Hello:
Can anyone direct me to ideas for DIY studio monitors?
I will be using anyone of the following amplifiers:
Leach 4.5
ESP P101
ESP P3A
I have considered several options:
ProAc 2.5 Clones
-Scan-Speak 18W 8535-00
-Scan-Speak D2010 8513
Bottlehead Straight 8
-16 ohm speakers for Single Ended Tube Amps-300B, 2A3, etc.
-8 MCM 55-1870 woofers-baskets are dampened and cones coated with varnish
-1 MCM 53-325 tweeter
Sessions Studio Monitor
-AudioXpress magazine November and Decmber 2001 issues
-2 Scan-Speak 15W8530K
-1 SEAS E-11
-1 unknown woofer
Thanks
K
Can anyone direct me to ideas for DIY studio monitors?
I will be using anyone of the following amplifiers:
Leach 4.5
ESP P101
ESP P3A
I have considered several options:
ProAc 2.5 Clones
-Scan-Speak 18W 8535-00
-Scan-Speak D2010 8513
Bottlehead Straight 8
-16 ohm speakers for Single Ended Tube Amps-300B, 2A3, etc.
-8 MCM 55-1870 woofers-baskets are dampened and cones coated with varnish
-1 MCM 53-325 tweeter
Sessions Studio Monitor
-AudioXpress magazine November and Decmber 2001 issues
-2 Scan-Speak 15W8530K
-1 SEAS E-11
-1 unknown woofer
Thanks
K
I would be using them as main monitors (far field). I already have near field home stereo type monitors (NS10s).
The Straight 8 is a line array, but it has received major praise for its coherency and transparent sound. Bottlehead is no longer selling them but apparently they have already been used by several recording studios as their main monitors. I am interested in them primarily due to their price and ease of construction. Also the advantage to the Straight 8 and the ProAc 2.5 is that a sub-woofer is not required for full frequency representation.
Thanks
K
The Straight 8 is a line array, but it has received major praise for its coherency and transparent sound. Bottlehead is no longer selling them but apparently they have already been used by several recording studios as their main monitors. I am interested in them primarily due to their price and ease of construction. Also the advantage to the Straight 8 and the ProAc 2.5 is that a sub-woofer is not required for full frequency representation.
Thanks
K
Sorry, Sreten. I must disagree with you there. I may be a novice in speaker DIY-ing, but I've worked in studios for a number of years (and still do).
NS-10 may not be the most linear speaker on the market, but they are quite suitable to make really good mixes - *IF* you know what you're listening to. You have to know them (and any other speaker, for that matter) inside and out if you want to be able to make a decent mix on them. The fact that they sound less then ideal makes them very useful as a "sub-standard" reference - they sound somewhat like a large tv set or cheap hifi. Which is useful, so you can make your mixes sound good on those systems too. They have been used for years as a standard for a reason.
NS-10 aren't always used by them selves. I've used them for a while next to active nearfields - Tannoy, Genelec, pmc... The NS-10's were able to reveal things I didn't immediately hear on the other speakers. Resonance in the mid-bass range, for example. The mix sounded okay on the tannoys, but really cluttered on the ns-10. I turned down mid bass a little, which made the mix sound well balanced on the ns-10. On the tannoys the mix now sounded just right - everything fell into place just a little better. If you can get your mix to sound good on NS-10's, you can be pretty sure it sounds good anywhere else.
[EDIT:] On top of that, off-axis response generally is not much of an issue in studio's, because most of the time, you'll be working in the sweet-spot.
NS-10 may not be the most linear speaker on the market, but they are quite suitable to make really good mixes - *IF* you know what you're listening to. You have to know them (and any other speaker, for that matter) inside and out if you want to be able to make a decent mix on them. The fact that they sound less then ideal makes them very useful as a "sub-standard" reference - they sound somewhat like a large tv set or cheap hifi. Which is useful, so you can make your mixes sound good on those systems too. They have been used for years as a standard for a reason.
NS-10 aren't always used by them selves. I've used them for a while next to active nearfields - Tannoy, Genelec, pmc... The NS-10's were able to reveal things I didn't immediately hear on the other speakers. Resonance in the mid-bass range, for example. The mix sounded okay on the tannoys, but really cluttered on the ns-10. I turned down mid bass a little, which made the mix sound well balanced on the ns-10. On the tannoys the mix now sounded just right - everything fell into place just a little better. If you can get your mix to sound good on NS-10's, you can be pretty sure it sounds good anywhere else.
[EDIT:] On top of that, off-axis response generally is not much of an issue in studio's, because most of the time, you'll be working in the sweet-spot.
quamen,
I had the Rod Elliot P3A, with ProAc Response "2.95" clone.
Great amp and speakers, but too big for near field use!
