supposed to play everything flat and tell you everything that's wrong with your mix
Most home hi-fi speakers are not designed for live sound from instruments. 30 years ago I tried it and blew out drivers at low volume levels. It is the dynamics, the peaks that hi-fi can't take. I use small Roland Cubes for live sound in the studio, then listen critically after recording with Roland near fields RSM90's, and then finally another check of the master recording on Yamaha home hi-fi speakers....all during this process I am also checking with Sennheiser studio headphones. Between it all I get a good idea of the mix for all environments and sound systems.
Agree. Raw sound from synths can easily overload sound systems that are adequate for normal use. You deginately need headroom.
Nice video, thanks for the explanation :-) I use Yamaha MSP5 monitors for my Nord Stage 3 Compact (and my Yamaha MX61), I like the full, clear sound a lot! But since I now have a daughter (>5 months old), I use my Sennheiser headphones way more ;-)
end of the day its all just personal preference, imo if you play to record/mix/produce etc use monitors, if you play to just enjoy playing a hi-fi set up is way more rewarding :)
I use hi fi speakers from back when I bought them in 1976, and they still sound as good to me as the NZ $600 monitors I have listened to at the music stores - mine are razor sharp even now.
Mind you, I'm not mixing music professionally, so I do take the points made below. The main thing for me, is If I can get to play piano half as well as you, now that is what will really sound good..
I do the same as you mate. I use a Marantz amp and a pair of JPW speakers about the same size as yours. The sound is way loud enough and it's also used for TH-cam and Spotify
great minds...
Those are some nice looking speakers. I still use a pair of 20 year old computer speakers from Labtech. It’s not ideal but often use headphones as well. Focusrite seem to have issues creating good windows 10 from what I’ve heard. This is why I bought a Steinberg UR 242 and it works quite well, the drivers are very stable and work good with windows 10.
I have been composing and producing music for broadcast for the past 20 years or so and yes, i do have a pair of high end JBL studio monitors, however, for more than 10 years my monitoring setup was an Alesis RA-100 power amp hooked to a pair of 1980's 3 way sony speakers (from the time sony used to build quality stuff) and they are still next to my monitors for A/B testing. In the "studio monitor" field, there is a LOT of snake oil all over the place, almost like in the "audiophile" world (Genelec, im looking at you).
I'm with you on that Diego!
It's a nice setup and those speakers look nice, too. I have two sets of speakers: a set of studio monitors by PreSonus in front of my PC, and a very old set of hifi speakers made in the GDR in the sixties (there's even an official "made in the people's republic…" in them :) ) , which I connected to a $20 mini amplifier from some chinese vendor. Guess what, those old speakers plus cheap amp sound a lot better to me than the studio monitors. You can hear a lot more details.
Thanks Woody, interesting to see your perspective on this. Would love to see a video from you on tips for getting best music quality when uploading to TH-cam.
what a great suggestion, thanks! i always put a lot of time and effort into that, seems critical for an audio channel.
Woody Piano Shack : Great, yes I noticed your audio quality is always good. I have uploaded a few things and they sound terrible compared to listening to the original so it would be good to know where I am going wrong. Regards Rob
There is just nothing criminal in your setup.
Since I can't do right acoustic treatment at my place - I use the same system as you do (passive Hi-Fi speakers+amplifier). And yes, that works for my needs.
Anyway, first thing to be done before buying studio monitors is acoustic treatment. Glenn from SMG TH-cam channel always repeat this thing.
As for the setup like Woody has - open-back headphones will be your friend in mixing.
PS
As for a gigging setup Sam from Look Mum No Computer channel has a video about what he takes on tour with him.
And my advice for everyone playing live is to use in-ear monitors. It will help you to prevent hearing loss.
Spend no matter how much money, but be careful to save your hearing which is priceless.
As I reduced my hardware synths I moved my KRK Rockit 5 RP3s to my desktop pc. sounded cool when synth noodling but playing back music, ugh awful (though amazing stereo separation). I think I'm going to go back to my marantz amp and some old bookshelf Mission 751F. I picked up the cheap behringer subwoofer a while ago and will stick that back in. much easier to tune and route that through the marantz digital amp with one cable going to it than 2 pairs of xlrs going to the sub then another 2 pairs back to the monitors
Many great records were recorded and mixed on the horrible sounding Yamaha NS10 passive loudspeaker, which was a failed hifi speaker. It's about picking a setup that works for you and your budget/environment, then getting to know it and, more importantly, how to use it to create work that will sound good when played back on most speakers/headphones.
right, but i think the NS10s are all about a proper amp.
