Most speakers should be designed for a flat response. The elephant in the room is where the measurement for flat response is taken.
This is a crucial thing to understand and get right, and to do so very careful thoughts and wording are vital.
It seems to me that only rarely does a recording reference the way it actually sounds live to the ear, much is done in booths with no reference to the acoustic event, and that event may actually be far from ideal.
Every stage in the recording, mixing, and mastering processes needs to be considered, and also the listening environment's effects on reproduction.
The circle of confusion is a real problem.
It seems to me that only rarely does a recording reference the way it actually sounds live to the ear, much is done in booths with no reference to the acoustic event, and that event may actually be far from ideal.
Every stage in the recording, mixing, and mastering processes needs to be considered, and also the listening environment's effects on reproduction.
The circle of confusion is a real problem.
... and their man parts.
As my cousin tells me: "The body parts they're thinking with don't have any brain cells in them".
Do you think then valtergio, that reference to those who are professionals, who make a living from speaker design, and gain a massively respected reputation, is inappropriate?
Given their resources alone it seems improbable that they have 'got it all wrong'.
And my earlier reference to flat was, as is usually the case, free field.
ATC defines its bass response to work in typical rooms to give a better approximation to flat, and did some years ago provide a bass lift control on their professional versions because mixers wanted to have adjustable bass boost, probably because their cubicles may be small.
Given their resources alone it seems improbable that they have 'got it all wrong'.
And my earlier reference to flat was, as is usually the case, free field.
ATC defines its bass response to work in typical rooms to give a better approximation to flat, and did some years ago provide a bass lift control on their professional versions because mixers wanted to have adjustable bass boost, probably because their cubicles may be small.
Of course not. But, in many cases it's the only thing the home user really has much control over. They have the DSP in most modern amps and speaker positioning, the rest of it is pretty much pre-set at the factory.
At the start of all this, before it got torn apart into three threads, I was trying to get the OP to run some REW sweeps so I could, hopefully, eliminate room nodes and reflections from the problem before he launched into experimental modifications of his speakers. Do the free stuff first... right?
Pro monitors do indeed sound terrible in larger listening rooms. They're most often intended for "near field" on top of consoles or desks where most sound is direct and reflections and echos really don't have much effect. When they get into the larger air mass of a listening room they mess up just as badly as any other speaker.
I've never been a big fan of anechoic chambers for speaker design. Try to find some images of test chambers from the 50s 60s and 70s. Most had a partition in them where the speakers were placed for testing. They were simulating the back wall of the room. Somewhere in the later 80s that wall disappeared, almost without notice and speakers got taller and skinnier and suddenly had to be moved out into the room to sound right. Now we are adding baffle step compensation to make up for the loss of wall gain... go figure.
For a few years I had a pair of Heresys sitting at the ends of my stereo stand, right up against the wall... and the sound was just amazing. Before that I had L-100s that ended up about a foot from the wall and they were equally good speakers. In fact, I still regret selling them and going to bookshelves when I moved to a smaller place... Not my best decision.
Last edited:
I would not agree that, (as perhaps you imply), all pro monitors sound terrible in larger listening rooms, and I think that companies which address both needs, generally do each quite well. Many pro monitors are sofit mounted, in the facing wall, a very different completely 2pi space for bass to work in.
Of course many small studios have small monitors on the desks and listen free field, and with reflections from the desk included.
Harbeth 40.2s are used in both professional and domestic situations.
Alan Shaw puts his speaker at the top of a pole in the open and measures them with the mic. above, a method recognised for a long time as very close to free field.
The problem of matching a speaker O/P below about 300 Hz is really the moot point, rooms are variable, and so are the O/Ps of speakers dependant on configurations.
I cannot remember precisely who, either Alison or Olson designed a close coupled to the boundary woofer in one of his pioneering attempts to deal with this interface. Many speakers in the last ten years have had a port close coupled to the floor, often above a platform supporting them, I presume as an attempt to 'standardise' this aspect.
