#163

I don’t have any first-hand experience with this, but I’ve happened upon articles and other things about “broadcast trucks” in the past. I believe these are common for things like sports or on-site news reporting. It’s common to see tiny near-fields, and it seems like genelec dominates that particular industry as the standard. broadcast work may be focused on voice intelligibility, leveling and things like that, so it might be that the relatively high lower bound of frequency response is not really a problem like it could be for music.

Due to the nature of mounting close to the wall, I would think you are correct in thinking rear ports might not be the best. If your budget is high and you are looking for something very accurate to mix on, the focal shape 40 might be a good option. That series is designed with passive radiators instead of ports that theoretically don’t have as much boundary interference effect. Another option could be some (or a) mixcube, as well as some speakers that are more full-spectrum and fun to listen to like the audio engine a2+ mentioned above? Those really are tiny

1 Like
#164

I would look at passive monitors in the classic BBC style and a good power amp. Brands like Spendor, Harbeth, and Rogers are the classics but quite expensive. But this is basically what the design is made for, and it works.

3 Likes
#165

Boxes like LS3/5A? Nothing better invented in 40 years? These speakers are “a bit” pricey, as are the Genelecs… You know, there’s a reason my room is that small… :wink:

1 Like
#166

Yep. Like that design. They really are still phenomenal and especially in small spaces.

But yeah, Genelecs are great too. They are rear ported, but have some ways of adjusting the bass through the switches in the back.

#167

The laws of physics haven’t changed! :+1:

3 Likes
#168

Sure, but I had rather the driver’s technology, materials and electronics (active crossovers, DSP) in mind.

#169

Small spaces won’t benefit as much from multi-way speakers (I’m talking more than 2 drivers, in most cases) the same as larger spaces where driver size and separation become more of a concern, and DSP is mostly used to make less-expensive designs “sound” psychoacoustically better, at the expense of the waterfall plot (much like porting and passive resonators do). It’s not necessary to build the DSP into the speaker, either. Time-alignment software which takes the room into account does far better in real-world applications in most cases than simply optimizing the speaker alone. And of course all of that just micro-optimizes compared to proper acoustic treatment of the space itself, which has by far the most benefit to a studio install.

2 Likes
#170

The modern version of these designs use modern drivers and electronics. They are generally still analog, so no dsp. But lots of modern monitors and speakers don’t use dsp, that’s still a minority and definitely not necessary for a great sounding speaker.

1 Like
#171

Studiods, are you pro? Could you, please, recommend a pair or two of monitors I asked about?

#172

i haven’t researched for some time but i guess a pair of genelec 8020 is still the cheapest best thing for nearfield listening. The Neumann KH120 are ok too.

3 Likes
#173

All of the suggestions you’ve been given so far are pretty solid, from the Audioengine A2+ on up. Personally I prefer sealed, not ported or passive-reflex, enclosures due to their increased transient accuracy, if you care about making quality mixes. But the bass response for pleasure listening is somewhat reduced. Honestly if you’re not going to invest (time and effort at least, if not significant money) in acoustic treatment you may end up getting better results with quality headphones and an ordinary pair of quality unported bookshelf speakers for comparison. For higher end aspirations @emenel’s recs are a good starting point.

#174

“and an ordinary pair of quality unported bookshelf speakers for comparison”
Does “ordinary” mean a civilian hi-fi?

#175

It depends on your goals. You’ve not said much about why you want this space to be fitted out, or what you’ll be doing in it. If you’ll be trying to make professional mixes of any kind, you’ll need at least one pair of consumer-grade speakers to test listen to your mix (in both mono and stereo) - in that case, yes, any old consumer hi-fi would do - usually I suggest picking stuff similar to what you’d personally listen on at home as you’ll be familiar with how other mixes translate on that setup. If you’re really trying to maximize utility you could go as far as getting a single Auratone or the various modern equivalents. They sound fine, but they’ll utterly not sugarcoat your material. If it sounds good on that, it’ll sound good on anything. On the flip side, if you’re not terribly interested in doing pro-grade mixdowns for money and you just want to get the best utility out of a small space for enjoying and making your own personal music, where commercial competition isn’t really a factor and you have the liberty to take your more serious work outside to a studio fitted out for mixdown, it might be more enjoyable for you to get a nicer pair of speakers designed for playback enhancement (the Audioengines A2+ as mentioned above are an excellent first choice for affordable, decent-sounding small-space speakers) and just accept that you’ll have to teach yourself how to translate mixes done with them.

Remember, ALL speakers, from the most enhanced studio monitors down to the lowly Auratone and even further to boomboxes and other shite, colour the sound. The famous NS-10Ms were horrid nasty things, but the mix engineers knew them well and could compensate for their vagaries and produce excellent mixes. So, it’s not about what you get, it’s about how well you learn it and learn to translate your work to other things. Nicer speakers just make that process more enjoyable for you, as the artist/engineer.

Now, as for ports: ports are great. They enhance bass response (read: make small speakers sound much larger than they are) and, if used right, eliminate or sidestep nasty cabinet resonances due to dimensional physics, etc. But at the same time, they’re a mass (of air) that’s moving independently of the speaker cone (and thus to some extent not controlled with great precision). This means that they’ll “overhang” the bass response and whatever frequencies they’re resonant at (on small speakers this can go well up into the midrange too) and make for a “muddy” or “overpowered” presence. If you compensate for this to try to make the mix sound “perfect” on a ported speaker, it often sounds thin, nasal, or sometimes strongly resonant in other frequencies on speakers with different portings. Since the vast majority of consumer speakers are ported, this is not really a good thing. That’s why the majority opinion of pro mixers is to avoid ported speakers (even for the cheap listening boxes) - because if you’re not careful and you optimize for one ported speaker it may translate horribly to another, but because non-ported speakers don’t have the same peaky resonances, they’ll translate pretty fairly to nearly anything. Again, is this a hard and fast rule? No - you can learn to compensate and make great mixes on a ported set of monitors. But is it extra work for you? Absolutely, and you’ll get it wrong sometimes.