@@olafkliemt1145 That's the case with any speaker, though, be that active or passive. As is the room, positioning, monitoring levels etc etc.
The NS10 is not a good speaker with any amp, but it's portable and has been widely available at certain times, and many people know how to mix on them to get things sounding good. I swear the only reason they became popular is the white cones.
Hi Woody,
I use a NAD C 320BEE amp into Jamo C803s. They will play better low than your Wharfies but really not a drama as the Diamonds are well respected for the cost and pretty popular therefore representative.
For decades I used a Radio Shack Receiver into some speakers my Dad made for me with 8" Dual Cones + Piezo Tweeters - no crossover! The boxes were tuned by ear the same way he tuned the soundboard of the harpsichords he built. Several times I had that gear all running from inside a built-in wardrobe. No one ever said those mixes were crap at the time (or even now unless they are 12 years old and trying to big note themselves).
I truly think that unless you can go into a decent powered monitor, entry-level Audiophile gear is far better. Home Theater or Game Speakers not so much at all. I'd use an old 10 Watt Sansui amp with a big transformer weighing about 5Kg over a modern Home Theater 5.1 HDMI everything but with a total weight of about 2Kg as that amp will always sound strangled, no matter the insane quoted PMPO.
Ultimately tho it is knowing your system and how things translate to other systems.
you're probably right about decent hifi being better than the budget studio monitors, I'm pretty sure the hefty amp in the NAD is far superior to what you would get in an active speaker for similar price.
Well Woody....I have to say that my old jam tins connected with a piece of string do the job. I also use Behringer 200 watt pa speakers for my listening. It's all wrong I know but it's what Im used to. I wouldn't know if the best pair of high quality Monitors hit me in the face. Better than hearing loss through studio monitor headphones
@saab, thx for injecting a touch of humour into the conversation :D
Very informative as always Woody. Thank you. I have had some Edirol active monitors for years, nothing fancy but not thinking of upgrading as they do the job, moreover I tend to use headphones most of the time due to neighbours. I use Sennheiser HD555's and they've been brilliant, can't praise then enough. Thanks for the Behringer sound card tip (and Focusrite), I need a new sound card and don't want to spend a fortune. Bye!
cheers Paul, yeah, should have mentioned headphones in the video as that's a great option, i use cans to check the low frequencies occasionally since my speakers don't reproduce that well.
@@WoodyPianoShack Everyone should always check stereo mixes in headphones. Today, most people listening with anything of decent quality will do that in headphones (crappy laptop speakers or phone speakers, and a lot of bluetooth speaker offerings are really bad, but even a lot of cheaper headphones/headsets do have decent quality), so any mix has to sound good with headphones.
With speakers, there is a crosstalk, where the sound going to either channel, will also reach the opposite ear, that doesn't happen with headphones. With bass it is really critical, because for humans at least, below a certain frequency we can't tell from what direction bass is coming, thus it will sound wrong in headphones when bass is isolated to one channel. Panned reverb also sounds really weird (I would say it often sounds weird through speakers as well, but it isn't as obvious as with headphones).
The best stereo-mixing would be placing speakers on a stage at the intended position of the instrument. And using speakers with a similar spread pattern to that instrument. And then just record with a Neumann head (or equal) in the listening position. Playing that back through headphones, would be just the same stereo mix as the microphones recorded. (using speakers, instead of live playing means it is possible to do all the processing to the sounds, that one might want to, but it would still be a recording of a live-stage when it comes to stereo image). However, it might still be good to use a separate mono track for bass, that perhaps is not even played back in the room, as bass creates a lot of acoustic issues.
Hi Woody, I am buying speakers for Roland organ keyboard for home usage, would you recommond 8' studio monitors or 12' PA plus amp like what you did for your organ keyboard? many thanks~@@!
I recommend a pair of ADAM AUDIO T7V's. They are excellent and go for about $500us.