Of course many small studios have small monitors on the desks and listen free field, and with reflections from the desk included.
Harbeth 40.2s are used in both professional and domestic situations.
Alan Shaw puts his speaker at the top of a pole in the open and measures them with the mic. above, a method recognised for a long time as very close to free field.
The problem of matching a speaker O/P below about 300 Hz is really the moot point, rooms are variable, and so are the O/Ps of speakers dependant on configurations.
I cannot remember precisely who, either Alison or Olson designed a close coupled to the boundary woofer in one of his pioneering attempts to deal with this interface. Many speakers in the last ten years have had a port close coupled to the floor, often above a platform supporting them, I presume as an attempt to 'standardise' this aspect.
Hi, in fact the bass lift on Atc monitors is here mainly because you can use the speaker either freestanding in room or inwall.
Both case needs different approach to baffle step compensation: freestanding you may need up to 6db gain in low end, once inwall you see inverse situation you need to attenuate lowend by 6db ( you have a massive boost from around 200hz with low end). The frequency of action is located at Bsc freq.
Valtergio, please give us reference (edit: and condition of use!) because for me this is just blank statement and absolute nonsense! ( maybe that is because i come from proworld?!).
Yes there is not very pleasing to hear reference in proworld but most of the tools used are usually good to very good. This even more true since 2000 area where good quality relatively lowcost monitors are availlable( whatever lowcost mean).
That said last time i visited an hifi show i couldn't help myself and run away from most rooms! Loudspeakers were most of the time coloured, didn't have the capability to reproduce real dynamic of instruments ( small drivers are a plague in my view), most of them where 'audiojewelry' which is here again an absolute nonsense to me...
From your statement things like Atc, B&W, Focal, Genelec,Tannoy, Dynaudio,Jbl... ( to name a few) are to be put in junk.
Ok, even if i don't like some of this brands i won't go to the point to say i will run away from them. Maybe you are part of the 'baby boomer' generation... in this case things evolved since the 70's...
(Edit: about my turntable ... this is not an SL7 but an SL10! I was disturbed...
a real killer combo with 310mc, quality is really up to 5number price TT at bargain price for everyone broke like me!).
Last edited:
Play fair, my friend ... I did not say "all".
What I meant was that pro audio monitors are no less subject to the vagaries of the average urban stereo than any other speaker. But, yes, many do sound pretty bad in mid or far field listening.
Careful ... I'm a boomer. Born in 1951 and messing with audio since the mid-1970s. At one point every piece of my audio chain, pre-amp, power amp, speakers, tuner... all built with my own two hands.
Yes things have evolved since the 70s... but in many cases I question whether that is improvement or simply change for it's own sake. There is a reason why some 70s and 80s designs are still in use today and there is a reason why "vintage" gear is such a thing right now. If you take a look at the market as it is today it's not hard to enumerate the missing, but useful, features... tone controls, loudness switches, LPads, phono inputs, etc. We boomers tend to miss that stuff, because we actually used that stuff.
Douglas please don't mix nearfield and monitors.
Those are monitors:
RM Monitor
Those are nearfield:
auratone 5C enceintes vintage histoire musique son
Of course this is both extreme one being absolute state of the art the other 'plagued' with a lot of issues.
That said both have their place in case of mixing.
There is a misconception from audiophile/ amateur world about nearfields: most of the time they are presents in control room for freelance which change room often and need a reference to work with or they are used for their issues as they reflect some real life condition ( this is the case of auratone with their lack of lowend from 100hz and horrible peak at 11khz which mimic the behavior of small radio and give the important range of audio spectrum ( 300hz to 6khz) a kind of magnifying glass).
Of course i won't listen at home auratones or ns10 but when i work i'm happy to have them around ( not so with ns10 though).
Douglas about the boomers, i'm son of! I won't imply everyone is the same but there is a kind of arrogance from your generation ( as a generalisation) which is sometime difficult to stand for younger generation. That said i've learned a lot from people of your gen and i have respect for olders and more knowlegable people than i am, that doesn't imply this generation is perfect! Neither others are...
