fixing a crack in NS-10M monitor woofer

[gilwe]

Thanks,

how about replacing only the cracked speaker with a new (or used) one ?

Should I expect any kind of imprecision ?

[rabbitz]

Only one way to find out. The original cone might be getting harder and not as flexible as a new unit but that's anyones guess.

I had mine for over 20 years and besides a bit of yellowing seemed as good as new and was still flexible.

Once you put the new driver in and play a CD, it's then a used one.

[markus76]

gilwe, as long as the TSPs are the same there are no compatibility problems. Just measure the TSPs of the driver.

Best, Markus

[Salas]

Originally posted by rabbitz
I think it was said if you mixed to make the music sound good on a NS10M, then it will sound good on almost anything.

I don't think it's a thing about them being good, flat, coloured or whatever, the people that use them have become so used to using them and their idiosyncacies that it has become a reliable tool. To put the fear of god into a recording engineer etc, change the monitoring speakers.

I have owned some NS10M speakers and were very good for nearfield even without tissues over the tweeters. When I finished with them after over 20 years use, they were snapped up by a recording studio for 3 times what I paid for them.

Studio practice for popular music needs just a known tool. Unfortunately the operators were not historically perfectly educated, nor the systems in the world out there were good. They just wanted know that it ''will translate well''. The NS10 was the SM-57 mic of speakers. Just that. Well said.

Originally posted by markus76
infinia, obviously you don't have much experience. "in the whole scheme of variables encountered" having a neutral monitoring is THE most important part. I.e. low distortion (linear and nonlinear), a frequency response that is complete (20/40 Hz to 16/20 kHz) and a uniform polar pattern. That must be your reference. That's typically achieved by having a reflection free control room where the speakers are flush-mounted. But it can also be achieved by very good nearfield monitors. I would look at Klein + Hummel or Genelec.
Then one needs a lot of experience to have a mix work on the average setup of your target audience. The NS-10 is a good tool to achieve exactly that. But that doesn't change the fact that this particular speaker is the average c**p most people have at home.

Best, Markus

Fortunately, in the last decade more and more studio operators are exposed to monitors from Genelec or Dynaudio or other cheaper but technically well sorted actives like Mackie or Alesis etc. Surely much more correct than the colored NS-10. Actually I don't see the NS-10s perched on meter bridges everywhere as in the 90s anymore. There are no big meter bridges so to perch a speaker on, in small production studios with tiny digital consoles running Nuendo or Pro Tools on TFT monitors anymore anyway. They can normally be found in older studios which sport big consoles as an option in their gear arsenal. Even in live reinforcement all operators are aware of Meyer or L-Acoustics. Its not that bad anymore.

[phase_accurate]

Surely much more correct than the colored NS-10.

Philip Newll definitely has a different opinion on that. He sais that either a monitor is closed-box (when it is small) for accurate mixing or if you have to use a box with an "exhaust" then is should definitely go lower (and therefore also be much bigger) than all those small monitors.

Regards

Charles

[Salas]

I like closed box too. But this is a little beside the point in mixing with nearfields I guess, because when mixing for judging bass we always do it in high SPL on the main monitors. Normally 12-15 inch.

[phase_accurate]

Normally 12-15 inch.

No problem with that. Large monitors that really go low don't have the the same problems with transient imperfections as small ones that don't go as low.

Regards

Charles