Small correction - 2021 marks 30 years since NAD Electronics left the UK (initially to Denmark, then to Lenbrook in Canada). Pickering is on the outskirts of Toronto but I believe that other than the design, marketing and engineering bods everything else is done in China (not sure about the Masters series). I've only ever been able to afford entry-level amps from NAD and Cambridge - even the 'Made In Japan' Marantz SACD player I had isnt consider 'high end' by most - and overall I agree re NAD's power ratings.
i love that about YT, you never know who will stumble across your vid, thanks for the insight
Good morning Woodie , Brilliant video from you today , lots of good info and I agree with your opinion on the audio set up , Hifi is much better , with the PSR keyboards you can play audio through them and add to the audio too , there is a good thump from the keyboards too , I also have the same Audio Interface's as you have and both are excellent for what they do and they are very good value for the money too , no point in wasting money on monitors when any HiFi can do the very same thing , well done Woodie ! ,, really enjoyed watching this one , big thumbs are way way up ! , enjoy your new week over there and have fun too !!!
😎AK☘
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🎹🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘☘
Can I suggest you to have a look at this great book: "Mixing Secrets for The Small Studio" (2nd ed.) by Mike Senior.
The most important thing in a small studio for your speakers to sound "good" is dealing with acoustic reflections and resonances, and correctly placing the speakers. In short, the room is at least as important as the speakers.
By the way, I'm planning to replace my current studio speakers with a pair of Focal Shape 65 . Shape 65 monitors combine an ingenuous design and numerous settings optimised for the acoustics of small listening rooms, including a double passive radiator allowing the monitors to be placed very close to a wall.
yes excellent point solina, wish I'd mentioned that in the vid, topic for another day perhaps.
I might be wrong.... but the reason I've always used a power amp, not an integrated amp is because your mixer/soundcard has a preamp so when you use an integrated amp (built in preamp) you can get some distortion. The quad 405 is a hifi amp often used with ns10s, but it has no preamp. My amp is so bad that I would probably do better with an integrated amp....
I like what you have on the wall, behind the red couch. Those brown things. What are they ? Look good for sound. Also please try audient id22 interface - the sound is so perfect, it makes what you had before sound cheap. I had focusrite and motu- sold them. Audio technica microphone at4050 C if you can test , im sure you will love the sound - its compared to neumann the expensive mic ...
they are a vintage room divider from ikea. for the shack look and also some acoustic treatment. bought them from a young lady, so another effect is that they make the room smell nice :)
I have hifi speakers as well, but i do miss some subs. Would you recommend adding a sub woofer?
i would, if your amp has a sub out. just to add a touch of low end, don't go crazy! my amp doesn't have the output so it's a bit of a pain to set it up, so I didn't bother. plenty of bass from the diamonds when you turn up the volume.
I got monitors (both sound and screen) and some lights connected to a power splitter which is connected to my computer via USB, so when I switch my computer on or off same thing happens to my monitors, so I don't have to fiddle with the on/off button on the back
i forgot to mention about adjusting the volume on active monitors... you need to adjust the volume on the back of each monitors, or you set it to max, forget it, and use the audio interface volume control?
I never thought a lot about this, I just bought monitors because I thought you were supposed to. Main reason I did was I always thought recorded music is far less dynamic than playing instruments yourself. Hifi speakers are designed for this (relatively) narrow dynamic range. You might blow up your Hifi speakers with your elctric guitar, for example. I didn't want to run that risk (having seen speakers been blown up regularly on parties, so hardly a imaginary risk). For the same reason I think you run more risk damaging your ears by using a headphone playing music yourself than playing a CD or YT. I searched for headphones with limiters, but that's rather cumbersome and/or expensive (I know there are BBC-compatible devices, and Beyerdynamics have some models featuring protection). Especially VST's can be surprisingly und unexpectly loud. So sound quality is not my first concern.
some great points Frits, thanks! Made me think of another advantage with hifi, is that it's modular. blow the speakers or want better ones? just replace them and keep the amp. with monitors you have to replace the whole system.
If you're working, and make your money, in post production monitors matter. You won't want to muck about here. The more money you can throw at the problem the better (that's assuming you have a space to work in already and the space has been designed for post). If you're working in production it's still important. I mean when you put up that Neumann u47 you'll want to make sure your speakers give you an accurate picture of what that sounds like.
