When it comes to speaker selection and testing, I hope that people have come to realize that there is 'no free lunch' and every sort of speaker design has its good and bad characteristics, some of which might be forgotten, because other 'specs' appear to be so good.
Personally, from my experience, I think that 'time response' is not given enough importance, and that flat frequency response is over-stressed.
Personally, from my experience, I think that 'time response' is not given enough importance, and that flat frequency response is over-stressed.
The thing about frequency response is that the ear/brain can learn to compensate to some degree. That is why people can learn how to mix well using NS-10M speakers. One has to learn what a mix should sound like on the particular speaker.
OTOH, it doesn't seem to be equally possible for the ear/brain to learn how to compensate for less accurate time resolution.
All IMHO, of course.
OTOH, it doesn't seem to be equally possible for the ear/brain to learn how to compensate for less accurate time resolution.
All IMHO, of course.
Is a used NS-1000M (studio monitor) at eBay more accurate?
YAMAHA NS-1000MM 3-Way Closed-Type A+B From Japan with Tracking Number F/S (8) 4960693135501 | eBay
-RM
Last edited:
Unfortunately, no. Yamaha hasn't been able to hit another home run although they have tried.
Depends on the mechanism. A bell glued to a driver can't really be eq'ed out. Many driver resonance are like little bells that start ringing after the trigger has gone.
No magic to replace well engineered drivers.
I'm not sure what these are, but they're not NS-1000M's, which had beryllium mids and tweeters. Not bad in their day (late 1970's) - wish I'd kept mine.
My understanding of the beauty of the NS-10 was that if you mixed it to sound great on NS-10s it would sound quite good on most consumer systems, car radios and so on. It was a way to have an “intended audience reference”.
In other words it wasn’t to replace other monitors. Frequently in studios you would see big built-ins and then perched up on the console a beat up pair of NS-10s.
I’m curious what the technical similarities where that made it such a cult piece in studios at that time.
I agree with both JC and Scott on the merits of the Met-7s. Rather than knock its frequency response, get a pair and see what it is they are doing right.
I think we can all agree that we’ve heard speakers with very good frequency response and poor sound?
In other words it wasn’t to replace other monitors. Frequently in studios you would see big built-ins and then perched up on the console a beat up pair of NS-10s.
I’m curious what the technical similarities where that made it such a cult piece in studios at that time.
I agree with both JC and Scott on the merits of the Met-7s. Rather than knock its frequency response, get a pair and see what it is they are doing right.
I think we can all agree that we’ve heard speakers with very good frequency response and poor sound?
Last edited:
It was more like: if you make it sound decent on the NS-10 then you´re good, cause it will sound better on almost anything else
flat on axis freq response
flat off axis response to 90 degrees (-3dB)
flat power response
low distortion to 30Hz
high dynamic range
no compression at realistic spl
time aligned.
low and constant GD
near field listening distance.
You can put your own tolerances to those.... the tighter, the more accurate.
In a small foot print would be hard --- don't know.... would have to give up too much IMO. I have not owned a small speaker system in decades..... limited dynamic range, limited low end, -- I would try to find ones only designed for high accuracy monitors of 2-way and listen in near-field only.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I must disagree. Flat SPL and flat power response will almost certainly have way too much energy in the all too important region of 2-5kHz. For speakers to sound natural, this region should be relaxed by a couple of dB. BBC and Linkwitz is correct from my experience. Mics and speakers are much more directional than human ears. A live event recorded with directional mics and played back on directional speakers will not sound natural and will not sound the same as if a human ear heard it live to begin with. Unless of course the mix was made on those speakers and the engineer applied a BBC EQ. But 90% of the time, better not to have so much energy in that region.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.