diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Instruments and Amps (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/instruments-amps/)
-   -   Studio monitor (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/instruments-amps/69017-studio-monitor.html)

gev 2nd December 2005 08:08 PM

Studio monitor
 
please help me

Mackie HR824 or Yamaha MSP5 or Event TR8 or Alesis M1 Active MK2 or M Audio BX8 or Behringer B2031A or Samson Rubicon 6a or Fostex PM1 or Tannoy Reveal or circuit schema or professional studio monitor schema:(??

bogicp 3rd December 2005 02:56 AM

Re: Studio monitor
 
Hey gev,

Quote:

Originally posted by gev
please help me

Mackie HR824 or Yamaha MSP5 or Event TR8 or Alesis M1 Active MK2 or M Audio BX8 or Behringer B2031A or Samson Rubicon 6a or Fostex PM1 or Tannoy Reveal or circuit schema or professional studio monitor schema:(??


You can just use all knowledge existing on Internet to make better "professional studio monitors" than you listed. Cheaper way to obtain "professional studio monitor" is to buy it. If you need to build it, they will be expensive, but they can be better. All monitors you listed, are cheap small monitors, carefully designed to work good and be cheap. You cannot find any special design inside, only amplifiers and active crossover, and some chinese (cheaper) or danish (better) drivers... at this forum you can find all information about amplifiers (JBL small one use well known LM3886 chip amp, if I remember, some other use STK-type modules), active crossovers and two way loudspeakers design. If you use better drivers (Scan Speak or Seas) and if you carefully design your monitors, you can obtain small studio monitors that you cannot buy anywhere.
It will be better? Yes, they can sounds better than this you listed above.

In professional studio monitors market exists only "studio monitors" and "cheap studio monitors"... be aware about this.


Best regards

boggy

gev 3rd December 2005 11:49 AM

Thank you bogicp

in what there studio monitor anfi circuit+ x circuit= studio monitor?:(

bogicp 3rd December 2005 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by gev
Thank you bogicp

in what there studio monitor anfi circuit+ x circuit= studio monitor?:(


Im not sure that I understand... but I'll try:

You can use any good acoustical design for loudspeaker, then you can build some amplifier, and at end you can build active crossover for it.
If you obtain good overall characteristics you will probably have good loudspeaker... there aren't any clear definition about differences between good loudspeakers and professional studio monitors... only in their market name.... look at PMC loudspeakers... they have pro monitors AND audiophile (hifi) loudspeakers... some of their models are in both groups, and differences is only in their colour.


best regards,

boggy

Thunau 3rd December 2005 02:27 PM

bogicp, I don't think you should lead this man down the DIY path when he has obviously little understanding of speakers in general and studio monitors in particular.
Studio monitors have to meet a very particular set of design goals. Any old hi-fi speaker design from the web will not do.

gev, of the monitors you named you would be best served by the Mackies, followed by the Events, Tannoys and Alesis- in that order.
I used all of them at one point or another to record and mix music.
But, you don't have to have active monitors to get good results. As a matter of fact some of the cheaper active monitors are inferior to comparably priced passives. A 40W chip amp for the tweeter can not swing enough voltage to deliver clean transients at studio levels. You will work with extremely wide dynamic range if you record acoustic instruments like drums, guitar amps, percussion etc. So, at 90dB-95dB average listening levels you are looking at peaks well in excess of 100dBSPL- more like 115dBSPL. Of the ones you brought up only the Mackie HR can do it cleanly at the listening position- but you have to watch your low end.
If you got something like a Dynaudio BM15P with a 400W/ch DIY or a cheap QSC RMX series amp you would do much better than any of the active monitors you named for about the same money as the Mackies. Don't underestimate the amount of power you need for real studio work. The cheap nearfields just don't cut it.

That said, if you are working with synths and computer generated sounds- like premade samples and loops and record guitars through digital boxes with a lot of processing you can get away with less power. The dynamic range of the material is usually much more limited- as the sounds are pre-processed for you. Then something like the little Yamaha MSP-5 plus a sub would be a sensitive solution. In that case you are more of an editor than a recordist and your monitors won't be as strained.

bogicp 3rd December 2005 02:45 PM

Hi Thunay,

Quote:

Originally posted by Thunau
bogicp, I don't think you should lead this man down the DIY path when he has obviously little understanding of speakers in general and studio monitors in particular.



I see this now, sorry gev! Sorry Thunay.

Quote:

Studio monitors have to meet a very particular set of design goals....
<snip>
I'm just courious about what you say... can you explain some more about "particular design goals", or, where we can find this goals written in some specification (AES, ASA, whatever).


Best regards,

boggy

Thunau 3rd December 2005 04:37 PM

Well, there is no official AES standard for studio monitors. That said, the leaders in the field - Genelec, JBL, Dynaudio Acoustics have published papers that are a good road map to the design of studio monitors. The few things that stand out are:

-flat frequency reponse at the listening position,
-controlled directivity and smooth power response,
-low distortion at high playback levels,
-low thermal compression- constant bass response regardless of driving power

Needless to say many inexpensive monitors don't meet most of these requirements.

Things like lobing have to be carefully considered because of the highly reflective surface (mixing console) right next to the listener and the monitors. Excessive lobing will be exagurated and will result in wrong power response. This leads to careful consideration of phase tracking at the crossover point. Sometimes a deliberate "wrong" lobing pattern will result in good power and frequency response at the sweet spot.
These are things that studio monitor designers have to consider.

Even then some excentric producers will flip the monitors upside down, because they sound better to them that way and ruin the carefully designed directivity. But that's a whole other topic.

bogicp 3rd December 2005 04:41 PM

thanks, Thunau


best regards,

boggy

Optical 5th December 2005 12:07 AM

I would love for someone to design a mackie HR824 beater..
they are extremely expensive where i am, and i want them badly

surely someone must have done somethign like this before?

kexik 6th December 2005 08:55 AM

behringer 2031A is SO cheap, that you can NOT build something cheaper as DIY project. Acoustic design is apparently stolen from genelec 1031, which is very close to mackie 824 in performance (even better, imho). the only disadvantage is chipamp inside, which is known to be unstable, as it lacks any RC cimpensations and RL filters on outputs. it's based on lm3886 chips (bridge of two for woofer and one for tweeter section). there's big room for DIY improvements!!!
by the way, I prefer more 2030A, although with smaller woofer, bass is faster and transients ar much more transparent. and, in addition, there are no known troubles with amp...


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:09 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2