studio monitors and quality of home speakers Options

[Bartholomew MacG...]

Has there ever been a documented case of a recording sounding worse on quality home speakers because the studio monitors used to make the recording where of lower quality?

[RonaldDumsfeld]

the trend to market "pleasing sounding" speakers to pro mix engineers.

not to start a row or anything mate but I don't recognise that as a trend myself.

Do you have any examples?

[Ethan Winer]

Yes, plenty of examples. Some years back, a fellow named David French measured the response of ten popular monitor speakers. I've tried to reach him for permission to post his graphs on my own site because they are so incredibly telling. Without his permission I can't post the actual graphs, but I can tell you what they show. There's also Appendix 2 in the book Recording Studio Design by Philip Newell that shows the response of many popular studio speakers. But those graphs are so small it's difficult to see the detail.

Anyway, David measured ten speakers using a technique that's even better than an anechoic chamber. The problem with anechoic chambers is they are anechoic only down to 100 Hz, or maybe 80 Hz if it's a really good one. What David did was fly all ten speakers high up over the stage in a huge auditorium. By keeping the speakers 40 feet from all boundaries, a technique known as gating can be used to avoid the effects of all reflections down to a very low frequency. I've seen a photo of the test setup and it was valid. The graphs were made using the ETF software.

The speakers tested were Tannoy 800A, Genelec 1031A, Event Studio Precision 8, Dynaudio BM15A, Mackie HR824, Alesis M1 Active MkII, M&K S-150PK THX Ultra, Yamaha NS10, ADAM S2A, and Event TR8. In order:

The Tannoy was reasonably flat from 60 Hz to 14 KHz, with a broad 3dB dip centered around 4 KHz.

The Genelec was reasonably flat from 60 Hz to 20 KHz with a broad 4 dB dip centered around 4 KHz.

The Event was a little bumpier between 60 Hz and 20 KHz with a narrow 4 dB dip at 400 Hz and a broad 4 dB dip between 4 and 6 KHz.

The Dynaudio was pretty terrible having a narrow 9 dB dip at 3.5 KHz and a sharp rolloff above 8 KHz.

The Mackie was by far the smoothest of the lot being flat within 3 dB (total span, not +/-) from 60 Hz to 20 KHz, with a broad 2 dB dip between 1.6 and 4 KHz.

The Alesis response went out to 18 KHz but had a narrow 5 dB peak centered at 60 Hz.

The M&K fell off sharply below 100 Hz, with narrow dips of 3 and 4 dB at 3 KHz and 6 KHz respectively, and a narrow boost at 12 KHz.

The NS10 was as expected with very little bass below 120 Hz, a narrow 4 dB boost at 1.6 KHz, another narrow peak at 12 KHz, and a sharp fall-off above 12 KHz.

The Adam was pretty lumpy with a steep LF roll-off starting at 80 Hz, a broad 3 dB boost at 1 KHz, a broad 6 dB scoop centered at 4 KHz, and then was flat to 20 KHz.

The Event was similarly lumpy, but with a 9 dB narrow dip at 4 KHz, a narrow peak at 13 KHz, and a sharp roll-off above that.

--Ethan

[tnargs]

The Tannoy ...a broad 3dB dip centered around 4 KHz.
The Genelec ...a broad 4 dB dip centered around 4 KHz.
The Event ...a broad 4 dB dip between 4 and 6 KHz.
The Dynaudio ...a narrow 9 dB dip at 3.5 KHz ....
The Mackie ...a broad 2 dB dip between 1.6 and 4 KHz.
The Alesis ...
The M&K ...narrow dips of 3 and 4 dB at 3 KHz and 6 KHz ...
The NS10 ...a narrow 4 dB boost at 1.6 KHz ...
The Adam ...a broad 6 dB scoop centered at 4 KHz...
The Event ...a 9 dB narrow dip at 4 KHz...

Let's say, based on the above, 000's of recordings are out there with some emphasis in the 2k-5kHz region, because the monitors had a dip there.

And let's say a lot of home playback loudspeakers don't share this trait.

This is the very region that Linkwitz says is emphasised by close mic'ing techniques, and needs a bit of restraint in mixing or playback of many recordings. Based on the above, we might be getting the opposite.

This might be one systemic contributor to that 'in your face, CD sound' that many attribute to poor old CD.

My sincere hope is that studios don't use these monitors for final mastering (which is best done in a simulated home listening room with full range speakers at normal distance); I hope the use of these monitors is primarily for getting the details right and forensically peeking into the mix for little glitches and for dialling in correct panning and echo etc. In which case something of a boost in the region in question, like the NS10, would be the best servant. IMHO