Iow this is not a personal attack, ok?
Those are monitors:
RM Monitor
Those are nearfield:
auratone 5C enceintes vintage histoire musique son
Of course this is both extreme one being absolute state of the art the other 'plagued' with a lot of issues.
That said both have their place in case of mixing.
There is a misconception from audiophile/ amateur world about nearfields: most of the time they are presents in control room for freelance which change room often and need a reference to work with or they are used for their issues as they reflect some real life condition ( this is the case of auratone with their lack of lowend from 100hz and horrible peak at 11khz which mimic the behavior of small radio and give the important range of audio spectrum ( 300hz to 6khz) a kind of magnifying glass).
Of course i won't listen at home auratones or ns10 but when i work i'm happy to have them around ( not so with ns10 though).
Douglas about the boomers, i'm son of! I won't imply everyone is the same but there is a kind of arrogance from your generation ( as a generalisation) which is sometime difficult to stand for younger generation. That said i've learned a lot from people of your gen and i have respect for olders and more knowlegable people than i am, that doesn't imply this generation is perfect! Neither others are...
Iow this is not a personal attack, ok?
Last edited:
I didn't mean to. But if you look at what leaks over into consumer audio, they are most often smaller two ways, like bookshelf speakers, meant to be set on the console while working. Because they are designed mainly as what I would call a desktop speaker, they do not do well on stands at the front of a listening room. But this is generally true of any smallish speaker.
Douglas about the boomers, i'm son of! I won't imply everyone is the same but there is a kind of arrogance from your generation ( as a generalisation) which is sometime difficult to stand for younger generation. That said i've learned a lot from people of your gen and i have respect for olders and more knowlegable people than i am, that doesn't imply this generation is perfect! Neither others are...
Iow this is not a personal attack, ok?
Yes that is a pretty wide generalization...
Don't mistake confidence for arrogance. We've earned our airs.
Sadly, going the other way, what I see a lot is Millenials who seem to think they can do big things without training or experience and often overestimate their abilities in unfortunate ways. Just look how many here eschew any suggestion of studying electronic theory... then end up with problems they can't solve.
Also, lets not forget who invented and developed the technology you young whipper snappers now take for granted.
Not to fear, no offence was taken.
But do keep in mind that's a two way street.
I was aware as I wrote that that you left your statement open and hence undefined, but meant no misrepresentation or ill feeling.
It may also be fairer to bear in mind that the pro monitor has to deliver 115, placing greater demands on design, and the domestic speaker only 105dB
Last edited:
I said not to refer to PRO speakers for a reason, the PRO speakers are made for playing outdoors or in large spaces, and in a small room it won't work.
when you put a speakers it is important to think about the conditions in which it will be used, for example my dipole speaker was designed to be used in a little or not absorbent room,
LX521 Description
it is clear that if the speaker is put into different acoustics it will not be suitable.
then there are many other issues that I disagree with PRO thoughts.
they don't recognize the sound of amplifiers, and this is absurd, you can take for example the forum of amplifiers, you will find hundreds of projects of amplifiers with different circuits, which sound different, same users who have built more than one amplifier, different models of amp to get a different sound, Nelson Pass also participates in the forum, he also didn't understand anything about amps?
what I don't like about the PRO sector is that their judgments do not foresee the judgment of listening and comparison, and this contradicts what we can hear in our rooms.
So we have an obvious contradiction, if we do not distinguish the conditions of use we cannot judge.
I am also inclined to think that a PRO speaker that plays outdoors and you are listening at 50 meters, maybe you will not hear the change of amplifier ..
