2. speakers
  3. 1097661738

Active studio monitors. Nobody has them. Why?

I'm referring to mainly GENELEC studio monitors, the world leader in today's recording studios. I don't see anything here about them. Why?

They're good enough for 80 to 90 percent of the world's top/major studios yet not good enough for us audiophiles? Do recording engineers/musicians and audiophiles have THAT varying degree of tastes? Why do you think?

After all, these are what the artists and engineers choose to CREATE the music as a reference. I would think they'd want us to hear their artistic INTENT? So why the huge gap between the music creators and the listeners?

Please help answer this burning question.

Thank you.
quantumavman
beavis
272 posts
 
It's already expensive enough to upgade, don't make it more expensive. Anyways, I don't think a constantly vibrating enviroment is ideal.
lazarus28
339 posts
 
i use active studio monitors. i think you'll find that ATC monitors are getting more popular with the audio crowd. i haven't heard genelec, but i've never heard a better speaker in my life that ATCs.
gregm
3,405 posts
 
A few reasons -- not an exhaustive list:
* Genelecs response curve designed for mastering, not for musical enjoyment
* Nearfield or sattelite application
* For full-range operation most models need equivalent, matching bass+low bass spkrs
* Active: many audiophiles prefer passive, most home spkrs sold are passive

Overall, "mastering" a recording is NOT identical to listening to the end product (i.e. the music s/ware we use at home). So the "tools" including speakers, are designed differently. For the sake of it, one exception may be the Griffin speakers (griffinspeaker.com).
Cheers
s7horton
1,077 posts
 
Don't forget, that as audiophiles, this is a hobby. One that we all like to explore. It's tough to switch out amplifiers when your speakers are active...
More to discover