..... and because someting is someone else's preferred tool does not mean it is the best that there is available. But it is probably THE tool with which he personally can achieve his best results .....
My experience is that sound engineers in partilcular often tax some equipment as being "better than anything else" when it is just a matter of personal taste.
The Strausses that I've heard were damn cool speakers but I wouldn't claim that they are the best there is, especially without the possibility of direct comparison.
Regards
Charles
Hey again, thanks a lot for your responses. Perhaps I'm too addicted by this "magic" that should be behind it. That "special idea" that only one person in the world knows (which is susipcious anyway, esp. if there is no patent, or if he is not a worldwide renowed specialist in his subject) Pehaps this is just all not real, it's just a good combination of speakers with good specifications, that fit to each other.
Yeah or expectation bias, you know you value your friend knowledge so it equal a kind of authority and as such implie a reaction from your subconscious.
It is true for anyone.
But it doesn't mater at all: what is YOUR goal. We don't all listen to the same things so have different bias: two ways, full rangers, 3 or more way, constant directivity, coax, horns, boxed or not...
When i linked about NS10 it was for you to see even a 'bad' frequency response loudspeaker ( it's not inherently bad but it is short on low end, mid emphised and with highs which are not particularly fine) but which have great time domain behavior could be a nice and important design goal ( low group delay).
It could be said the same thing from Auratone 5c which were standard nearfield before NS10.
None are adapted to modern genre of music imho. But these time domain behavior is something desirable.
Directivity management is too a design goal with Kef, Genelec, Amphion, Jbl,... maybe there is something about it.
And the box design, low diffraction, etc,etc,..
Finding the 'magic' driver can be part of it but it'll be soon enough you'll see if used in a defined range many drivers sound ( almost) the same.
But it's my pov, others can vary on that point and it is fine to me.
It is true for anyone.
But it doesn't mater at all: what is YOUR goal. We don't all listen to the same things so have different bias: two ways, full rangers, 3 or more way, constant directivity, coax, horns, boxed or not...
When i linked about NS10 it was for you to see even a 'bad' frequency response loudspeaker ( it's not inherently bad but it is short on low end, mid emphised and with highs which are not particularly fine) but which have great time domain behavior could be a nice and important design goal ( low group delay).
It could be said the same thing from Auratone 5c which were standard nearfield before NS10.
None are adapted to modern genre of music imho. But these time domain behavior is something desirable.
Directivity management is too a design goal with Kef, Genelec, Amphion, Jbl,... maybe there is something about it.
And the box design, low diffraction, etc,etc,..
Finding the 'magic' driver can be part of it but it'll be soon enough you'll see if used in a defined range many drivers sound ( almost) the same.
But it's my pov, others can vary on that point and it is fine to me.
High quality nearfield monitors for mixing.
Very easy to build nice 2 ways or 3 ways
Ribbon tweeters very smooth and different than typical domes.
Very easy to build nice 2 ways or 3 ways
Ribbon tweeters very smooth and different than typical domes.
I’m also very interested in the NF-3’s. I don’t agree with the claim on passive speakers.. because they are 2-way, I think passive can be “fair enough”
He seems to explain himself well and his speakers are used in many world class studios..
I wish there were measurements. His claim of 60 degree vertical directivity seems off.. but it is crossed over sort of low and close to the woofer
He seems to explain himself well and his speakers are used in many world class studios..
I wish there were measurements. His claim of 60 degree vertical directivity seems off.. but it is crossed over sort of low and close to the woofer
The manufacturer of the waveguide he uses does also claim 60 degrees vertical. So he might actually be correct.
Regards
Charles
Manufacturers with "good" measurements will almost certainly show them on their websites and be inclinded to send their speakers off to reviewers that include measurements. Manufacturers with OK or poor measurements relative to the competition are unlikely to show them on their websites and be less inclined to send their speakers to reviewers that include measurements. The latter will normally work harder to get people with status in the eyes of potential customers to say good things about their products in order to increase perceived value.
