I currently own a pair of KRK RP8 studio monitors and a RP10s sub. I've been using them for recreational listening for around a month now (I'm not involved in production). They were recommend to me by a friend for having a clean sound. I brought them without ever having heard them (a mistake) and while I appreciate their clarity I can find them a little flat.

I've been told that I shouldn't have brought studio monitors in the first place as they aren't designed for recreational listening, rather for music professionals to technically assess the quality of their work.
I light of this I'm considering replacing them with speakers that are better suited to recreational listening.

Could anyone recommend some stereo speakers and an amplifier totalling approx £400 - £600, or some reputable manufacturers. I listen to jazz, classical, rock, techno and acoustic so I'd prefer them to be good all-rounders if such things exist. The form of the speakers (floor standers etc.) is irrelevant. I'd appreciate any recommendations so when I go hunting I'll have an idea of what's available.

I'm guessing that converts to around a thousand dollars Canadian... as such:

Pioneer Elite M-10X Integrated Amplifier (or any of their receivers)
MSR $400.00 Can find them online for less

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Pro...s/ci.M-10X.Kuro

Polk Audio Monitor 60
MSR $650.00 Can find them online for less

http://www.polkaudio.com/homeaudio/product...ding/monitor60/

Andrew D.
www.cdnav.com

Thanks

Think about what that means. It means studio monitors are designed to be *accurate*.

It may be, then that it's not the speakers, but your listening environment, that needs tweaking.

There's an argument that most/all popular music is produced for a non-flat speaker response. Most notably to my knowledge, Etymotic uses this as the justification for not selling the ER-4B to everybody, which has a razor-flat frequency response, but is pretty universally judged to be heavy on the treble.

So yes, krab, one can be forgiven for deliberately choosing inaccurate speakers. The art of system configuration is such that, to an extent, adjusting speaker models may be easier/cheaper than adjusting equalization or placement.

That said, it's a shame you don't like them, and I would seriously consider getting a good cheap parametric eq instead of springing for some (potentially) less accurate speakers.

I have Genelec 8040's running with Benchmark DAC. Both studio products and I like their sound very much(or lack thereof). What are you feeding them through or with? I am not familiar with that particular brand though,so its hard to make deductions...

I'm feeding them flac out of my pc's sound card. Its a creative sound blaster live. Perhaps I should try changing things at the source before jumping to conclusions. I think I'll try to borrow a stand alone CD player from a friend and see if that helps the sound. Thank you for your input.

Is a 'parametric eq' the same kind of eq thats in foobar.

Looking at the specs of your speakers, I wouldn't advise to trade them in. You might want to experiment with the speaker positions in the room, and use a decent source. There is for sure a better one then the analog output stage of a $10 soundcard :-)
If your room acoustics are a problem, then you might start to look for an equalizer to tackle this..

I agree.Try to borrow some good gear and hook those up. It should give you a good indication where is the weak link in your chain. Plus pay attention how your sub and mains are integrated.It might take a while to get used to a "flat" sound too. Flat and neutral can very easily sound boring if you have not heard this before...

I would
a. change the audio-card.
b. check the preamp on the monitors.
c. check the HF ADJUSTMENT.
d. check the positioning of the speakers.

Thanks for all your input. I think I'll trial one of the benchmark DAC1s poleepkwa recommended, along with a good cd player. The DAC1 seem to receive universal approval. I was actually considering getting one anyway. I've only recently read about the impact that a good sound card/DAC can have on quality. I was under the misguided impression that speakers were all that mattered. I guess the consensus is that studio monitors are perfectly good for recreational listing, I just need to put time into setting them up for the sound I want.

Well, I like that DAC1. Its a fine sounding machine,but some may find the sound a little "dry". Its suits my setup well as I also use it as preamp to the Genelecs. If you can find the USB version you even better. Also have you given thought to a Squeezebox as a alternative?

I think I prefer the DAC1. The preamp, headphone-amp and DAC combo is appealing and would suit my monitors too.
What would be the appeal of the squeezebox? I don't have need of a wireless set-up, am I missing something?

Well,its setlled then:-)
Main benefits of the squeezebox is the remote control and display functionality if you have your hifi and computer seperated. I run ta Trends Audio UD-10 into the DAC1 as mine is the older version.

