2. speakers
  3. 1243863676

Underestimating the influence of studio monitors?

Every recording gets its final sonic signature from a recording engineer who listens to the recording through a pair (or more in case of mutli-channel) of studio monitors. In the face of that reality, the recordings we listen to at home are shaped by those very studio monitor speakers.

So, if the monitors used are inherently bright, the result in our home systems will sound slightly dull assuming that the engineer is adjusting the mix to sound "real" based on the sound coming from the monitors. If the monitor's bass doesn't extend to the lowest octave, then the result at home is likely to sound overblown in the bottom octave for this same reason. Likewise, if the monitor has a bass hump, then the final result may sound a bit bass-shy. Therefore, unless the studio monitor is completely neutral in tonal balance and covers the entire audible spectrum from low to high, the final recording will have some inappropriate signature based on its defficiencies.

I suppose the skill and experience of the recording mixing engineer can come into play if they know the defficiencies of the monitors themselves and compernsate accordingly in the mixdown but can we really count on this? What do you think?
krisjan
kirkus
502 posts
 
I suppose the skill and experience of the recording mixing engineer can come into play if they know the defficiencies of the monitors themselves and compernsate accordingly in the mixdown but can we really count on this?
It's all about skill and experience, all the time, period. Can we count on it? Er, we have no choice.

The recording/mastering engineer's tools (monitors, console, microphones, etc.) are the same thing for their art as the instrument for the instrumentalist. You could just as easily ask questions like "can a pianist ever get a light, delicate tone on a big Bosendorfer?" Or "can a flutist ever get quick, clean articulation on a heavy-wall Miramatsu?" Yes, there are some truly bad instruments out there, and some really amazing ones . . . but that's really not the point in the end.
rodman99999
6,202 posts
 
To add another variable to the previous valid points, re: Recording Engineers, their abilities, knowledge and monitors: (http://www.digido.com/honor-roll.html) (http://www.digido.com/level-practices-part-2-includes-the-k-system.html)
sthomas12321
408 posts
 
I have a recording studio.

Everyone has different tastes in mastering. Some like to bump the bass. Some like bright crisp high's. Ive always liked weight and slight warmth to the sound. I dont want it to be thin. I basically like a fat full sound, with no hint of muddiness, and a airy top end.

check out love songs, by warren hill, or born 2 groove by Eugo Groove. Great albums.
krisjan OP
100 posts
 
Sthomas - Yes, I get that. But you are missing my essential point (I think). You say you like weight and slight warmth in the sound. But what we hear in the home may not be what you want us to hear if your studio monitors are flawed in some way. If the monitors you use are already weighty and warm in nature then what we get will not be as warm and weighty as you foresaw. If your monitors happen to be a bit lean, them what we hear at home will be tilted too much towards weighty and warm. This means that the studio monitors must be as neutral and full frequency as possible for you particluar sound standard to be realized in our homes. Thanks for your comments.
More to discover