@retiredfarmer Wrote:
Well there are a lot of different speakers made and only a few of them are worth owning. I don't find pmc,b&w or atc ones that I want to own.
I agree!
Mike
Who says studio monitors are "cold and analytical"?
Who says studio monitors are "cold and analytical"? Does that mean audiophile speakers are warm/colored and distorted? If Studio Monitors main goal is low distortion, does that mean low distortion is not something audiophiles want? They want what, high distortion? "Pretty" sounding distortion? Or find pretty sounding speakers that make bad recordings sound really good? What is the point of searching out good recordings then? They won't sound as intended on a highly colored distorted speaker!
@retiredfarmer Wrote:
I agree! Mike |
@kenjit you said: “Its just WRONG. Dont be afraid to say it. There is no such thing as analytical. A speaker needs to reproduce the input signal. Either its right or wrong. Dont give me this hogwash about it being analytical or accurate or pleasing. I like to think in terms of is it RIGHT? or is it WRONG?” totally again put your foot in your mouth. You constantly talk about tuning to one’s ears. Now it’s you think about things in right and wrong, black and white. You a dummy boy. |
The first key statement in this, and is endemic of all of @kenjit posts is the part of “According to discussions I’ve read…”. That’s pretty much all ya need to know. Why? Because according to kenjit all speakers are trash and are fatally flawed. Note, he NEVER lists components in his own system. Why? Because that would pin him down and hold him accountable for his own ridiculous statements. As for the rest of this absurd statement I’m not even gonna waste my time. He’s trying to infer speakers are only constructed by engineers OR audiophiles, and I think that’s silly because all speaker designers are ,of necessity, both. If u guys wanna continue to read more of kenjit’s backfilling and circular reasoning go ahead but I’m done. Anything else he says from here you can reference my earlier retorts and see why they’re complete BS, but I refuse to waste anymore of my time on this. Someone else can retort and state kenjit’s obvious contradictions. Good luck with that, and Peace Out and Happy Hollidays to all. Yes, even kenjit. |
Pro engineers care about translation. They want their mix to sound good on other systems. That’s why the NS-10s became a standard - if a mix sounded good on them, it was going to sound good everywhere. Generally speaking, pro engineers want highly revealing speakers. They don’t want "bad sounding" speakers. But their goal is clarity above all else. NS-10s aren't really a standard anymore - what is more common is to have a pair of great speakers like PMCs or ATCs and then check your mix occasionally on a crappy speaker called an Auratone. Mastering engineers have crossed over with audiophiles for years as both B&W speakers and Dunlavy have been standards. ProAc 100s used to be standards in mix rooms. Dynaudio makes models for both markets. So does Amphion. I am a newbie here but the notion that professional audio engineers and professional equipment designers don’t understand music is ludicrous. One other point about nearfield studio monitors is that they are designed to sound good at only one point: the mix position. I would think that home audio designers would target a wider sound field. Note that "distortion" is in fact highly prized in professional audio when it’s the pleasing type of distortion known as saturation. No one mixes a track without it these days. Formerly it was provided by tape and transformers; today it’s added back by plugins; it’s a big topic and a key part of modern sound.
|
I own the Harbeth 30.2 and they are certainly not cold, I find them to be very neutral, clean and clear. I listen for hours on end with no fatigue. I play guitar and piano (poorly I admit) and find the 30.2’s to be very accurate. Vocals sound like a human singing in front of me. |