If you're a composer, and this is probably an area where you can get away with a lot more, I'd still say spend all you can on speakers. That's the part you hear through. Combine that with great DA and you'll enjoy your work so much more. I use Geithain 901k mains - which are absolutely massive and expensive - because when I work on new music I want to be immersed fully. Like I'm in the music. I don't like a lot of level but I like to move a lot of air and big speakers do that. You hit the low note and it's a kick in the chest without making your ears bleed. The Geithains are not speakers they're a portal into another world. All the other crap you can throw out but a DA and a great speaker will always make you smile. Software instruments are getting so good now that I'd rather prioritise great speakers and DA than just about any synth. Spare no expense in this area and you'll be rewarded with endless inspiration.
@Trees, Wonderful comment. thank you so much!
What drivers do you use for your behringer? Because i have the behringer um2 and it didnt come with drivers i just use asio for all with it but i can not get it to zero latency in either of my daws sequioa 13 or reaper. No matter how i adjust the buffers. Which is why im looking at getting a new interface with usb type c zero latency by m audio or presonus..
i use drivers downloaded from their website, as far as i know, you can't get zero latency ASIO buffer
Wouldn’t 0.0 milliseconds latency require NO buffering whatsoever? At 44 KHz sample rate, 44 samples is 1 millisecond. 10 ms sounds like a more realistic goal, at least if you are running any soft synths or effects and not just recording dry audio.
I may suck at music, but I’ve been programming computers for over 30 years. Trust me, you want some buffering, or ANY interruption of your audio program is going to make the sound glitch.
@@Roboprogs yea well i ended up searching for behringer drivers on google and i didn't find them on there official site but i was able to find a driver for the behringer um2 off youtube and got my interface working, think its for another behringer interface but works with my model got it going great at 6ms output 2ms input and cannot even hear the latency now with live effects like autotune and vocoder so thanks again woody if it wasn't for this video i wouldn't of even thought to search for a new driver because out of the box it just said to use asio4all..
illinbeat glad you were able to find a configuration that works well for your use case
@@Roboprogs yea that driver saved me some money i was about to break down n get a new interface but was able to get this one working ha thanks for the reply
casio cdp-s350 review? :)
I was hoping to plug a moog grandmother right into my hifi but I’ve read lots this evening that I’ll damage my speakers! Not sure if it’s safe or not. Would an interface block some frequencies making it safe or can I just go moog into hifi?
There's no right or wrong way. Hi fi speakers are not what I would personally recommend for somebody who wants to release music.
Woody your PC is a bit dusty...careful you don't make dusty music and notes!
I agree on the speaker thing, a hi-fi setup is fine. I'm looking for speakers now for a Roland RD2000 and can't decide what to get at all just yet. I wan't them self powered really to save space, but I'm still looking so far.
I've been in a few professional recording studios, and they all have acoustic treatments in the mixing room. Do you (Woody or anyone else) think the acoustics of the room are just as important as the speakers?
hi! yes, totally agree, should have mentioned that. a good pair of headphones much better than great monitors in a bad room.
Woody, what is / are your favorite studio monitors?
i got no experience david, other than awful experience with a pair of M-Audio studio monitors that made a very slight 50hz humming sound, sent them back.
I used to use hifi gear too. I don’t like neutral monitors as they’re not very exciting when you’re performing/composing. Whereas hifi gear naturally gives a better listening experience which encourages you.
Obviously neutral monitors better if you’re mixing and looking to find that ‘sweet’ spot, but if you know your setup you can mix on anything to a reasonable standard.
A bit late to the party Woody.
I am in the exact same scenario as you. I am a guitarist/musician who lives in a small studio apartment and my computer is my all in one system (movies, videos, Music streaming and guitar playing/recording). Would a set up like yours work for me (with additionally connecting a turntable as well). Or the guitar playing will damage the highly sensitive hi-fi monitors?
Note: I use Scarlett Focusrite to plug my guitar and play through amp simulation software and DAWs.
hi! not sure what's best for you, you'll need to think about how many sources you want to play at the same time. in case you need some kind of mixer.