If you want to have useful answers to solve a problem you must make considerations appropriate to the way of use, generalizing is useless, it is only to not see the problems
when you put a speakers it is important to think about the conditions in which it will be used, for example my dipole speaker was designed to be used in a little or not absorbent room,
LX521 Description
it is clear that if the speaker is put into different acoustics it will not be suitable.
then there are many other issues that I disagree with PRO thoughts.
they don't recognize the sound of amplifiers, and this is absurd, you can take for example the forum of amplifiers, you will find hundreds of projects of amplifiers with different circuits, which sound different, same users who have built more than one amplifier, different models of amp to get a different sound, Nelson Pass also participates in the forum, he also didn't understand anything about amps?
what I don't like about the PRO sector is that their judgments do not foresee the judgment of listening and comparison, and this contradicts what we can hear in our rooms.
So we have an obvious contradiction, if we do not distinguish the conditions of use we cannot judge.
I am also inclined to think that a PRO speaker that plays outdoors and you are listening at 50 meters, maybe you will not hear the change of amplifier ..
If you want to have useful answers to solve a problem you must make considerations appropriate to the way of use, generalizing is useless, it is only to not see the problems
Last edited by a moderator:
Anechoic chamber speaker design is a positive thing. One of the benefits is that some of the qualities of the chamber are incorporated into the design from the start. This gives the speaker a degree of immunity from some of the room effects.
Hi Valtergio,
Happy to see you back answering my question: it clarify a lot of things to me.
First your use of pro is misleading to me. The professional field is vast and range from studio to live events/PA ( Public Adress), strictly theorical research (eg: Ircam in France which is P.Boulez's baby) to sound systems in restaurants...
From your description you have grief with P.A. which i can understand in some case. That said here again there have been a lot of evolution in this field with reference to gear in the last 20 years and in the good direction imho. Which lead to an issue with operators and/or the requirements of the exercice...
About operators ( sound engineers) there is bad ones and good ones... like everywhere!
One thing have to be remembered though most people acting in this field are self teached person ( this have changed a lot since the gear is more and more technical and complicated to use so their is a new generation of engineer slowly replacing the previous one which should bring better things).
Now requirements: you are paid for a contract in which you are asked to garantee a certain SPL level at a given distance. You don't satisfy this: you don't get paid.
So the level is sometimes too high in some area and the size of spot to cover being what it is there is place where there is issues regarding sound quality when you are in the audience. I won't talk about the fact you usually doesn't have the time to make thing as they should be or that the gear isn't adapted to the situation ( economy mate: the client doesn't want to spend money on sound, 'we don't care people are there to SEE the artist'...).
I was not this much active in this field ( i worked in studio mainly) but i've had my part of this...
You talk about dipole as this is something which is not used in pro field. I previously had done works on Esl63 and some studio use that kind of loudspeakers!
Take a look at what is used here ( but with acoustic treatments as all rooms need some) and the credit of the guy...it spoke by itself:
Barry Diament Audio
BDA Credits
There is a misunderstanding here again, more a shortcut in my view: who told you amplifiers doesn't have a sound from pro world?!
Have you ever visited a PA dedicated forum? There is even more battle about the sound of gear than in amateur world!
You may had contact with bad or 'greeny' engineers... That said there is a point where WORKS need to be done so, you use the gear you have access to. And in some case yes all amps sounds the same ( more or less).
You talk about N.Pass... guess what? The mastering/studio engineer ARE a big part of PASS AMP customers ( not Firstwatt for obvious reason= we constantly needs more POWER!). Doubt about it? Ask Nelson directly i'm sure he'll kindly answer being the nice man he is.
I don't see a contradiction, i see two worlds which have difficulty to talk each others: amateur see things used or done and take for granted things they don't understand as being a norm and professional being used to thing they don't explain or even doesn't know why they are doing as they are convention ( or because they are self teached have lack of understanding) or because lack of time or will to share or teach...
We agree but you must consider that we have to talk to each other letting or judgement aside and listen to the answer given...
Not make judgements on things not understood. Well be open minded and don't make judgement without knowing what it is all about.
Last edited:
I didn't say it was a bad thing ... I merely commented that I am not a fan, because it's absolutely no help to me when tuning a system into a room.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.