If the measurements were good we can be pretty sure they would be around. This doesn't mean they are necessarily bad but they are not going to be good enough to enhance the value of the product given the marketing adopted. The asking price compared to established speakers that do offer "good" measurements is also fairly relevant when it comes to the pros and cons of showing measurements. Many people though place little value in measurements but do value endorsements from people they consider knowledgeable and so for such people the Strauss speakers may be worth considering.
If the measurements were good we can be pretty sure they would be around. This doesn't mean they are necessarily bad but they are not going to be good enough to enhance the value of the product given the marketing adopted. The asking price compared to established speakers that do offer "good" measurements is also fairly relevant when it comes to the pros and cons of showing measurements. Many people though place little value in measurements but do value endorsements from people they consider knowledgeable and so for such people the Strauss speakers may be worth considering.
I’ve tried watching this for ten minutes. It was a waste of time. The man tells stuff he hopefully doesn’t believe himself. If he does, he doesn’t have a clue.
I suspect it is a myth that there is an "ultimate" neutral speaker, that if you use for mixes, your mixes will be enjoyable for the largest number of people. This seems like wishful thinking to me. I think most sound engineers probably choose the speakers they want to use, after they have convinced themselves they are sufficiently neutral.
Not too long ago I took home 800 photos from a trip and realized I didn't trust my monitors to display images accurately. Being an analog guy, I wanted to draw the tone curve for each image.
I borrowed a color calibrator and tried calibrating my monitor to sRGB standard, but quickly realized if I edited this way that my images would not look right on the monitor of anyone I actually cared about. The actual sRGB tone curve lifts the darks compared to what most people view media on. Most monitor manufacturers are going for the simple and effective Gamma 2.2 curve rather than the wacky ancient piecewise sRGB curve that no one even remembers the purpose of. This is when I realized that there is an entire economy of people that edit in sRGB only to show their photos to other people who use sRGB and the only reason for this is that they think it is a standard and therefore better in some way.
The take away for me is that there is no standard I can use to be sure my photos will look good on the screens they will be viewed on. You need to understand the equipment the people you actually care about will be viewing/listening with. Depending on what it is, this may even mean you need to largely forget realism or accuracy so that certain music can be enjoyed in the spirit it was intended, by people using ubiquitous audio devices.
It is possible to choose the wrong equipment by mistake but wishful thinking will ensure you never get it right.
Not too long ago I took home 800 photos from a trip and realized I didn't trust my monitors to display images accurately. Being an analog guy, I wanted to draw the tone curve for each image.
I borrowed a color calibrator and tried calibrating my monitor to sRGB standard, but quickly realized if I edited this way that my images would not look right on the monitor of anyone I actually cared about. The actual sRGB tone curve lifts the darks compared to what most people view media on. Most monitor manufacturers are going for the simple and effective Gamma 2.2 curve rather than the wacky ancient piecewise sRGB curve that no one even remembers the purpose of. This is when I realized that there is an entire economy of people that edit in sRGB only to show their photos to other people who use sRGB and the only reason for this is that they think it is a standard and therefore better in some way.
The take away for me is that there is no standard I can use to be sure my photos will look good on the screens they will be viewed on. You need to understand the equipment the people you actually care about will be viewing/listening with. Depending on what it is, this may even mean you need to largely forget realism or accuracy so that certain music can be enjoyed in the spirit it was intended, by people using ubiquitous audio devices.
It is possible to choose the wrong equipment by mistake but wishful thinking will ensure you never get it right.
Interesting thread. I didn’t read all just yet but will. As a hobby musician I can probably give some general advice.
The first advice I would like to give is to clarify terms such as “need” vs “want”. Nobody really needs near field monitors, a lot of artists use headphones or just regular speakers to make music. Especially hobby artists. Most pro studios have industry standard nearfields for material to translate predictably from one system to another. Things like Genelec is “best” only because everyone use it. When you bring your music from home to a studio of course if both locations have the same system it will translate well.