@@WoodyPianoShack no thanks god, I am
Not looking to use sources simultaneously. One at the time is good. My biggest fear is damaging my hifi speakers with the guitar as many aduiophiles or people in the hifi have warmed me and they are usually against the use of audiophile speakers for electric guitar signals. I don’t know whether it’s a myth or reality
I'm totally with you with the hi-fi system Woody. It's what I use for exactly the same reasons. I know the purists will scoff but who cares. If it works, it works :) For what it's worth, I use an old Pioneer system....
I've found that you get used to what you use and can tweak your music compositions and mixes in the way you know will work on other systems. I work with another singer who uses some very old and cheap hi-fi speakers and amp and his mixes always sound great - he just knows how to use his system.
100%, forgot to mention that the room and placement of monitors and listening position has a significant effect, but all of which can be negated to some extent by using reference tracks.
Totally agree. IT takes time to get used to your setup but using reference tracks certainly helps. I am due to move my studio soon so the process of getting to know my setup will begin again to some extent.@@WoodyPianoShack
“Reference tracks “ = my favorite songs, and getting a similar tone? Lol.
Or maybe something more technical.
that's exactly it. compare your track to a professionally mixed and mastered track and try and match it.
Monitors, Schmonitors! I'm much more interested in your Grado headphones! I've had SR80s for decades, but can't wear these beauties for more than 15 minutes due to physical pain from the pressure of the pads on the ol' outer ears. On several of your SUPERB! videos, you are wearing Grados with what are clearly aftermarket ear pads. Have you found a solution to the problem? Would love to know what they are and if you are happy with them.
I have learned LOTS from your videos and enjoy all I've seen - a recent discovery here. Thanks for your considerable effort!
hi, thanks for the question, i don't know the model number, they were about $100, stock earpads but i did buy some cheap ebay replacements for when they wear out. haven't noticed any head clamping, you can probably bend out the frame carefully to widen it and release tension. good luck!
@@WoodyPianoShack I get it now - those ARE stock pads. Grado apparently upgraded the stock earpads between the time of my purchase and yours. The older pads were much thinner and the source of complaints by all who wore them. Since you are NOT complaining I assume Joe's son has solved the problem at the source. Appreciate the info!
I'm using logitech
That slot for bass reinforcement is known as a "vent". Similarly, a "port" is a tube serving the same function.
Hi, my background is hi-fi. I agree with this video. basically my setup too, minus the video stuff and add a bigger system which is my main music rig. I may use used PA amps like QSC's and Crowns, but I still use big cerwin-vega and other home speakers because I NEED clean. You obviously have used your ears and deal in reality. I have ALWAYS used a big stereo for my keyboards. Hi-fi, like you said, is all about PERFECT REPRODUCTION. you are not creating the sound like with a distorted guitar amp, you are REPRODUCING the sound and the goal is to do it without the stereo getting in the way. ie, TRANSPARENCY. I freak out when I see any speaker with a woofer smaller than 6" or so used for critical listening, or worse, mixing. there is no open bass, sry there just isn't, even when servo controlled.
I have an old Pioneer receiver as my master control. it is 100w/ch and I run DCM timewindows. I have my PC, my scarlett2i4 monitor I/O, an external CD player, ANNNNND I use the radio. Right now you are making noise via my PC audio ->receiver->speakers.
You completely forgot about ears.
We all have different hearing. So what we really need is some way of EQing to our hearing. I've thought about this for years. Nuraphone headphones, have mics that can actually measure the hearing. But I don't think there is any way of exporting the EQ curve, so that one can use it to correct one's speaker and room to match one's hearing (or to use with other headphones for that matter). When I started thinking about correction based on individual hearing, I didn't know it would be possible to measure, and I thought one would have to go through a long list of manual tests.
A lot (read almost all) mixing and mastering engineers have no idea how much their ears differ from a perfectly flat frequency response. Not only will other listeners ears hear it differently, but they don't even have a clue what it would sound like, flat.
Some even insists on using speakers that they know aren't flat, and claim that they know them so well that they can compensate. How would they, when they don't know what flat is.
And really it isn't possible to compensate for something you can't hear.
There is loads of music out there, that sounds harsh to a lot of people, on relatively flat speakers. Even by well known sound engineers. I'm sure they didn't hear it that way.
There are several of Hifi speaker producers, that tune their speakers to be less harsh. There are however those that go in the opposite direction (I assume they are tuned mostly by ear, then).
