http://thehub.musiciansfriend.com/audio-recording-buying-guides/studio-monitors-buying-guide
This leaves me in a quandry: do I build speakers that sound like studio monitors or do I build speakers for music? After all, the artist is not recording music only to be heard in his studio.
The studio uses their studio monitors in the process of making music to sound good on commercial sound systems.
yes it would be difficult to individually record 100 instruments in a symphony and mix it into a good sounding mix, but what percentage of commercial music is that? An very TINY percentage. Pop music is more often than not put together. yes, sometimes the whole band sits in a large studio and cranks out a tune, but that is not the usual way.
having said that, even 25 years ago we had samplers of orchestral instruments, and I could easily put together a string section or a horn section to add to a rock song, and it would sound real to you.
Drum machines can sound great, some use real samples, so it is real drum sounds. But to the trained ear, even a good drummer has small variances in his play: subtle changes in tempo, missed beats, or beats slightly off now and then, or the tap tap tap on the snare is not the exact same loudness each strike, that sort of thing. There are drum machines that can add that effect, makes you swear a real drummer is sitting there.
Much commercial music is compressed. Reducing the dynamic range makes the product more listenable in like a car stereo. Also it is almost competitive to see how loud a signal they can store on a CD. They are making ear candy, not accurate documentaries of sound.
The Yamaha NS10M used to be one of the most common studio speakers in the business. I know recording guys who can listen to a recording and say "Yes, that was mixed on the Yamahas."
yes it would be difficult to individually record 100 instruments in a symphony and mix it into a good sounding mix, but what percentage of commercial music is that? An very TINY percentage. Pop music is more often than not put together. yes, sometimes the whole band sits in a large studio and cranks out a tune, but that is not the usual way.
having said that, even 25 years ago we had samplers of orchestral instruments, and I could easily put together a string section or a horn section to add to a rock song, and it would sound real to you.
Drum machines can sound great, some use real samples, so it is real drum sounds. But to the trained ear, even a good drummer has small variances in his play: subtle changes in tempo, missed beats, or beats slightly off now and then, or the tap tap tap on the snare is not the exact same loudness each strike, that sort of thing. There are drum machines that can add that effect, makes you swear a real drummer is sitting there.
Much commercial music is compressed. Reducing the dynamic range makes the product more listenable in like a car stereo. Also it is almost competitive to see how loud a signal they can store on a CD. They are making ear candy, not accurate documentaries of sound.
The Yamaha NS10M used to be one of the most common studio speakers in the business. I know recording guys who can listen to a recording and say "Yes, that was mixed on the Yamahas."
Enzo
Yes I have heard of the Yamaha and listened to some on You Tube through my phone and headphones. Not the best for fidelity, but the Yamahas had a thin, flat sound with not much bass at all, but very clear, like a when you don't use tone controls on your system. Id' like to listen to everything I have through these, just to check.
I'm curious were those samples on open reel tape? I hear they are very capable, but I am sure the modern digital equivalents generate the same sound more or less.
What about synthesizers - the string section on synthesizers always sounded like synthesizer - no fullness to the sound, was that on purpose? Are synthesizers different from samplers?
Yes I have heard of the Yamaha and listened to some on You Tube through my phone and headphones. Not the best for fidelity, but the Yamahas had a thin, flat sound with not much bass at all, but very clear, like a when you don't use tone controls on your system. Id' like to listen to everything I have through these, just to check.
I'm curious were those samples on open reel tape? I hear they are very capable, but I am sure the modern digital equivalents generate the same sound more or less.
What about synthesizers - the string section on synthesizers always sounded like synthesizer - no fullness to the sound, was that on purpose? Are synthesizers different from samplers?
Soooo it MUST be like this:
(chain of electronic apparels )>Yamahas in room > caption with a mic >preamplifier and A/D conversion>(storage)> compression with codecs for transmission>decompression with codecs > D/A conversion>(chain of electronic apparels )> your speakers in room
and your conclusion is:
🙄
The NS10 was arguably not a great speaker (It made more sense with the optional sub), but it had one thing going for it....
It was a STANDARD, you could walk into most rooms and know how your mix would translate from them to a transistor radio, or a car or a run of the mill hifi, and that is a huge thing.
They were not typically the only speakers in the room, or even the best speakers in the room, but everyone had them and knew their imperfections.
Commercial music is usually an artificial thing, pan pot 'stereo' and heavy use of overdubs, layered guitars, drum replacement ("Superior drummer" being one of the tools of choice), it is what it is, and some percentage of it is very, very good, but the objective is not usually to sound like something it is not.