Based on this I would assume you just want nearfields that allow you to produce good music as you have not mentioned any translation need. DIY is not a good solution unless you are experienced and have this sick hobby in addition to producing music (like myself). Just buy some Genelecs, Yamaha or Tannoys and don’t look back. You just need something that’s decent revealing and pleasant to listen over time. Neutrals. All the above get the job done. A full range 8” might also do the job…. I’m not going into detail here but midrange is essential.
Now mains or midfields are a different game. They serve two purposes. 1) to test your material on something large to resemble a club or a home system. To have a reference. And 2) to impress your clients. I guess in both cases you do not have this need if your production is a hobby only. This is the mixing engineers problem. On the other hand this is where DIY serve a purpose. DIY mains is fun. 2x15” coax will be easy to build provide tons of fun and impress any “client” (if you have one). They don’t need to be flat. Just big sounding. Bass and treble. It’s almost a bonus if the midrange is toned down.
in short: clarify your needs and wants better, then: Build mains, buy nearfields. And please don’t spend 10k. Start small. I can probably comment more after reading the whole thread. Hope it helps. Good luck.
The first advice I would like to give is to clarify terms such as “need” vs “want”. Nobody really needs near field monitors, a lot of artists use headphones or just regular speakers to make music. Especially hobby artists. Most pro studios have industry standard nearfields for material to translate predictably from one system to another. Things like Genelec is “best” only because everyone use it. When you bring your music from home to a studio of course if both locations have the same system it will translate well.
Based on this I would assume you just want nearfields that allow you to produce good music as you have not mentioned any translation need. DIY is not a good solution unless you are experienced and have this sick hobby in addition to producing music (like myself). Just buy some Genelecs, Yamaha or Tannoys and don’t look back. You just need something that’s decent revealing and pleasant to listen over time. Neutrals. All the above get the job done. A full range 8” might also do the job…. I’m not going into detail here but midrange is essential.
Now mains or midfields are a different game. They serve two purposes. 1) to test your material on something large to resemble a club or a home system. To have a reference. And 2) to impress your clients. I guess in both cases you do not have this need if your production is a hobby only. This is the mixing engineers problem. On the other hand this is where DIY serve a purpose. DIY mains is fun. 2x15” coax will be easy to build provide tons of fun and impress any “client” (if you have one). They don’t need to be flat. Just big sounding. Bass and treble. It’s almost a bonus if the midrange is toned down.
in short: clarify your needs and wants better, then: Build mains, buy nearfields. And please don’t spend 10k. Start small. I can probably comment more after reading the whole thread. Hope it helps. Good luck.
Last edited:
Hi,
Well i don't get this 'mains are to impress your client' myth.
This might be true for small or mid budget studios ( no condescending tones from my side about such places in many cases but if people think they need to spend money to impress client with 'loud big thing' rather than investing in a good quality widebandwith system then... run away from the place! ) but it never been the case in 'big rooms': when tracking you need a system which is widebandwidth ( not high passed at 60hz) and able to reproduce the dynamic and output of real instruments played by pro musician as this is how they ( musicians) assess quality of mic placement and overall tone: they listen at same level as they play their instrument which can be... (very)loud. Even more when in a very damped room and at 3,5m away...
What most people doesn't realise is that many of 'classics' albums had their 'sound' made not at mixing or mastering but during tracking where engineer used 'big' mains as they allow to spot issues in low end and dynamic no nearfield will ever be able to expose. And not at deafening level ( well not after 70's/80's anyway) this is for musicians needs...
Can tell as i had access to multitape of such original classic and can testify you just have to put all faders at UG to have the sound ( without the effects but is it what makes such classics what they are? I doubt about it) with calibrated spl mains ( around the 83dbc spl target).
Nearfields were a mixing tool for mixer freelancers moving from rooms to rooms on a daily basis and needing a known reference. Then in the 80's 'Thriller' got mixed on ns10 and nearfields became the 'magic bullet' for all purpose... such a joke.
A bit like the tools used by 'the insect' band which became 'magical' because a succesfull boys band ( which wrote some nice tune from time to time) used them in 60's and 70's... lol.
Well i don't get this 'mains are to impress your client' myth.
