How do audition monitors with bias

[abt]

I was listening to some monitors the other day and I was finding it very hard not to get sucked in by monitors that sound good as opposed to monitors that are accurate.

For example I kept going back to Mackie HR824s. Apart from being physically too big for my space I couldn’t help thinking what made them sound nice was that the bottom end was somewhat hyped (I could be wrong here, flame away Mackie fans if you must!).

I also find myself leaning towards Dynaudio BM6A. Apart from being a great monitor I find myself influenced by their reputation. Sure, reputation is valuable when recommended by the right people, I guess what I’m saying is that it’s hard to be impartial.

I’ve read loads of information on this. There seems to be three approaches: 1. Do the right thing and write a good review for whoever paid for the article, 2. The scientific approach using test equipment to collect data on what the monitor is capable of, or 3. Field testing by someone who has there own tastes and opinions as to what a good monitor is.

I’m not being cynical, all are valid in some way, but it very hard to find information on choosing a monitoring system that is not heavily geared towards someone’s opinion of what a great brand of monitors is.

So at the end of the day what I’m asking is for help on how to listen to and test monitors. I’m working on a reference CD but even then I can’t help thinking that my frame of reference is coming from a pair of monitors that I don’t like hence why I’m changing them and I risk getting caught out by “these sound great” as opposed to “these sound accurate”.

 

[BLUElightCory]

The Mackies are actually exceptionally flat; the bass reproduction is just really good. I love mine, they translate well and they aren't overly flattering.

HR824 Frequency Response:

Any decent monitor will do the trick once you familiarize yourself with them. It's probably more important to have a good monitoring environment if you're going for accuracy.

 

[alan1990]

The Mackies are actually exceptionally flat; the bass reproduction is just really good. I love mine, they translate well and they aren't overly flattering.

HR824 Frequency Response:

Any decent monitor will do the trick once you familiarize yourself with them. It's probably more important to have a good monitoring environment if you're going for accuracy.

I would have to agree and add that I would much rather have a set of monitors that I like the sound of then ones that made my music sound too flat because what bands hear during tracking has a lot to do with the performance your going to get and the overall excitement of the session

 

[JeffTD]

Get the Dyn's, those Mackies blow REALLY hard.

 

[BLUElightCory]

Get the Dyn's, those Mackies blow REALLY hard.

And that's why there are thousands of people using them every day.

It's funny, I teach a recording class at SCC college here in AZ and the entire recording faculty prefers our HR824s over our ADAM S2.5A's (which cost three times as much as the Mackies or the Dynaudios).

I also personally have a set of HR824s and they get the job done every day.

 

[JeffTD]

And that's why there are thousands of people using them every day.

It's funny, I teach a recording class at SCC college here in AZ and the entire recording faculty prefers our HR824s over our ADAM S2.5A's (which cost three times as much as the Mackies or the Dynaudios).

I also personally have a set of HR824s and they get the job done every day.

Yeah, and McDonald's sells thousands of cheeseburgers everyday, which just proves that they sell great food.

I'm not going to sit here and debate about monitors, as they're pretty much a personal preference after a certain point, but I can't wait for the rest of basically the entire forum to come in and rag on the Mackies.

If your entire recording faculty honestly prefers the HR824's... I gotta say I don't have much faith in them.

My Klipsch 2.1 set gets the job done every day - I far prefer working on my A7's.

 

[abt]

ahh jes.. when I said flame away I meant at me not each other. I knew I should have written brand X or brand Y.

If people have opinions on what monitors are great then I'm happy to take it on board but that was not the point of my post. I want some pointers on how to pick good monitors by using my ears with out getting sidetrack by what’s good to listen to vs. what’s good to monitor on.

 

[BLUElightCory]

Yeah, and McDonald's sells thousands of cheeseburgers everyday, which just proves that they sell great food.

I'm not going to sit here and debate about monitors, as they're pretty much a personal preference after a certain point, but I can't wait for the rest of basically the entire forum to come in and rag on the Mackies.

If your entire recording faculty honestly prefers the HR824's... I gotta say I don't have much faith in them.

My Klipsch 2.1 set gets the job done every day - I far prefer working on my A7's.

This would be a really good point if the logic behind it wasn't totally flawed. McDonald's sells thousands of burgers because they're cheap (and therefore, available to any Joe Schmo who wants one). The HR824s are ubiquitous in modern studios NOT because they're inexpensive, but because they are good, reliable, accurate monitors with good enough low end response to not require a sub.

My issue is NOT that I think the HR824s are the best monitors on earth and the OP shouldn't consider anything else. My issue is that you're on here saying they "blow" when it's simply not true, no matter what our opinions may be. Notice I'm not sitting here saying "no way, Dynaudios and ADAM A7s totally suck," because they don't. It's like saying that the Shure SM57 "blows". It's not the best mic in the world, but if you can't get a decent sound out of it the gear isn't the problem. If you're having problems mixing on HR824s, it's not the monitors' fault.

