Why Do Audio Engineers Use Different Speakers?

I use Altec 604-8G studio monitors (1975) with a pair of McIntosh tube monos and to me they reproduce music very well. Very realistic to my ears. I guess that is why there are so many manufacturers of speakers. I believe a great deal of the music from the 50-70s were mastered using Altec 604. Since most of the music I enjoy is from that era, they just sound right to me. I can and do listen for hours.

I am no speaker expert, far from it actually. But I do know what sounds good to me and falls within my budget.

David Gilmour also uses Shunyata as do many other studios.

=> your friend is wrong about this point.

One question that comes to mind in this discussion is that if the engineer uses such different equipment/speakers (relative to an audiophile) & optimizes the sound based on very different speakers...then is it dumb luck (most likely not) that a recording sounds great on audiophile setups?

I'm in RDE in a different industry...in my world the base references you use for an optimization makes the optimal end-result somewhat unique. I.e. if I apply the optimal end result conditions to another base reference the new end result is less than optimal. I would espect the same to be true in the studio-monitor mix vs audiophile playback case. No?

Fishboat,

if the engineer uses such different equipment/speakers (relative to an audiophile) & optimizes the sound based on very different speakers...

Then it will not sound the same...yes this is a big problem. However most engineers know how to "dumb down" the sound to make it work on ordinary systems....this mostly requires judicious use of compression so that the dynamic range is not as great as real music. Engineers will often check that the mix translates by playing it on the way home in a car or on cheap speakers like Yamaha NS10's.

Fishboat - you hit the conundrum on the head. Layers of sound, room ambience, fast transients, rock steady pinpoint imaging.

Many of these "desirable" audiophile characteristics can only exist in a live, one take environment. Anything else is simply an illusion - however convincing - created by a (talented) engineer.

Recording is a craft and IMHO the best craftsmen are those who use the least gear - historically the guys working classical and acoustic.

The development of multi-track decks and multiple take/punch in techniques together with the compression applied to make up for poor musicianship and mike placement does not result in layers of effortless sound...

in fact a lot of what we hear in that kind of work reflects references no one wants to talk about: the saturation levels of audio tape, the sound of recording equipment distorting, the degradation of less then perfectly made dubs.

I think the variety of hardware reflects the inherent dualism of our community. Some of us like gear that reveals every detail because the fun is isolating the details - oh look the back wall; while others listen to immerse themselves in music for catharsis or escape.