There is also an issue with dialogue in films and series, where it is often not loud enough. Here I think using near field monitors (studio monitors) partly gets in the way. But there is also the composer and sound FX teams that want their stuff to be heard, ending up in a mess of audio competing with each other to be heard. With DTS X, there is a potential solution, as it does offer the ability to separate dialogue, so that the listener could actually set their own level, but it isn't mandatory and some directors/engineers/producers insists that people should hear it the way they intended (no matter if that is what it actually sounds with that person's hearing, with a typical speaker set-up, in a typical room).
Even among studio monitors there are those that are far from flat. Some well liked ones do boost the bass. And if one is person that do like a lot of bass, that could be good thing, because then one might get that extra bass boost while mixing, that makes the mix more balanced for other listeners. But there is also the risk, that there wont be as much bass as one expected in the mix. And there is a risk that one boost certain other frequencies to not drown in the mix, something that might result in a harsh sound on other speakers.
if you compare and eq your masters and mixes to reference tracks then i think that nullifies any effects of hearing, room, monitoring, headphones. of course your ears and monitors must be good enough so you can actually hear what's happening... :)
@@WoodyPianoShack The problem of using a reference track is that it is highly unlikely that the spectral content will be identical. One can't simply follow a spectral profile of one track, and think that will sound good on another with a completely different set of sounds. As soon as one deviates from the reference track, it ceases to be a reference, and one is propelled in to the unknown.
For dealing with frequency clashes, and harsh frequencies, it would be possible to rely on AI (if it is fed proper science as the source).
For individual taste of the sound (overall and specific sounds in the mix), well then one would be best of with a system that is adapted to one’s hearing and where the room effect is removed. Everyone listening has their own hearing and if they aren’t using headphones or listening in a highly treated room, their room sound will not be the same, so one’s own room will not emulate the situation for others.
To make matters worse, hearing is not only a physical function, there is interpretation of the signal, and one’s focus can shift, so the mix balance might sound completely different from day to day, or even during the day. And on an instrument level, there is also the issue of the person making a mix, focusing on a sound, will know certain things about that sound and hear them in a way that they will sound like to most people (this part can also play a part in mixing dialogue, where everyone in a room listening to the mix, actually knows the dialogue quite well, and easily hear what it said, while to someone listening for the first time, it is perhaps barely audible).
Unfortunately I think the business if full of stubbornness;
People with hearing loss (tinnitus or due to age), that claims they can compensate for that (many without having any idea of what exact frequencies are affected, because they haven’t tested).
People afraid of admitting their shortcomings, in fear of being replaceable (compared to other people or tools).
People that have knowledge based on old premises.
People trying to protect or justify investments.
People unwilling to accept advancements, which may lead to shortcuts that make some knowledge less needed (although they had the same kind benefits over others before them).
People that hears saturated audio, and prefer it over unsaturated and therefor believe it to be of higher quality while from a technical point the opposite is truth (there is nothing wrong in preferring saturated audio, the issue is when someone think it is superior in quality).
A lot of the “the emperor’s new clothes” effect, where people don’t speak their mind, because they start second guessing themselves when listening to someone more experienced in the field.
In a field in constant movement, in terms of technology and in terms of styles, one has to be able to swallow the pride. Look at Max Martin, he was down for the count, when the music he produced was no longer topping the charts, and for a while, he admitted he thought it was the rest of the world that was wrong. Then he realized he had to change, and now he is topping the charts again, although partly by getting help from others, so it isn’t completely down to him developing new skills.
I like videos on other people's shacks!!!
If you're releasing music, you need to use quality studio monitors (or have your tracks mixed and mastered by someone else who is). If you aren't, use whatever you want.
If all you're doing is recording single instrument performances the only thing you need to worry about is volume. If you're playing instruments for your own enjoyment you'll enjoy them more if your speakers have lots of power/low end. That matters more than any other factor.
Not sure what you were alluding to with the "sounds great up close and far away" comment. Hi-fi systems are made that way. Studio monitors are the opposite. They tend to have a small sweet spot; especially when toed in (which is how they're designed to be setup). Stepping in and out of the sweet spot makes a noticeable difference. Though there are some with "wide dispersion" where the sweet spot is so wide it's like black magic.