So yeah, long story short: it comes down to what you’ll be needing them for and how serious you are about turning out competitive professional work or just stuff for your own enjoyment.

Last note: if you are serious about pro quality output (or even just serious about good sound in general) - spend at least as much money and twice or more as much time on treating your listening space acoustically with well-researched diffusion, suppression, and bass traps (if you have the room for them) - you’ll get FAR more out of ANY pair of speakers this way than spending the extra coin on the speakers themselves and leaving the room untreated. Better to have average speakers in a great room than amazing speakers in an average room.

And if that’s all too much, just get a set of Beyerdynamic DT-880’s or 990’s and get mixing, checking your mix from time to time on nearly any handy speaker (in mono, since that’s how, in effect, the majority of music is listened to on phones, computers, and public spaces). That’s far better than a crappy room or heavily compromised main speakers.

7 Likes
#176

I didn’t mention that, but yes, I’ve got the DT-880’s. It was my first buy, earlier than my semi-modular and Eurorack modules. As for my goals: I am definitely not interested in doing pro-grade mixdowns for money, I have to learn to play my modular first and learn the basic recording, mixing and mastering techniques (Ableton etc.). I just want to be able to hear all the sounds it produces in my limited acoustic conditions. The cans are sometimes tiring.

#177

in this case any of the options mentioned will work just fine. think about your budget, buy the best thing you can afford.

I own and can wholeheartedly recommend Dynaudio, Genelec, Harbeth. I use

Dynaudio BM5 mkIII as my main studio reference monitor. I love them and have had them long enough to really know them well. I’ve recorded and mixed many albums with them, and I like just listening to music on them as well.

I use Genelec 8010A+7040APM in my art studio and they are also great. If I had space and didn’t need it to be ultra-portable I would have gone for the 8040 without the sub, but this setup lets me easily move it to new locations or use it for temporary installations. The sub sounds great for listening, but is hard to setup for critical work, and I’d almost always recommend larger full range monitors over a sub for anything critical. I partly got the 8010 because I do multi-channel sound art and if I need 8-10 of these I can rent them and know what they will sound like.

In my main listening stereo I have Harbeth C7ES-3’s. These are absolutely phenomenal—balanced, expressive, and just a pleasure to listen to for hours and hours. IMO they are also revealing and flat enough that I could definitely use them as studio monitors. However, if I was going to get this style for a monitor I’d go with the Harbeth Pro series or similar since they are voiced more specifically for studio work rather than home stereos.

If I was buying new main monitors now I would consider the Genelec 8040 or the 8340. The digital room correction is very appealing in the 83xx series. And although I love my BM5mkIII’s, I’m not sure I love the current range of Dynaudio options quite a much as the previous models.

3 Likes
#178

I believe you the Dynaudio BM5 mkIII are great monitors but I’m afraid 7" inch woofer is too much for my small room…

#179

Yeah, I’m not suggesting you get those specifically, just relaying my experience. The smaller Dynaudios are also really nice. As are any of the other brands mentioned.

Frankly, based on your needs you probably don’t even need to spend this much. The JBL 305’s are excellent for the price if all you want to do is hear what you’re playing more clearly and listen to music.

2 Likes
#180

I have a pair of Neumann KH 310 which I love.

Some years ago I had the chance to listen to them (and their other speakers) at Neumann’s own showroom, which was the best speaker listening experience I ever had before and after.
Their room is well treated and measured to the centimeter, so it also made me realize what an important role the room itself plays.

Recently, Neumann released a new sub, the KH 750 DSP, which comes with an iPad app and detailed room correction. The cool thing is: Since the room correction and bass management all happens in the sub, you can connect the older analog speakers and still benefit from the room correction on the whole system… :raised_hands:

1 Like
#181

Just recently got some stands for my nearfields to replace the hutch shelf (made with a board on a second tier keyboard stand) I had my monitors sitting on, and I just wanted to say the difference is HUGE. The stereo image is much tighter and there is so much more bass. I really did not change the overall positioning of the speakers that much. they were in an equilateral triangle with my listening position (albeit smaller) and tweeters were at similar height.

I had started thinking about how wobbly and precarious the makeshift hutch I had made was, and how that’s probably not the most effective thing to place something that works by making very accurate vibrations, hah. Also been reading more about positioning and wanted to have an easier way to explore widening my listening position triangle.

I got these and I’ve been impressed, especially for the price. It is nice that the base is not much larger than the monitor, as I have a closet door to the right of me, and something more bulky would block the door from being able to open enough. But thinking more generally, having something sturdy for the monitor to sit on, decoupled from the other one (and other things) probably really helps it perform more ideally!

#182

I have a pair of original JBL LSR305s. Unfortunately my cat punctured the surround on one of them… :heart_eyes_cat:

I see that the originals have been replaced by the MKIIs. Does anyone think it would be weird to have one of the MKIIs and one of the originals from an aural perspective? I know it might drive me crazy aesthetically not having matching finishes, but that doesn’t really matter. Would rather avoid buying two speakers when I still have one good one but idk if it makes sense to use two monitors that aren’t the same model (even though they are the same series).