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!   

lonemountain

@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.  

kenjit said: "A good speaker will play every track and 99% should sound good. There is no such thing as a bad recording".

 

This has got to be one of the silliest bits of nonsense I’ve ever read on an audio forum, trolling or not. 

@ddd1 

not only that all recordings are perfect and all songs are a masterpiece. There is no such thing as crappy music.

Silly would be responding in any serious manner to anything @kenjit writes, but many of you do. Personally, I don't find what seanheis1 said to be any less ridiculous. People feel a need to write a comment, even lacking experience with the topic.

I find this thread funny, people say "class D" as though anything Class D sounds like everthing else Class D. Years back we tried building a CLass D amp at my shop, I wanted a low cost decent studio (no fan) amp. We started with off the shelf hypex modules and jsut used it as described and it was awful So then we realized the power supply was the problem, you needed the upgrade power supply-yes-much better! Still not as good as the Class A/B amps I had around, so we built an even larger power supply- better yet again! Then we realized the front end was not adequate (analog portion before the amp itself) so we modified that to be close to something one would see with a decent audiophile or pro amp (the ATC P1 and P2 are my benchmarks). Another step better. By the time we were done, I spent as much on the Class D as one could expect to spend on a good Class AB amp. It finally sounded good, competitive, but didnt save anyone money. It was suprising to me at how much sonic difference each step made. It gave me deep respect for the designers who can build a class D inexpensively and make it sound good. Class D was not the miracle I was hoping for.  I ended up wondering, why bother?

Brad