The point of studio monitors is to be clinical. They give you the fine detail in whatever you're working with. That also means they are fatiguing to listen to. If you can listen to your monitors all day they aren't actually studio monitors. They are glorified hi-fi speakers. In fact some producers do most of their work on hi-fi speakers and reserve their monitors for finalizing mixes. This allows them to work much longer hours without issue.
thanks for the clarification on my nearfield comment! interesting point about the use of hifi speakers, cheers
I moved from a HiFi setup to Rokit Monitors a few years back. Biggest mistake ever. Don't use them for mixing, just my keyboards or listening to youtube and music. They just suck the life out of the sound. Use my headphones exclusively now.
I have my music listening gear and the synth playing gear completely separate (and even in different places), so I was just looking for some active studio monitors to play my synthesizers with. I wanted to get Genelec speakers (8030 or 8330), but then finally I went with much cheaper KRK Rokit 6 monitors and I could get a Moog Grandmother with the price difference... so it was Genelecs or the KRK's AND the Moog... :D
So far I'm happy with the KRKs, they are connected directly to my mixer with balanced XLR cables. The other option would be to use one of my audio interfaces, which have balanced TRS connectors, which the KRKs also have.
I used to play my synths for a long time only thru headphones (Beyerdynamic DT-990), but it's actually also fun to play them via loudspeakers. I could even use my powered monitors as a small pa for an indoor gig if I want, and there's no need to carry a separate amplifier. I already have used something similar earlier with a borrowed powered speaker.
Woody, around 6:40 you ask a question why is the conventional wisdom say hifi speakers sound best further away from the speakers. Actually this is not true as you have stated. The nature of hifi speakers together with miscommunication or poor interpretation for how studio "experts" have classified the two is the reason. What I mean is hifi speakers dont have purposeful phase matching implemented/adjusted for between the two speakers (no calibration step for this at the factory for most hifi speaker production) and the fact there's generally no phase matched drivers between low and the mid-high driver per speaker cabinet. For active near-fields the overall response to an external production measuring reference (at factory) is adjusted .....to be able to correct for the phase mismatching that all speakers inherently have. Hifi speakers generally dont use or can't use bi-amplfication since this is impractical in many cases for most external receivers/amps, however I dont want to say not all near fields are internally bi-amped as there are good passive near-fields out there. It's just that active bi-amped monitor design gives an advantage to correcting phase differences between the drivers and each completed speaker versus another identical speaker on the factory-line than passive crossover networks can in hifi speakers. Where the misnomer is born is in that people have classified hifi speakers for only across the room or mid-room listening-only is because they "know" or have heard from other studio folks that for near-fields to be effective should be close to your ears relative to any other objects and walls. This is true. As soon as you get far enough away from good near-field monitors in a normal or even a well dampened room you will start hearing phantom sounds coming from all directions and distinctly not from where the speaker sits for a good near-field. If your near-field doesnt exhibit this in a normal room like a bedroom, then most likely you don't have good near-field monitors. Near fields by definition are supposed to be very phase accurate between the low and mile-high driver for flatter frequency response and phase accurate between another identical speaker for accurate stereo imaging. This can be shown by listening to good near-fields across the room. Perfect phase matching coming from the the immediate space in front of the pair will be destoyed as soon as the sound waves start reflecting off other objects/surfaces when you're.farther away than if you're closer to them. Further away the perfect phase relationships of good monitors become more exaggerated than poor "near-fields" and there will be very noticeable differences, mainly spatial mangling of where the instruments were originally ntended to be placed. So the misnomer actually stems from the implication that good near-field monitors should always be close to you, thus "hifi's should be far away" Not true. For getting the best most consistent stereo imaging across a range of differrent speakers people will use, using good near-field monitors to mix with is critical.
Btw, near fields are better for mixing than headphones too since you still hear the inherent crosstalk through the air between the speakers from left and right that you dont get with headphones. The only exception for phones over near-fields for mixing is when you're producing headphone-only content like for games.
wow, great comment, thank you for contributing!
I'm with you on the use of good quality hi-fi speakers and amplifiers as studio monitoring.
I do the same myself. Tannoy Mercury MkII speakers from the 80s and a 40W/ch stereo amplifier.
I used these speakers as they were the monitors in a studio that I worked at in the 80s.