I think an 8530K based speaker would be nice. Compact, killer bass, great mids. Low sensitivity but who cares- you're sitting close!
This would be nice first choice in a compact 2 way, in the price-no-concern class.
Troels has a design for it with the SS 9700 tweeter...
I had the Rod Elliot P3A, with ProAc Response "2.95" clone.
Great amp and speakers, but too big for near field use!
I think an 8530K based speaker would be nice. Compact, killer bass, great mids. Low sensitivity but who cares- you're sitting close!
This would be nice first choice in a compact 2 way, in the price-no-concern class.
Troels has a design for it with the SS 9700 tweeter...
Yes sorry, i see he said line array, in the pa world these are becoming "the thing" the trouble is they don't work! well let me clarify that . if you had an area outside with NO air movement, then they would sound fine, but as anyone who has listened to concerts knows, this happens very rarely. So you get air movement which upsets the clever physics which allows them to work in the first place which results in huge gaps in the frequency range, as the drivers lose the ability to couple correctly.
Jamesblond said:
Hi,
In terms of hi-fi you are totally agreeing with me, not disagreeing.
Used on their own for tonal balance without other references the
NS-10s are hopelessly inaccurate.
Regarding on top of that :
You said you wanted a far field monitor. Means to me a normal
position for a listener in a normal room. The off axis behaviour is
one of the critical factors in determining the percieved frequency
balance at the listening position.
/sreten.
I see your point. However, I judge studio monitors not on soundquality, but on efficiency and ease of use as a tool. Sure - soundquality is an important aspect, but in the end the result is what matters. If you can deliver with a speaker like the NS-10, then the NS-10 is suited for the job. Even though there are better sounding alternatives.
For my own project I have completely different standards. Those speakers will be used for Hifi use, not for mixing. I want something that I like the sound of (and I am picky, unfortunately). Fact is that I have no experience in building and designing loudspeakers, so I appreciate any info and help on that subject. But I think that designing hifi and using studiomonitors are two different things. I can imagine that studio monitors are designed for a different purpose. I might be wrong though, since high end Hifi has pretty high standards aswell. Once again: I judge studiomonitors by efficiency as a tool, not by their "enjoyment-factor" in a home situation. I hope you get what I'm trying to say.
For my own project I have completely different standards. Those speakers will be used for Hifi use, not for mixing. I want something that I like the sound of (and I am picky, unfortunately). Fact is that I have no experience in building and designing loudspeakers, so I appreciate any info and help on that subject. But I think that designing hifi and using studiomonitors are two different things. I can imagine that studio monitors are designed for a different purpose. I might be wrong though, since high end Hifi has pretty high standards aswell. Once again: I judge studiomonitors by efficiency as a tool, not by their "enjoyment-factor" in a home situation. I hope you get what I'm trying to say.
Jamesblond,
I've worked in a studio too. And to be honest, there are all KINDS of studio monitors. The ones to mix on really depends on the target audience.
At the studio I was in, after you finish your recording, to get an idea of how they will sound on your average boombox or car stereo, we play them back on the crappy speakers. We even had little Bose speakers to get a feel on how they'd sound on crappy little clock radio speakers.
But of course when we are finalising acoustic music eg. classical, jazz etc, we make sure they sound good on the large full range speakers. We want the illusion of reality.
In the ideal world everyone has speakers that play from
30Hz to 20Khz +/- 0.5dB with superb polar response, extremely low harmonic distortion and able to hit 120+ dB transients effortlessly at the listening position. But that's not the reality.
The general public generally doesn't really care, buys all kinds of junk that fits there living spaces and purse sizes. Probably less than 1% have really good speakers that can give the illusion of the real thing.
Most large studios that have multiple rooms have a great variation in monitors. This allows the audio engineer to get a feel for what the music will sound like at home.
Now I know why the average bubble-gum pop music that sounds great at my gym boombox over the radio sounds absolutely crap I listen on my favourite floorstanders.
The idea of building that LAST PERFECT speaker, that sounds great on all kinds of music is an illusion. But it keeps us in the hobby.
I've worked in a studio too. And to be honest, there are all KINDS of studio monitors. The ones to mix on really depends on the target audience.
At the studio I was in, after you finish your recording, to get an idea of how they will sound on your average boombox or car stereo, we play them back on the crappy speakers. We even had little Bose speakers to get a feel on how they'd sound on crappy little clock radio speakers.
But of course when we are finalising acoustic music eg. classical, jazz etc, we make sure they sound good on the large full range speakers. We want the illusion of reality.
In the ideal world everyone has speakers that play from
30Hz to 20Khz +/- 0.5dB with superb polar response, extremely low harmonic distortion and able to hit 120+ dB transients effortlessly at the listening position. But that's not the reality.