Poleepkwa, thanks for your advice. I feel much happier knowing that buying my monitors wasn't a total blunder. Now i'll get to work on the rest of my set-up. Regards, Duncan

One thing to have in mind is that lot's of people make statements of how things sound good and how much better one thing sounds than the other, but many times such claims are very poorly substantiated. Things like level matching and bias controlled listening tests are very rarely mentioned.

No; there are currently no native parametric eqs for foobar. (I wrote something for 0.8 but it's not maintained.) The usual recommendation nowadays is to install a VST eq plugin with the foo<->VST interface, but I haven't found any VST I'm comfortable with yet.

That said, the graphical eq in foobar should be fine for roughing in the frequency response. If it really is something response-related then that could give you a good idea of what can be improved upon in the midrange/treble.

I'd agree with brimstone's skepticism on sources - it is very, very easy to fool yourself into thinking one source is better than another; don't buy a ~$1000 source like the DAC1 unless you can get a friend to help conduct a blind test to confirm it yields an improvement. True story: When I bought my iPod 5G I thought it sounded better than a pro sound card+headphone amp combination. A year later, I thought it sounded worse.

As far as I understand these are close-field monitors, so build to be listen at close range. The idea is that listening at close range gives a very direct sound so free of room acoustics. Given a typical studio this is a must.

You might simply try by listening to them from 3 – 6 foot and from a ‘normal’ listening position.

Regardless the speakers, I do think you can improve sound quality by using a good DAC and I do consider the Benchmark one of them. Try one with a USB input, this turns almost any PC into a quality source.



In general speakers are the weakest spot. Investing in a pair of good speakers is the best way to improve on sound quality. But if they are really good in reproducing small details, they are no longer the weakest in the audio chain, that’s the moment you start to hear the limitations of other components.

That's sound advice. I'll trial expensive equipment I'm considering before permanently parting with my cash.
With regard to not having to over-spend for a good sound, can anyone recommend some pci, pci-e or usb sound cards. I am quite interested in the ESI Juli@ but I noticed its vista drivers are still in beta. The M-audio Audiophile 192 is another potential. E-mu seem to produce comparable cards but I've read they're owned by creative who seem to be renowned for poor driver & customer support. If these claims are unfounded then I would be looking at E-mu's 1212M card. Are the three cards roughly equivalent in terms of playback quality? Does any one stand out above the rest? Are there other manufactures who produce cards around the same level with vista support?

The suggestions regarding a better DAC are pretty much hogwash. Unless there is something seriously wrong with the current DAC used(noise problems, defective circuitry, purposely designed to alter signal by large degree, etc.) there is no reason to change it out on the basis of sound quality; that is not proven to be true except in the cases I outlined above.

These KRK units have XLR inputs on the back, right? Powered units? I recommend trying two things: room treatments and a proper high quality DSP EQ/crossover. The Behringer DCX2496 is a powerful and transparent device that will let you adjust that 'flat' sound to anything you desire with very high precision, and it will allow ideal integration to the subwoofer(s), as it has virtually unlimited xover options/controls.

BTW, there is one possible problem using the KRK monitors for home use in mid/far field: many studio monitors are designed with a very limited off axis horizontal window, as this is not an issue in near field use. However, in a regular room/distance/acoustics, you need the most linear/similar off axis response as compared to on axis response as possible for optimum sound quality. I am not aware of the KRK's off axis response characteristics, so I have no way to know if it is suited in this regard.

-Chris

I guess I'll throw-in my 2-cents...

Duncan,

I'm not sure what you meant by "flat sound". That's not a put-down... It's often hard to describe how a particular speaker sounds... At least you didn't use any of that goofy audiophile terminology that drives us all crazy! (If a speaker has "ruler-flat frequency-response", it's a very good speaker!)

I had assumed that you had tried some equalizer adjustments, or at least some bass/treble adjustment. A "regular" graphic equalizer can make your bass wimpy or boomy. It can make the high-frequencies dull or harsh. Or, it can make more-subtle adjustments. A parametric equalizer can give you "more control", but takes a bit more skill and experience to adjust. A parametric equalizer is normally used to fix a known problem in the frequency response. It's much easier to experiment with a graphic equalizer... it's easier to "play around" with.

I believe your main speakers have a "high frequency" adjustment, and I assume the subwoofer also has a level adjustment. That should allow you to adjust the high-mid-low frequency-balance. I suggest you play with those to see if the sound gets better or worse. (The high-frequency adjustment looks very subtle. You'll get more "effect" from an equalizer.)

