Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: "Soundhaspriority" <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 01:09:02 -0400
"Chris Hornbeck" <chrishornbeckremovethis@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0soh34hcmk5f6u53v8hq0k421e1g424pa2@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 23 May 2008 13:53:58 -0400, "Ethan Winer" <ethanw atI have a pair of Acoustat 2+2's, seven feet eight inches tall and 20 inches
ethanwiner dot com> wrote:
Scott,
They are way too forward for my personal taste
But that's my point. They are very flat. Most speakers have an intentional
response dip in the "harsh" range between 2 and 4 KHz. Even many pro
speakers. So they sound "smooth and airy" and by comparison Mackies sound
harsh. But the Mackies are more accurate.
Another thing complicating this range is that a crossover pretty
much *has* to fall here. The crossover itself adds a big change
in directivity and (usually) a significant tilt in the radiation
pattern through the crossover region.
All the crossover issues are just exaggerated by our hearing.
Yikes! but not a lot of getting around it; dimensions are
pretty much fixed by mechanical constraints (linearly moving
pistons, yada yada) and they fight against the desire to
make all drivers very small WRT wavelength for best radiation
patterns. Good numbers fall into this range.
Possible valid but mutually exclusive crossover designs might
have flat on-listening-axis magnitude response, or flat "power"
(summed response of all sound in the room) response, or some
compromise, or even some other design goal. A perfect solution
doesn't exist. Bummer, but that's the deal.
But to respond to Bob's OP, if you've got the dough-re-mi, try
to find a pair of Nearfield Acoustics Pipedreams to listen to.
Possibly next to unobtainium now, and more expensive than my
house when current (2000, 2001, etc.) but they made the big
Wilsons sound like loudspeakers. And they're "nearfield" at
10 feet away. NOT portable (without a crew of guys with prison
tat's, anyway).
wide, in my office. They are pure electrostats with no crossover. I could
set up displays between them and mix to them in near field. The problem
isn't finding the ultimate loudspeakers. The problem is that at over $4K a
pair, my Thiel CS2.3's are atypical even as concerns an average hifi setup.
The hifi system of the musically accomplished person who gave the mix a
thumbs down doesn't have the extension of the one I mixed to. Few systems
do. Even though I am a purist, I lose my audience if the mix pleases only
listeners with exotic all-metal driver speakers with first order crossovers.
Much thanks, as always,Knowledge is power. So it occurred to me that perhaps the next step should
be some MLSSA analysis. I'm looking at Professor Angelo Farina's software
http://www.aurora-plugins.com/Aurora_XP/index.htm
This is the plan: I'll install it on a laptop and get samples of different
hifi setups. The samples may point toward a golden mean. I'll eq the Thiels
to approximate it.
This is the tentative plan. Perhaps a producer will step forward with
insight that will allow me to sidetrack it.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Chris Hornbeck
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: hank alrich
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Chris Hornbeck
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- References:
- The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Soundhaspriority
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Ethan Winer
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Scott Dorsey
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Ethan Winer
- Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- From: Chris Hornbeck
- The most neutral monitors for mix?
- Prev by Date: Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- Next by Date: Re: amplifier redux
- Previous by thread: Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- Next by thread: Re: The most neutral monitors for mix?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading