Who says studio monitors are "cold and analytical"?

Kenjit

NO.   A Designer knows what he wants before he ever puts pen to paper.  He doesn't need to try caps in crossover, he knows what values equal a given result.  You really believe speakers are designed in a hunt and peck fashion?  A designer may adjust a few things if they don't work precisely the way he thought, but there is no "tuning like a piano".  The only way this trial and error method of creating something happens is if the builder/designer is completely untrained and is fishing for some combo that "works" by ear.  This is NOT how modern speakers are designed - not in this day and age of klippel and CAD.  

Studio people work for the music creators.  I can assure you, because I know them and visit them/talk to them, the engineers that work for people like Tom Petty or Pink Floyd spend many many hours getting the sound just right, so the artist is happy.  It must sound amazing or they are fired.  Unless you want to make some ill founded argument the artist doesn't know what he or she wants, or some other equally inane argument that the artist wants their mix to sound bad, these engineers spend enormous time just getting the sound to be right.  You absolutely have no idea what you are talking about. Stop confusing people with this made up crap, pretending you have some special insight.  

Most studio monitors are rubbish for enjoyment. Both audiophiles and studio Pros agree on that at least

@kenjit Uh, no.  No they absolutely do not and I’ve no idea where you’d even get any such data to support this except in your own mind.  I had the pleasure of meeting/speaking at length with one of ATC’s top engineers and nowhere in that conversation did he say their speakers were rubbish for enjoyment, and the fact that their speakers are revered globally as both studio and home monitors would greatly refute your misguided contention.

There are some speakers such as B&W nautilus that are marketed as both audiophile and studio speakers hence they are used by both sides of the market.

But, if as you maintain studio monitors are designed to be flat and don’t sound good then B&W speakers must be bad studio monitors.  Same with ATC, PMC, etc.  Can’t have your argument both ways.

As usual, once kenjit’s “theories” are examined at all they devolve into unsupported circular logic that, much like toilet water, circles the bowl and eventually just ends up in the sewer where it belongs.  But, wait to hear him double down on his garbage with further unsupported circular logic.  Thus why kenjit is so beloved here.  Ugh. 

Has anyone ever seen kenjit and MC st the same time?

@soix 

But, if as you maintain studio monitors are designed to be flat and don’t sound good then B&W speakers must be bad studio monitors.  Same with ATC, PMC, etc.  Can’t have your argument both ways.

Im not having it both ways. Youre just misinterpreting me. The term studio monitor is just marketing speak. As I stated earlier there is no such thing as a studio monitor. All speakers are made in the same way using the same parts. The only difference is the way they are tuned. That is one big reason some speakers sound the way they do. Now what I am saying is most of these speakers that are labelled as studio monitors, are in fact tuned excessively flat. As we all know this is WRONG. Some speaker companies like ATC or PMC dont fit the mould because they have a foot in both camps. One in the audiophile market and the other in the Pro audio market. So THEY are the ones having it both ways not me. 

I had the pleasure of meeting/speaking at length with one of ATC’s top engineers and nowhere in that conversation did he say their speakers were rubbish for enjoyment,

That is because 1) they have a foot in both camps and 2) No company would criticize their own products would they?

If you want a less biased opinion you would need to see posts like this from audiosciencereview. Here is one post about those horrendous ATC speakers:

I’ve seen measurements for four ATC models, ranging from cheap to expensive. All measured poorly.

1 fail out of 1 might be bad luck. 2 of 2 I’d call an indication. 4 messes out of 4 suggests failings of a more systematic nature, IMO.
Finally (and I don’t expect you to place any stock in this last point, obviously) I’ve heard the SCM2000ASL in an excellent room and was unimpressed (although admittedly it‘a the only speaker I’ve heard in that particular studio)

Taken from here: 

So in conclusion he found that the ATC not only measured poorly despite being so called studio monitors but also sounded horrific. I can also attest to that too. I have heard ATC and not been impressed. They are WRONG. Just trust me.

The Master has spoken.

Ah, ASR reviews....the plot sickens.