You do sometimes see a commercial release of a recording done by micing up a whole band and pressing record, but it takes universally excellent musicianship to pull off and mostly producers are too scared of the reduced ability to fix things later (due to spill) to make it a common thing.
Recording Jazz, Choral or Orchestral is a whole other game, but even there you usually mix in spot mics in addition to whatever you are using for a main pair, a 'simple' stereo recording of the room may seem like a good idea, but it really does not cut it in reality for most things.
Even some of the 'live' albums are in fact a case of record every input to the desk plus some crowd mics, then go back to the studio and replace pretty much everything EXCEPT the crowd noise.... It happens.
Regards, Dan.
It was a STANDARD, you could walk into most rooms and know how your mix would translate from them to a transistor radio, or a car or a run of the mill hifi, and that is a huge thing.
They were not typically the only speakers in the room, or even the best speakers in the room, but everyone had them and knew their imperfections.
Commercial music is usually an artificial thing, pan pot 'stereo' and heavy use of overdubs, layered guitars, drum replacement ("Superior drummer" being one of the tools of choice), it is what it is, and some percentage of it is very, very good, but the objective is not usually to sound like something it is not.
You do sometimes see a commercial release of a recording done by micing up a whole band and pressing record, but it takes universally excellent musicianship to pull off and mostly producers are too scared of the reduced ability to fix things later (due to spill) to make it a common thing.
Recording Jazz, Choral or Orchestral is a whole other game, but even there you usually mix in spot mics in addition to whatever you are using for a main pair, a 'simple' stereo recording of the room may seem like a good idea, but it really does not cut it in reality for most things.
Even some of the 'live' albums are in fact a case of record every input to the desk plus some crowd mics, then go back to the studio and replace pretty much everything EXCEPT the crowd noise.... It happens.
Regards, Dan.
Samples. No not on tape. Many many many synthesizers are samplers. For an 88 key piano synth, the early ones made up a sound that somewhat resembled a piano. Then they could record an actual piano key strike electronically and store it digitally in a synthesizer. the circuit then could spread that one note higher and lower to cover and entire octave. As memory got cheaper and cheaper over the years we wound up with synths with each key individually sampled. Now do the same with other instruments - sax, oboe, trumpet, violin, etc - and put them all in a MIDI controls sound module, et voila: orchestra in a box. Of course this all happened to drums eariler.
EMU Proteus was an example of MIDI sound module.
EMU Proteus was an example of MIDI sound module.
Attachments
The Yamaha NS10 Story | Sound On Sound
http://dt7v1i9vyp3mf.cloudfront.net/assetlibrary/n/ns10m.pdf?Mox1MHrRfMC0jrcxfvOtE1aJ4mEwV4P.
Since the Yamaha NS10M got mentioned, I thought it fitting to link to a research paper called "THE YAMAHA NS10M: TWENTY YEARS A REFERENCE MONITOR. WHY?"
"6. SUMMARY
From the investigations presented, and from experiences in the use of the NS10M, it would appear that the following statements can be made.
-The free-field frequency response of the NS10M gives rise to a response in typical use which has been recognised by many recording personnel as being what they need for pop / rock music mixing. The principal characteristics are the raised mid-range, the gentle top-end roll- off, and the very fast low-frequency decay; the latter is aided by the 12dB / octave roll-off of the sealed-box cabinet.
-The time response exhibits a better than average step function response, which implies good reproduction of transients. Many people speak of the "rock and roll punch" of the NS10M.
-The distortion characteristics are also better than average for a loudspeaker of such size.
-The output SPL is adequate for close-field studio monitoring with adequate reliability.
-In many of these characteristics, the NS10M mimics the response of many good larger monitor systems in well-controlled rooms. They are hence recognisable to many recording personnel in terms of their overall response.
-They are tools to achieve a well-balanced mix. It is notable how many of the people who use them in studios do not use them for home listening."
http://dt7v1i9vyp3mf.cloudfront.net/assetlibrary/n/ns10m.pdf?Mox1MHrRfMC0jrcxfvOtE1aJ4mEwV4P.
Since the Yamaha NS10M got mentioned, I thought it fitting to link to a research paper called "THE YAMAHA NS10M: TWENTY YEARS A REFERENCE MONITOR. WHY?"
"6. SUMMARY
From the investigations presented, and from experiences in the use of the NS10M, it would appear that the following statements can be made.