The general public generally doesn't really care, buys all kinds of junk that fits there living spaces and purse sizes. Probably less than 1% have really good speakers that can give the illusion of the real thing.
Most large studios that have multiple rooms have a great variation in monitors. This allows the audio engineer to get a feel for what the music will sound like at home.
Now I know why the average bubble-gum pop music that sounds great at my gym boombox over the radio sounds absolutely crap I listen on my favourite floorstanders.
The idea of building that LAST PERFECT speaker, that sounds great on all kinds of music is an illusion. But it keeps us in the hobby.
hey
i wanted to say that the off axis response of a speaker is very important in determining what you will listen on axis. In fact, in most rooms, reflected sound is the half of the information your ears will get.
Good Studio monitors are often conceived as to have a "narrower" dispersion that hi fi speakers have, and constant directivity. This allows the amount of early reflections to be greatly inferior, and then to ear more what's on the recording, without extensive room treatment.
Yamaha NS-10 is not conceived like that , and is not a good monitor in any respect.
What you are saying about the ns10, is right, but I always wondered something, being familliar to sound engineering, but not an engineer myself : Why use a NS10 when you can just buy a sony boombox that will cost, let's say 10x times less money ?
The truth is you need to hear a mix on 2 or 3 speakers, and then, even if none of them is accurate, you will be able,if you are a good engineer, to deduce what you recording sound like. In fact, in good studios, as said before, there's always more than just a good pair of monitor.
The Other truth is that it is much easier to work if you have , for monitoring, a system that is having good frequency response from 30hz to 20000 hz, constant directivity from the lowest frequency possible (depends on the size of the monitors and technology), low harmonic distortion, and excellent dynamic capability.
A ns-10 fullfils none of theses conditions and sounds terrible.
So if i was you, instead of an "exotic" or "hi fi" system, i would build something along the lines of good studio monitors, or hi-fi systems conceived along the lines of controlled directivity
A few examples :
SP technology speakers
Genelec 1037C
Gedlee Summa cum laude
The only diy "kit" that i know that fullfils some of the requirments :
zaph's waveguide TMM
i wanted to say that the off axis response of a speaker is very important in determining what you will listen on axis. In fact, in most rooms, reflected sound is the half of the information your ears will get.
Good Studio monitors are often conceived as to have a "narrower" dispersion that hi fi speakers have, and constant directivity. This allows the amount of early reflections to be greatly inferior, and then to ear more what's on the recording, without extensive room treatment.
Yamaha NS-10 is not conceived like that , and is not a good monitor in any respect.
What you are saying about the ns10, is right, but I always wondered something, being familliar to sound engineering, but not an engineer myself : Why use a NS10 when you can just buy a sony boombox that will cost, let's say 10x times less money ?
The truth is you need to hear a mix on 2 or 3 speakers, and then, even if none of them is accurate, you will be able,if you are a good engineer, to deduce what you recording sound like. In fact, in good studios, as said before, there's always more than just a good pair of monitor.
The Other truth is that it is much easier to work if you have , for monitoring, a system that is having good frequency response from 30hz to 20000 hz, constant directivity from the lowest frequency possible (depends on the size of the monitors and technology), low harmonic distortion, and excellent dynamic capability.
A ns-10 fullfils none of theses conditions and sounds terrible.
So if i was you, instead of an "exotic" or "hi fi" system, i would build something along the lines of good studio monitors, or hi-fi systems conceived along the lines of controlled directivity
A few examples :
SP technology speakers
Genelec 1037C
Gedlee Summa cum laude
The only diy "kit" that i know that fullfils some of the requirments :
zaph's waveguide TMM
The reason so many studio's have NS-10's is because it is a standard. Boomboxes come in all sorts of types and versions, whereas there is only one NS-10. The only thing that can change the sound of NS-10's somewhat, is the amp that drives them. The same goes for Auratones - a small, one driver, "widerange" system. Narrow- or midrange would be more accurate, because they too sound like crap. But, as with the NS-10, if a mix sounds good on those, you can bet anything that it will sound good anywhere.
As for acoustics: controlrooms in studio's are acoustically treated to have as little problems with reflections and diffractions as possible. They are by no means comparable to a listening room or living room in your average home. Orcourse, studio's sounds different, but all (well designed studio's) have only a fraction of the acoustic problems a normal home has.
As for acoustics: controlrooms in studio's are acoustically treated to have as little problems with reflections and diffractions as possible. They are by no means comparable to a listening room or living room in your average home. Orcourse, studio's sounds different, but all (well designed studio's) have only a fraction of the acoustic problems a normal home has.
Attachments
Speaking of Straight 8's (referenced in the beginning of the thread), I was wondering if there was some type of clone or design available somewhere? Not that I want to steal Doc's wonderful design, would just love to build a pair for myself. I have heard many great things about them and would love to have a set for myself. Plus I have never really listened to line arrays before.