When that closed I was able to buy them from the owner. In the studio the amp was a Quad 405 MkII but I couldn't afford that at the time so I'm using an old Memorex amp. It had good reviews back then.
I would take issue with you on the ”accuracy” aspect of hi-fi speakers though. Hi-fi speakers are often designed to flatter the material they are reproducing whereas honest accuracy really IS the aim of studio monitoring. The possible exception is when a studio speaker is chosen to imitate speakers that will be used in a certain application - Home, Car etc. Yamaha NS10s are such an example; deliberately bright and weak in the bass.
You have to search amongst the hi-fi offerings to find the more accurate types. After all Hi-fi equipment is part of the leisure industry where pleasing the customer is the priority,
Back to choice hi-fi as monitors though. An important factor is familiarity. If you're used to the sound then you can make reliable comparison with any reference sounds you may want to use. As long as they are “reasonably “ flat with no glaring holes in the frequency response.
Sound pressure level/power handling isn't often a major factor in small/home studio monitoring though I'm sure there are some … Over around 10 years of busy demo-studio use these Tannoys of mine have blown one bass speaker and one tweeter. Since I brought them home they have, touch wood, been fine.
excellent comment and some food for thought, thanks! i'm wondering if a good compromise for studio and home use would be a good amp + passive studio monitors.
@@WoodyPianoShack I'd say that NAD is perfectly good for the job.
I didn't mean to suggest that your setup needed changing particularly.
That said you might look at some speakers with a little more bass response. Without it it's very easy to mix with too much bass added to compensate.
The modern self powered offerings come into their own particularly when adding subwoofers as the crossovers are usually included.
For myself, if I were upgrading from my old Tannoys , I'd be looking at things like the Presonuis Eris 6 or 8 (more bass from the 8) .
Front facing ports are less affected by wall proximity.
Although very popular those yellow coned KRKs have exhibited some shocking faults and cheap design features (cue flames) ... I wouldn't
Have you been watching my rant on monitors😂.....yep monitors were used to represent hifi speakers......so monitors are only really now used is by us??? We kinda backed ourselves in corner lol
the real question is, do you store special home made cookies inside that box you have your monitor on? ...am sure you do!
Thanks Woody! I think the other difference would be SPL. Regardless, I don't believe in paying a load of cash for some of these monitors if you do this stuff for fun. I have a pair of Monoprice 5" bi amp studio monitors; I have had them since 2013 and they are great! Monoprice even sells a 10" sub to go along with them. I got them for $215 but you can buy them now for $189. www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=605500
My monitor isolation pads are square pieces of cardboard.
I understand less and less the option of having speakers without bass coverage... Monitors are a crappy option, I'm selling my Yamaha and buying a PC 2.1 kit...
Why not connect it to a proper receiver?
doubt a receiver will be on par with that NAD amp for sound
all fine if you play instruments or wavs or mp3s, but it's not for mixing and mastering. this setup is far from a flat responset - no offense.
see, your low and high end is boosted in a Hifi setup (the famous smile curve response), so your mixes will sound dull on other systems because you think the low and high end is all there, but it isn't..
i'm not sure that hifi systems are aiming for a smile eq, but you might be right, anyway, that's why we use reference tracks.
@@WoodyPianoShack right, good point !
The thing most people seems to forget with this of the so-called "flat" response of studio monitors, is that the same "flat" response can be achieved with the use of an EQ *and your trained ears* on the monitoring chain. EVERY recording studio i know (and i know lots) has an EQ prior to the monitoring chain. I dont know @Woody Piano Shack, but, considering he is a very skilled musician, considering also that it is obvious he has perfect pitch ear, i would bet my life that he can clearly hear (and eq) a speakers response curve just by ear, pretty much the way i have been doing for years. For me, monitoring is more about the room itself than the speakers (always talking about decent speakers of course).
@@diegomax really well said
@@olafkliemt1145 "true and proper" hi-fi is flat tonal balance, though I have no experience with hi-fi speakers and if they do indeed aim for true hi-fi, a pair of studio monitors will do for me anyway
I doubt cheap speakers nail the flat tonal balance, though, but nothing that EQ can't correct.
Do what works for you I use powered monitors too each there own enjoy
I don’t see AirPods anywhere in this rig so the whole studio is invalid.
lol
Yours in the trash, iLouds on the desk 😊