This might be true for small or mid budget studios ( no condescending tones from my side about such places in many cases but if people think they need to spend money to impress client with 'loud big thing' rather than investing in a good quality widebandwith system then... run away from the place! ) but it never been the case in 'big rooms': when tracking you need a system which is widebandwidth ( not high passed at 60hz) and able to reproduce the dynamic and output of real instruments played by pro musician as this is how they ( musicians) assess quality of mic placement and overall tone: they listen at same level as they play their instrument which can be... (very)loud. Even more when in a very damped room and at 3,5m away...
What most people doesn't realise is that many of 'classics' albums had their 'sound' made not at mixing or mastering but during tracking where engineer used 'big' mains as they allow to spot issues in low end and dynamic no nearfield will ever be able to expose. And not at deafening level ( well not after 70's/80's anyway) this is for musicians needs...
Can tell as i had access to multitape of such original classic and can testify you just have to put all faders at UG to have the sound ( without the effects but is it what makes such classics what they are? I doubt about it) with calibrated spl mains ( around the 83dbc spl target).
Nearfields were a mixing tool for mixer freelancers moving from rooms to rooms on a daily basis and needing a known reference. Then in the 80's 'Thriller' got mixed on ns10 and nearfields became the 'magic bullet' for all purpose... such a joke.
A bit like the tools used by 'the insect' band which became 'magical' because a succesfull boys band ( which wrote some nice tune from time to time) used them in 60's and 70's... lol.
Last edited:
Furthermore no speaker will ever be neutral in a room that is not treated acoustically. And even then some EQing might be needed in order to have a neutral frequency response.
I always smile when I see home studios in ordinary living rooms of musicians with sometimnes expensive monitoring but without any acoustic treatment.
The place where I once heard Strauss monitors was a serious studio with acoustic treatment and EQing in place of course. Everything else would have been a waste of money.
Regards
Charles
Hi Charles, i hope everything is fine for you.
Which is this waveguide manufacturer?
@Tom79 Listen, if you want some good studio monitors, you MUST limit your choice to ones that you can get detaild scientific data on. This is the only way to know the accuracy of the monitors. For example Genelec, Neuman, KEF, D&D. Browse ASR and Erin's Audio Corner. Additionally, you will not build such a loudspeaker as a new DIY'er.
If scientific data is not available, you can not make a reliable purchase decision. Subjective opinion, no matter who it comes from, is highly unreliable. Forget these Strauss speakers, one look tells you they are clearly not designed for accuracte replay following scientific data.
P.S. If I was you, knowing that you want a passive speaker, I'd buy a pair of KEF Reference 1. Here is the data - https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kef_reference_1_meta/
If scientific data is not available, you can not make a reliable purchase decision. Subjective opinion, no matter who it comes from, is highly unreliable. Forget these Strauss speakers, one look tells you they are clearly not designed for accuracte replay following scientific data.
P.S. If I was you, knowing that you want a passive speaker, I'd buy a pair of KEF Reference 1. Here is the data - https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kef_reference_1_meta/
Last edited:
Lots of good points here. I wanted to simplify things for the OP and allow some Birds Eye view. The “impress the client” term is more just a way of speaking. These are usually great speakers but could cost a ton. And usually not the ones for the dirty mixing work. They are more for reference and to just confirm at loud levels how things will behave in a club or similar. And of course as you said ensure the dynamics in the bass region is “unmuddy”. And for listening over long periods of time loud and low. It’s the fun compared to the ugly nearfields that serves only one purpose: to find errors.
I just wanted to help OP out of the rabbit hole and rather get some perspective. Mains nor nearfields are something normal people need. Hobby musicians is usually better off with some standard speaker or monitors like Genelec as they translate well to other things yet are ok to listen to. Not as brutally honest and fatiguing as the old Yamahas, not as expensive and overkill as most mains. Just a good compromise allowing the musician to focus on, well the music.
