Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

@brianlucey

Your idea of being qualified is you have ears and are over 41? Right.

2. A studio engineer needs 3 pair? Not if they mix Atmos.

3. Speakers are in their infancy? Are you shopping at Best Buy? As for amps, some feel we are going backward, look at how much classic tube amps sell for today.

4. The last 30 years powered monitors use cheap amps? Wrong. Cheap powered monitors use cheap amps. If you want powered monitors with good amps call Sweetwater, they’ll sell em to you by the dozen.

5. Why do you care if someone has budget? Do you think if you close your eyes and wish Santa will bring you something LOL.

6. Your from Ohio? Like, is that an ID? So where are your mythical "best components" or are you waiting for Santa. If you want to be all that you gotta bring it, post your virtual system, otherwise it is just another month to Christmas LOL.

Your advanced software? That explains everything, you got software, Bill Gates watch out. LAMO

@brianlucey

These setups use the same specs I do (see my profile), 9 bed channels, front and rear heights, center height, and VOG. THIS is why we ALL need 17+ speakers, SPECS.

Abbey Road using Neumann ACTIVE monitors (with cheap amps inside LOL) mixing Pink Floyd in immersive audio.

Sony’s Mixstage:

Floyd Tooles home system

Grammy winner Jeff Balding with those crappy amp Genelecs in his Nashville studio and MORE than six speakers, let him know you will take away his Grammys for breaking the 6 speaker rule LOL

,

@brianlucey

Super cool you worked with Pink Floyd, so much creative engineering on those albums. I really didn’t mean to brag about budget I just meant I didn’t worry about the money and I could have gotten more expensive monitors but my room is not really that big and larger monitors were not needed. I didn’t actually like hearing Genelec monitors in the past I made my decision to buy them because of the design philosophy of Genelec and the physical point source design of the speakers. Originally my mixing room was going to be in a smaller space that sounded awful, the acoustic changes that I would have had to make were more expensive than simply moving buildings. I thought well I love my room at home so why not. I was never a fan of Tannoy and Uri when they had their concentric tweeter and midrange drivers but when I heard these Genelecs I knew they got it right. It’s very interesting to listen to the mixing system then the home theater system there is no comparison as to which one sounds better the home theater is a different world but it’s super flavored ice cream and as you know through Pink Floyd the technology changes over the years. It is best to mix flat and accurately without the loudness button pushed because that may be the flavor of the listening public of the day.

The drawings that you provided are turning out to be changing, I have my Atmos system in my listening room 90 degrees from my music system this was really strange acoustically but it worked surprising well (I actually have some more dialing in to finish) but originally I bought all the hardware to put the speakers in the exact proper positions and angles then I read a few cutting edge articles and decided to put the speakers up in a non symmetric configuration because my head position can’t tell the difference between a front surround or a rear surround coming at the same opposite angle on the same side. The problem with this philosophy is that it’s not flat and may not be reproducible in other mixing rooms which is the original reason why I bought a flat system in the first place. Love to hear some stories about mixing Pink Floyd.

@brianlucey 

Oops I guess you didn't work with Pink Floyd I misread your post. Their team to me may be some of the greatest music mixers ever. 

You definitely need lots of speaker to mix Dolby Atmos you can do 5.1 but 7.1.4 is probably best. It is only a matter of time before 2 channel systems are changed to surround systems for music, it's already happening. At an AES convention a few years ago there was a vendor with software that let you use however many speakers you wanted in a surround configuration there was no limit because the outcome is object based and speakers equal resolution In that case. In real life all sounds are point sources but we hear nearly as much information from the first reflections as the original point source this is why acoustic is more important than most people think. 

@donavabdear I’m happy to see that you’re excited about the new format, I work in every week.I have a very high-end atmos and stereo room, and the only analog hardware focused, mastering Atmos room in the world at the moment.

Going back to your point it just doesn’t make any sense, the speakers you’re using are not anything special. If you think those are amazing, you’re not in any position to criticize any audiophiles for doing anything. I’m certainly not criticizing your speakers I’m saying that our evolution with understanding what’s possible or desired from a speaker is very personal and we always think we know everything at the moment we are in, and then things evolve.

Atmos doesn’t need special speakers what it needs most is cohesion. That can come from a balance of measurements and DSP, all depending on the hardware you’re using to run the system. And it needs good headphones. The beauty of Atmos is that it is the evolution of headphones. Atmos done well is superior to stereo and headphones, it’s a very rare bird right now, but overtime there will be more and more of it. The speaker component is fun and exciting and it’s a bonus, but it’s not the main benefit to Atmos, that would be headphones.

Am headed back into the studio right now to work on the biggest song of one of the decades last century :) ... enjoy your speakers, but try not to put people down, it really doesn’t make sense at all.