As for our recording faculty, we consist of PhDs, Berkeley grads, Tape Op contributors, and Billboard-charters, so I think we have a rough idea of what we're doing. I'm not trying to pump up our faculty but I'm definitely going to stand up for our program. Most of us (myself included) are professional engineers who run our own facilities and take the time to teach classes a few hours a week so that we can help people learn not to be shitty engineers.

I hate internet arguments that go around in circles, so this will be my last post on this topic. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

To the O.P., follow your gut instinct on this. Once you get to the level of the 824s/Dynaudios/etc. you really can't go wrong.

That's all! Love you guys.

 

[Nebulous]

To be able to honestly chose a monitor to suit your preferences you would have to take them all home or to your studio and test them out there IMO. The reason being that you would be in a room which you're use to and will ultimately work in.

When out shopping for monitors spend "enough time" with each one to get use to what you're hearing. Listen long enough for the honeymoon period to start to wear so that you can begin to concentrate on the details. Also try to listen to the speakers in more than just the sweet spot: try to get a grasp of the room's balance that you're listeing in. If it sounds a bit boxy overall then those monitors that sound bass heavy may just be what you want in a balanced room.

Are you looking for good depth, sharp transient response, flat or plesant to listen to, etc? Are your expecations or requirements something which your budget will allow?

It's certainly easy to get carried away by hyped lows or forward high mids. Give yourself enough time to encounter fatigue. Make a (mental or otherwise) list of what you like about a certain monitor and balance them against each other. At the end of the day, you're the one who has to work with the monitors, so there is no use in getting eg: NS10's if you can take listening to them for more than 5 minutes.

That's where other peoples recommendations should be thrown out the window and you should trust your ears.

 

[abt]

To be able to honestly chose a monitor to suit your preferences you would have to take them all home or to your studio and test them out there IMO. The reason being that you would be in a room which you're use to and will ultimately work in.

When out shopping for monitors spend "enough time" with each one to get use to what you're hearing. Listen long enough for the honeymoon period to start to wear so that you can begin to concentrate on the details. Also try to listen to the speakers in more than just the sweet spot: try to get a grasp of the room's balance that you're listeing in. If it sounds a bit boxy overall then those monitors that sound bass heavy may just be what you want in a balanced room.

Are you looking for good depth, sharp transient response, flat or plesant to listen to, etc? Are your expecations or requirements something which your budget will allow?

It's certainly easy to get carried away by hyped lows or forward high mids. Give yourself enough time to encounter fatigue. Make a (mental or otherwise) list of what you like about a certain monitor and balance them against each other. At the end of the day, you're the one who has to work with the monitors, so there is no use in getting eg: NS10's if you can take listening to them for more than 5 minutes.

That's where other peoples recommendations should be thrown out the window and you should trust your ears.

Thanks Mate. Some really good ideas here, I will try to employ them when I'm out hunting next.

 

[Nebulous]

Also one thing I like to do when listening to a new pair of monitors for the first time is to have more than one reference song/ CD. When I first got my HS80M's the first things I listened to where some Sneap and Nordstrom mixes. The Sneap mixes were as I remembered, Clayman was also good but sounded a little flatter than usual and then Nightrage's Sweet Vengance fell completely appart.

This made me reaslise that these monitors were going to tell me when something sounded good, and when it needed work- and fit my budget.

 

[greyskull]

mmm gonna have to say that i strongly disagree with that graph of the Mackies.
I found them really quite scooped in the mids,
Very fatiguing and translated poorly.
Far prefer my A7s
but hey beauty is in the ear of the beholder.
The dont do it for me.

 

[Jind]

To each his own I say - every single monitor owner has a bias towards a particular brand or aspirations to get something else other than what they already have (if money was not a consideration) - it's the never ending cycle of equipment.

It seems at a base level to be really about learning how the monitors you own behave in "your" environment. Yes, some monitors are flatter than others for sure, but the most expensive flat monitors and shitty environment is still going to result in probable issues in a mix. I think we all work to adjust to our own monitoring environment and our monitors whatever brand or expense level they are (all the while waiting for the day that we can afford to upgrade what we currently have .)

Considering very few people who post mixes in the "Rate my Mix/Song" section list their monitors in what they used to make that mix it is to be assumed that they get by with what they have and produce so kick ass mixes. We worry more about signal chains, plugins used, pickups, amps, real drums/fake drums/sampled drums, than we do what monitors they used.

So use what you have, get what you can afford, keep feeding the never ending cycle of GAS!!!!!