Or if anyone has a suggestion for a set set that can be built cheaply (tight buget these days), please pass the word along. Feel free to email me direct if you like.
Thanks,
Wayne Boyd
Or if anyone has a suggestion for a set set that can be built cheaply (tight buget these days), please pass the word along. Feel free to email me direct if you like.
Thanks,
Wayne Boyd
As I have often noticed, the worlds of recording and the audiophile never seem to combine. This is to say that the average audiophile has very little knowledge about how music is recorded and what equipment is used to record what. The reverse is true in that recording professionals often know little about the audiophile world.
For example, most "audiophiles" would argue night and day about how crappy the NE5532 opamp is. Yet they don't know that SSL recording consoles (used to record countless records) are full of NE5532/5534 opamps.
My mention of NS10s is to tell the board what I have. NS10 are a good "reference" because most people listen to music on speakers that resemble the NS10. Crappy factory car stereos, clock radios, TV's, boom-boxes, . .. this was mentioned before.
What I am inquiring about is a FULL FREQUENCY REFERENCE STUDIO MONITOR that I can build myself. This is because I can't afford a set of Duntech Sovereigns. SO I would like to build something close (or as close as possible with a small budget).
Any suggestions other than the ones mentioned?
By the way, I have plans/schematics for the Straight 8s. All of the info is on the web, you just have to search for it. The cabinet design is simple. The biggest mystery is the speaker cage dampening and the cone coating. But its easy to figure out. Its all hidden the Bottlehead forum at the Audio Asylum site. There are also some websites that show the construction process. I backwards engineered the Foreplay Preamp and Seduction Phono by doing the same thing. Bottlehead kits are about 50% profit or more.
For example, most "audiophiles" would argue night and day about how crappy the NE5532 opamp is. Yet they don't know that SSL recording consoles (used to record countless records) are full of NE5532/5534 opamps.
My mention of NS10s is to tell the board what I have. NS10 are a good "reference" because most people listen to music on speakers that resemble the NS10. Crappy factory car stereos, clock radios, TV's, boom-boxes, . .. this was mentioned before.
What I am inquiring about is a FULL FREQUENCY REFERENCE STUDIO MONITOR that I can build myself. This is because I can't afford a set of Duntech Sovereigns. SO I would like to build something close (or as close as possible with a small budget).
Any suggestions other than the ones mentioned?
By the way, I have plans/schematics for the Straight 8s. All of the info is on the web, you just have to search for it. The cabinet design is simple. The biggest mystery is the speaker cage dampening and the cone coating. But its easy to figure out. Its all hidden the Bottlehead forum at the Audio Asylum site. There are also some websites that show the construction process. I backwards engineered the Foreplay Preamp and Seduction Phono by doing the same thing. Bottlehead kits are about 50% profit or more.
Hi Q,
I know its frustrating when respondants start arguing
amongst themselves and lose sight of the original post.
The straight 8's like I said I couldn't recommend.
They will play loud and are sensitive but the converse of this
is a distance dependent balance and bugger all bass extension.
(unless you EQ it)
Take a look round this site :
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
/sreten.
I know its frustrating when respondants start arguing
amongst themselves and lose sight of the original post.
The straight 8's like I said I couldn't recommend.
They will play loud and are sensitive but the converse of this
is a distance dependent balance and bugger all bass extension.
(unless you EQ it)
Take a look round this site :
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
/sreten.Hi Q,
I know its frustrating when respondants start arguing
amongst themselves and lose sight of the original post.
The straight 8's like I said I couldn't recommend.
They will play loud and are sensitive but the converse of this
is a distance dependent balance and no real bass extension.
(unless you EQ it)
Take a look round this site :
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
/sreten.
I know its frustrating when respondants start arguing
amongst themselves and lose sight of the original post.
The straight 8's like I said I couldn't recommend.
They will play loud and are sensitive but the converse of this
is a distance dependent balance and no real bass extension.
(unless you EQ it)
Take a look round this site :
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
/sreten.Thanks for the suggestion on the website. I had found it a few days ago when I was researching the ProAc 2.5. The site has a 43 page paper on modificaions to the ProAc 2.5 clone. The mods address the tweeter, either the D2010/8513 or the D2905/9500. It also goes into great detail about the standard clone, the clone with a modified 8513 and the clone with 9500. Very interesting reading.
The rest of the site is very interesting as well. The TJL and SP95 floorstanders my be other options. I think I should email Troels and ask him for a suggestion.
Any other suggestions?
The rest of the site is very interesting as well. The TJL and SP95 floorstanders my be other options. I think I should email Troels and ask him for a suggestion.
Any other suggestions?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.