Speaker placement/alignment can make a big difference. In general, the high-frequencies are the most directional. If you "aim" the speakers directly at your head, the high-frequencies will usually get stronger (depending on the speakers). This includes tilting-up the speakers if they are sitting on the floor, or tilting them down if they are on a high-shelf. ...You may not want "stronger highs" and you may prefer the off-axis sound... It's just another thing to experiment with.

Subwoofer placement can also make a big difference. If you place the subwoofer on the floor next to the wall, the bass will be increased. If you place it exactly in a corner on the floor (where 2-walls meet the floor), or where 2-walls meet the ceiling, the bass will be greatly increased. Usually this is NOT recommended, because it can make your bass too "boomy". But if you feel the bass is too week, go ahead and give it a try!

If you do go shopping for new speakers, I suggest you listen to some surround-sound set-ups. All Dolby Pro Logic II receivers/decoders have "soundfield" settings that can take a 2-channel stereo input and send some delay/reverb to the rear speakers. This can somewhat compensate for a small acoustically "dead" listening room, and it can "enhance" the overall sound. The added "dimension" might be just the cure for your "flat" sound! You can make your living room sound like a concert hall! But, that's usually too much... It just doesn't seem "natural" to have that much big-room reverb in a small room. I suppose some audiophile's consider it heresy to process a 2-channel recording into surround sound, but you can adjust it for a very subtle effect if you wish. For example, you can reduce the rear-channel output to almost nothing... To the point where you can't really "hear" the rear speakers, but so that "something's missing" when you turn them off.

A different soundcard or DAC will have much less effect on the overall sound than an equalizer, or a different set of speakers. You might not hear a difference with a different DAC... You will always hear a difference with different speakers or with a "big enough" EQ adjustment.

Well, if so, then which speaker response *is* it produced for?

Clearly, the answer is, you can't know. The answer will not be constant. Thus, isn't it better to go for 'flat', and adjust at the pre-amp stage, to suit?





I seriously doubt that. Varying EQ and placement will certainly be cheaper than buying enough differently 'voiced' loudspeakers to cover the usual recording-, mixing- and mastering-stage contingencies.






If your loudspeakers have good on- and off-axis response, varying placement, room treatment, and digital EQ will likely be more fruitful experiments than varying the digital source.




As a rule, room acoustics are *always* a problem.

Just to clarify : I did not recommend the DAC1 or suggest you buy one.I suggested you TRY various things to improve the sound before settling on a choice. I just stated my current system which consist of PRO gear and said it sounded good to my ears. I like the DAC cause it does 3 things in 1 for me and have enough inputs. You bought something once blindly, I doubt you will do so again:-)
Speakers do have the biggest influence on sound that is agreed and PLACEMENT.
There are of course much cheaper alternatives than the DAC1.
I do think thought a analog volume gain will help as most here will agree that digital volume controls affects the sound,induces distortion,plus give you more option to add other sources,if you want.
To add a equalizer could help, but then you "should" do the whole room analysis with microphone and see at which frequency it should be adjusted to get a "flat" response otherwise the point would be to adjust it till you like... Which might not be neutral,but that depends on what you want heh?
On you monitors you can make treble adjustments. Have you tried those?
Are you speakers on stands?
How long are the RCA cable you are running?
Where is the subwoofer placed?
How close are you sitting when you listen?
How loud you listen?
What do you listen too?
What are you listening for?

Finally, some sense in this thread. Thanks WmAx, DVDdoug, poleepkwa and krabapple.
Mostly that heavy on the midbass and very little below 70Hz boombox sound, I would imagine.

I would give another vote for trying out some EQ, changing placement, and fiddling with phase adjustments. Incorrect set up has a huge effect on the sound of a HiFi system - especially near the crossover points and the baffle step point. Try different arrangements, different amounts of toe-in, and phase adjustments to get the sound you want.

Like, I expect, lots of people, I don't only listen to mainstream releases. I listen to lots of rock , and lots of classical, and lots of jazz. So the only gear (including loudspeakers) that conceivably could be a 'best fit' for all of these would be one that colors the sounds as little as possible. From there it's up to me to make it sound good in my room, for my listening seats. That's the job of speaker placement, room treatment and EQ

I don't think you could go wrong by questioning whether or not you've currently have the best speakers, for you. Personally, I really wonder if anyone can really recommend a speaker that would satisfy any and everyone else! A good place to start, in my opinion, is if you could name a brand of or type of speaker you heard that you thought sounded great?

As for speaker placement, some people have gone to great lengths in search of the perfect spot.