Who says studio monitors are "cold and analytical"?

I was an audiophile for 10 years before I got into recording and mixing music. At first, I used what I had.... audiophile speakers, for my mixing.  As my skills grew, I started having the common problem of "translation".  Why did my mixes sound great on some systems, and terrible on others??

I'm 56 now, and I've been through many audiophile speakers in my living room, and many "studio monitors" in my studio.  I've shopped extensively for monitors and I'll be darned if ALL these monitors that are supposed to be ruler-flat all sound very different from each other. Ha!  Anyway, I've finally found a pair of speakers that are  fun & pleasurable to listen to, AND my mixes sound good and translate well to other systems.  Studio Monitors are a TOOL designed to get a job done, but that job is a creative endeavor, and thus they are still a very subjective thing.

As for ATC's..... I home-demoed a pair of the $13k SCM50's for a week.  I did not like them.  I loved the low end, but not the mids or highs.  But that's just me in my studio.  Other engineers swear by them, and good for them.  I listened to many monitors in the 5-10k range, and purchased ADAM S3H's.  They tickled all my boxes just right, and 4 yeas later, I still enjoy them tremendously.  

Just 2 weeks ago I got a new Cadenza Blue cart for my Sota turntable, and my vinyl has never sounded so amazing. My ADAMS sit atop stereo 15" subs, so it's a true full range system.  This, "to me" sounds better than most systems I hear at audio shows.  These studio monitors bring me great pleasure, and sound more like live music than many sub-$20k audiophile systems.  

As my skills grew, I started having the common problem of "translation".  Why did my mixes sound great on some systems, and terrible on others??

Because some speakers are horrible and it doesnt matter how good the mixing and mastering is on the recording, if the speakers are not good. 

I home-demoed a pair of the $13k SCM50's for a week.  I loved the low end, but not the mids or highs. 

was wrong with the mids and highs?

Studio monitors have low distortion to bring out that analytical feel....but they also typically use Class D amps & DSP, which can create a cold and sterile presentation with an unnatural timbre...too much leading edge and sharpness. 

Not always though. Genelec does a pretty good job of avoiding the harshness and sterility that leads to listener fatigue and lack of involvement & toe tapping. 

@mirolab VERY interesting post.  I immediately looked up your speakers and found this review where the reviewer chose your speakers over some ATC SCM20s.  Go figure.  Thanks for the great info!

https://gearspace.com/board/reviews/1163637-adam-audio-s3h.html

@kenjit You miss my point about mix translation. It has nothing to do with the quality of various systems.  That's irrelevant.  It's my job as a mixer to make a mix that sounds like a well balanced professional mix on ALL systems... not just mine.  It's not easy.

As for the ATC SCM50's... I found the mids dry & boring, and the tweeter a bit wispy and sibilant for me.  The ADAM's AMT tweeter is clear, effortless, and non-fatiguing over long periods.

@soix I read that S3H review, and very much agree with the writer.  As in his conclusion, the ADAMs often do "leave my jaw on the floor" with their clarity and heart-stopping dynamics.  

For those that poo-poo DSP, I A/B'd the ADAMs with Focal Trio's for well over an hour at Vintage King using my own music collection.  They left me alone and I could switch and tweak all I wanted.  The Focals are all analog (and very good), but I liked the ADAMs better in every respect (except looks... the Focals are gorgeous).  Plus, the ADAMs have 8 band fully parametric EQ that I use for some room correction.