Now if you’re bitten by the poisonous DIY-bat and cought the virus that most here have, of course building studio monitors is tempting but I would claim it’s a stupid idea. Especially if these would be your first project and your only monitor. You would basically write music in blind (or deaf). On the other hand if you have some Genelecs already and are used to mix on them at least you would have a reference when you start building something such as a mains. If the mains are big bastards you built with tons of bass and dynamics but ruler flat that would be ok because you have control from the genelecs.
I’m trying to make a simple point for the OP not to waste his time and money. If DIY is his thing then sure go ahead build whatever. But if his focus is writing music, then just buy some basic industry standard monitors. In any case he should have the industry standard monitor for his artistry and keep the DIY as a separate thing. At least this has worked for me.
I have a feeling OP is confused with wants vs needs. As a musician he doesn’t need anything but a set of basic monitors. Now his wanting something amazing is something very different, but I would claim it has nothing to do with his artistry. I have seen so many times in other forums (gearslutz to name one) that amateur artists believe that if they just have magic gear X, they will be signed. This is not true.
Now I just realized this is an old thread the OP probably moved on long ago.
😂
Last edited:
Fabricadetabaco,
Thank you clarifying your previous message. We mostly agree and the advice you give are in my view full of wisdom and result from experience, it's obvious.
Let me just disagree on your pov of mains used to mimic club sound system and explain why:
There is no way you would have the same accuracy from a club sound system as from studio mains.
First because few clubs could afford the same gear and this despite the fact defacto standard for multimillion dollars 80's/90's control room i've been in used loudspeakers which were initially developped for PA:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190419140013/http://www.reyaudio.com/history-e.html
Second because of room.
Third because club usually have their own 'house curve' ( global eq response) to give visitors a wow experience for few hours.
I've been heavily into ( as musician/dj or as technician) 'club dedicated style' during 00's and 10's ( D&B, Ragga, Reggae, Tekno, Hip Hop,...) and been fairly surprised to see gear used by mastering facility dedicated to this kind of style.
Never seen any soundsystem or audiophool thingy but fairly typical (serious) monitoring. Things like Tannoy system15 dmt, Jbl,...
For caraibean style i used to work with a mastering engineer in Paris who used Dynaudio BM15 in a small postproduction booth... and results he got were outstanding. Because he had tons of experience in the style and he knew how music had to sound on his nearfield.
It wasn't fun to hear how his work compared to heavy weight of the time ( Sean Paul, Elephant Man, Capleton, Beenie Man,...) which used some of the best facility in the world... they often sounded smaller/thinner, heavilly limited/compressed, lacking subtility/finesse... he told me most of the time they worked at too high spl hence the issues...
i remember heard one of Sean Paul worldwide hit were he performed ms dematrixing to let me hear what they sent into main reverb/delay: heavily distorted signal from a dead line driver stage... shocking! He had a grin and said 'too much weed smoked during session!' Lol.
Gear is important, the know how even more!
So as outcome, we agree. 😉
Thank you clarifying your previous message. We mostly agree and the advice you give are in my view full of wisdom and result from experience, it's obvious.
Let me just disagree on your pov of mains used to mimic club sound system and explain why:
There is no way you would have the same accuracy from a club sound system as from studio mains.
First because few clubs could afford the same gear and this despite the fact defacto standard for multimillion dollars 80's/90's control room i've been in used loudspeakers which were initially developped for PA:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190419140013/http://www.reyaudio.com/history-e.html
Second because of room.
Third because club usually have their own 'house curve' ( global eq response) to give visitors a wow experience for few hours.
I've been heavily into ( as musician/dj or as technician) 'club dedicated style' during 00's and 10's ( D&B, Ragga, Reggae, Tekno, Hip Hop,...) and been fairly surprised to see gear used by mastering facility dedicated to this kind of style.
Never seen any soundsystem or audiophool thingy but fairly typical (serious) monitoring. Things like Tannoy system15 dmt, Jbl,...
For caraibean style i used to work with a mastering engineer in Paris who used Dynaudio BM15 in a small postproduction booth... and results he got were outstanding. Because he had tons of experience in the style and he knew how music had to sound on his nearfield.