-The free-field frequency response of the NS10M gives rise to a response in typical use which has been recognised by many recording personnel as being what they need for pop / rock music mixing. The principal characteristics are the raised mid-range, the gentle top-end roll- off, and the very fast low-frequency decay; the latter is aided by the 12dB / octave roll-off of the sealed-box cabinet.
-The time response exhibits a better than average step function response, which implies good reproduction of transients. Many people speak of the "rock and roll punch" of the NS10M.
-The distortion characteristics are also better than average for a loudspeaker of such size.
-The output SPL is adequate for close-field studio monitoring with adequate reliability.
-In many of these characteristics, the NS10M mimics the response of many good larger monitor systems in well-controlled rooms. They are hence recognisable to many recording personnel in terms of their overall response.
-They are tools to achieve a well-balanced mix. It is notable how many of the people who use them in studios do not use them for home listening."
I mean the in-ear headphones that I was using. I feel that listening to theYouTube recording of the speaker playing music will reveal something about the speaker, at least the difference between that digital sound uploaded to You Tube.
I don't want to offend anyone but that sounds like musical depeption, fraud, almost, unless there is a disclaimere on the album: 'This live performance may have been enhanced using re-layering using studio instruments.'
Recording one key and changing the pitch sounds artificial, what about those harmonics things? Also, recording each key is fine, but isn't there a difference between a piano played in an empty studio versus the piano played in a roomfull of musicians and instruments? There has to be. Is it detectable by ear? Here's an answer.
About the Yamaha NS10M, looking at the frequency response graph I see a peak just aove the 1 kHz frequency. Now for me the kHz frequency was the most disliked frequency for me and I would do my best to cut it on the system I was listening to - it had a 9 band graphic equalizer - Technics rack system but I listened to tapes mostly, so I suppose that if the recording engineer can make the 1k sound good, then the rest follows. That's my two cent theory anyway.
As for cloning these = there is an interesting thread on that, but I would rather try to build a speaker that has a prominent and distrtion free mid range and compromise on the ends - or maybe add a subwoofer. Musical detail is important to me now, not so much getting 'good bass' and sizzling high hats and cymbals.
Interesting article on the recordin of 'Staying Alive' using a drum sample to replace the drummer.
Full story here
As for cloning these = there is an interesting thread on that, but I would rather try to build a speaker that has a prominent and distrtion free mid range and compromise on the ends - or maybe add a subwoofer. Musical detail is important to me now, not so much getting 'good bass' and sizzling high hats and cymbals.
Interesting article on the recordin of 'Staying Alive' using a drum sample to replace the drummer.
.
Full story here
I cannot say it too often, in show business reality is not important, it is the appearance that matters. It has to LOOK like the lady was sawed in half, not that she really was. If I record a band live on stage, and one of the singers was way off pitch the entire night, what do I do? Leave the crappy singing in the mix? Apply a pitch shifter to correct his pitch - on his track only of course? HAve him come into the studio to re-rrecord that track and we'll mix it in? Throw the whole recording away? Only the crappy singing was real.
As to a disclaimer on the recording, EVERY commercial recording you hear would need a disclaimer saying, "The record does not sound like any live performance.
Jimi Hendrix claimed his All Along the Watchtower was impossible to perform live, and so he never did.
The recording process is interesting of course, and fun to learn about how what you hear comes to be. But I think - just my opinion - that you need to just make a good pair of stereo speakers and forget all the worrying about what is behind the scenes. Studio monitors are made for a sound engineer to listen to in his booth to make a recording. Unless you are doing that, you don;t need them.
As to a disclaimer on the recording, EVERY commercial recording you hear would need a disclaimer saying, "The record does not sound like any live performance.
Jimi Hendrix claimed his All Along the Watchtower was impossible to perform live, and so he never did.
The recording process is interesting of course, and fun to learn about how what you hear comes to be. But I think - just my opinion - that you need to just make a good pair of stereo speakers and forget all the worrying about what is behind the scenes. Studio monitors are made for a sound engineer to listen to in his booth to make a recording. Unless you are doing that, you don;t need them.
Atlanta 1970 Pop Festival and more. I think what was meant is that it could not be performed live with the studio effects.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2fuzx_jimi-hendrix-all-along-the-watchtow_music
Yes, Jimi could play the song, it was after all a Bob Dylan song, but it would sound nothing like the recording.
Enzo, I accept your point, and maybe few people realize what recording engineers go trough, I thought that they sat in air conditioned booths listening to music, adjust levels for vocalists and musicians while recording their tracks, and mixing it all together at the end. Like any real job it must have its ups and downs.