It wasn't fun to hear how his work compared to heavy weight of the time ( Sean Paul, Elephant Man, Capleton, Beenie Man,...) which used some of the best facility in the world... they often sounded smaller/thinner, heavilly limited/compressed, lacking subtility/finesse... he told me most of the time they worked at too high spl hence the issues...
i remember heard one of Sean Paul worldwide hit were he performed ms dematrixing to let me hear what they sent into main reverb/delay: heavily distorted signal from a dead line driver stage... shocking! He had a grin and said 'too much weed smoked during session!' Lol.
Gear is important, the know how even more!
So as outcome, we agree. 😉
Last edited:
We seem to share some similar background, I am to from a DJ setting originally spinning techno vinyl in small clubs with oversized gear, while working part time in a hifi shop selling tiny bookshelve speakers. The differences couldn’t be more clear. Studios are somewhere between in my view.
I think we actually do agree about the mains as well. In most semi pro studies they are usually 2x15 + horn or coaxials for simplicity and fun play. Very similar to PA DJ booth, from what I understand this is what you have experienced too. I have not much experience with pro studios but from my hifi shop days I remember there was a lot of fuss about JBL Everest replacing B&W 801 mains and Genelec replacing some SEAS mysterious nearfield build in a local pro studio like 20 years ago. We sold the Everest to them and installed it. I remember how surprised I was learning that a monster speaker like that didn’t produce much bass nor the horns was fatigueing. It was just music as intended with intense dynamics and flat response and no compression at any sound level. Completely different than 801s, which from my experience was just smooth and warm and required tons of watts. Neither have I seen in any semi pro studio after.
I have some experience with bedroom studios and what many testify is that they are happy with one pair of mid fields like the dynaudios you mention or Genelecs 8040 with a sub instead of PAs mains combined with ugly nearfields. The NS10s is a joke. A Visaton 8” fullrange to 20€ could do the same. Most serious artists seems to be very happy with the focal twin 6Be, but they are rather large and expensive, you don’t invest in that prior to being signed.
All in all I think we agree. Wannabe studios use regular PA as mains. It does work to test high SPL if you have some Genelecs as well for the serious stuff.
I have wanted to test the later Tannoy studio stuff but being bought by Behringer I’m not sure about the quality anymore staff moving out starting Fyne company.
Personally I’m building “mains” as we speak. 3x12”. To impress the client lol. And I have some tiny Genelecs and also some old Tannoys just to be sure.
I think we actually do agree about the mains as well. In most semi pro studies they are usually 2x15 + horn or coaxials for simplicity and fun play. Very similar to PA DJ booth, from what I understand this is what you have experienced too. I have not much experience with pro studios but from my hifi shop days I remember there was a lot of fuss about JBL Everest replacing B&W 801 mains and Genelec replacing some SEAS mysterious nearfield build in a local pro studio like 20 years ago. We sold the Everest to them and installed it. I remember how surprised I was learning that a monster speaker like that didn’t produce much bass nor the horns was fatigueing. It was just music as intended with intense dynamics and flat response and no compression at any sound level. Completely different than 801s, which from my experience was just smooth and warm and required tons of watts. Neither have I seen in any semi pro studio after.
I have some experience with bedroom studios and what many testify is that they are happy with one pair of mid fields like the dynaudios you mention or Genelecs 8040 with a sub instead of PAs mains combined with ugly nearfields. The NS10s is a joke. A Visaton 8” fullrange to 20€ could do the same. Most serious artists seems to be very happy with the focal twin 6Be, but they are rather large and expensive, you don’t invest in that prior to being signed.
All in all I think we agree. Wannabe studios use regular PA as mains. It does work to test high SPL if you have some Genelecs as well for the serious stuff.
I have wanted to test the later Tannoy studio stuff but being bought by Behringer I’m not sure about the quality anymore staff moving out starting Fyne company.
Personally I’m building “mains” as we speak. 3x12”. To impress the client lol. And I have some tiny Genelecs and also some old Tannoys just to be sure.