I have learned so much, a lot of it relevant to my building of speakers, and it will change my design goals somewhat. 😎
Thanks to all, I hope no music professionals were hurt in the process.🙂
I have been a recording engineer for 30 + years. As far as monitors go for you personal use you need to build a system that is as flat as possible. You do not want to have hyped mids or no bottom a simple 2 way crossover with the proper drivers and crossover points is what you want. As flat as you can get it from 20hz to 20khz. There are and were a lot of so called professional studio monitors that sound like crap.
Effect on speaker design
What I have learned so far will change the design of my speaker system:
1. I can use cheaper speakers
Artists and recording engineers are aware that their music will be played on cheaper systems. In fact there was an article some time back that most people listen to music on computer speakers. Add to this the MP3 and Bluetooth audio formats and Bluetooth speakers and you have a fairly low quality end user listening environment . So it won't matter too much what speakers I use in terms of hearing what was originally intended.
2. I should get a the best possible mid-range or full range speaker.
The lack of bass is probably compensated for in the mix to some extent, but I should make sure that all the sounds that were painstakinlgy added to the record are actually audible. This means getting a good mid or full range speaker so I can hear everything and enjoy the music more.
(Until recently I never heard the high-hat track in the Eagles "One of these nights". Thanks to Apple Music I have a lot more clarity than the compact cassette with its woolly bass and noexistent high end.
3.There's no need worry if the instruments are placed correctly in the recording.
The stereo effect is as subject to artificial processing as anything else, so there is no need to worry too much how faithfully the recording places the instruments in their 'proper' position in the band.
4. I should use a subwoofer
Given that the important sounds are mixed into the midrange, it is better to leave the production of midrange sounds to a single pair of speakers and reproduce the bass separately.
Bottom line is: all the artists and engineers care about is that I thoroughly enjoy the music they create. Whatever bias or equalization I use on my system, they understand is up to me.
Edit:
5: Point the speakers at the ears.
This is a simple but overlooked point that changes everything. Even with good speaker drives, to hear all the sounds the speakers should be aimed at the ears as far as possible. This rules out placing the speakers on a high shelf (as with the vintage Sony system I have in the living room) , or placing them on the desktop, to be obscured by other stuff. Wall mounting is the best option for me now, and the slightly used surround box and speakers I am listening on right now has satellites on the wall and it makes such a difference.
What I have learned so far will change the design of my speaker system:
1. I can use cheaper speakers
Artists and recording engineers are aware that their music will be played on cheaper systems. In fact there was an article some time back that most people listen to music on computer speakers. Add to this the MP3 and Bluetooth audio formats and Bluetooth speakers and you have a fairly low quality end user listening environment . So it won't matter too much what speakers I use in terms of hearing what was originally intended.
2. I should get a the best possible mid-range or full range speaker.
The lack of bass is probably compensated for in the mix to some extent, but I should make sure that all the sounds that were painstakinlgy added to the record are actually audible. This means getting a good mid or full range speaker so I can hear everything and enjoy the music more.
(Until recently I never heard the high-hat track in the Eagles "One of these nights". Thanks to Apple Music I have a lot more clarity than the compact cassette with its woolly bass and noexistent high end.
3.There's no need worry if the instruments are placed correctly in the recording.
The stereo effect is as subject to artificial processing as anything else, so there is no need to worry too much how faithfully the recording places the instruments in their 'proper' position in the band.
4. I should use a subwoofer
Given that the important sounds are mixed into the midrange, it is better to leave the production of midrange sounds to a single pair of speakers and reproduce the bass separately.
Bottom line is: all the artists and engineers care about is that I thoroughly enjoy the music they create. Whatever bias or equalization I use on my system, they understand is up to me.
Edit:
5: Point the speakers at the ears.
This is a simple but overlooked point that changes everything. Even with good speaker drives, to hear all the sounds the speakers should be aimed at the ears as far as possible. This rules out placing the speakers on a high shelf (as with the vintage Sony system I have in the living room) , or placing them on the desktop, to be obscured by other stuff. Wall mounting is the best option for me now, and the slightly used surround box and speakers I am listening on right now has satellites on the wall and it makes such a difference.
Last edited:
Yes, but if you want to get deeply into analysing the music and tracking each instrument in your mind, what would you use, I would need speakers that are 'revealing' as they say or as the Hi Fi magazine says have 'insight'.
I won't be getting any studio monitors anytime soon, if ever.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.