Blue Sky MediaDesk 2.1 review

[benjamind]

So I had the pleasure of being able to review a system that a good friend of mine bought a couple of months ago. I set it up, made sure I tested it with a decent SPL meter, and had everything done right according to the instructions. Levels were adjusted with the subwoofer to ensure a smooth transition from satellites to the subwoofer.

Right up I can say the tonal and overall frequency response is very accurate and in some areas, particularly in the upper midrange, is absolutely spot on.

There wasn't much in the way of roll-off in the treble as I expected for the amount of money these were worth ($1200AUD). The treble extended very well, and the detail and overall imaging was of good quality. Anyone with a decent set up with minimal acoustic room treatment could do mixes that would translate very well to other speakers, especially typical home stereos.

The midrange clarity was astounding, and the imaging was sharper and more defined than any other monitor I've heard in that price range including the Behringer Truths, the new Yamaha HS80Ms, the Event TR monitors, and the KRK Rokits. The bass was phenomenal. Very well extended and accurate, with only the very slightest emphasis in the midbass region which I did not detect with my ears but rather with the SPL meter.

To me, honestly, these were comparable to the Event Studio Precision 8s that my friend also had in his home studio setup. He uses his BlueSky MedaDesk for rough studio work and mixing with low-medium volumes, then uses SP8s for doing double checks and for final mastering. He plays these very loud when doing mastering and applying compression especially to bass and they sound amazing, but I found the MediaDesks to be more than adequate for my needs. The SP8s were much more expensive, and I found that their sound wasn't any better than the MediaDesks, just that they could play a lot louder which, for mastering and for checking to see if your mix will hold up when you crank the volume, is pretty important.

I also know that BeyerDynamic have a new Headzone headphone system that is supposed to fool the ears into believing that they are listening to sound via loudspeakers and that it supposedly handles accurate stereo and 5.1 imaging, along with the DT880 Pro headphone which is known to have a reasonably flat frequency response, both attributes of which are good for mixing. But these are *headphones* and I can assure you no headphone has every been trustworthy for me to mix on, and I've tried everything from Sennheiser to Ultrasone. The Ultrasone 750s were probably the best of the bunch, but still NOTHING compared to speakers, not even maybe. Just FORGET it. If you want to use headphones for checking details, then be my guest, but just try mixing on them if you want your mixes to translate correctly. Speakers just totally shit all over headphones when it comes to coherent imaging and spatial depth and ESPECIALLY visceral impact of the bass and lower midrange. Headphones will NEVER give you that, not even an inch of it.

But my instincts tell me to forget the Headzone system and go for speakers instead of headphones. Which is why I have decided on the MediaDesk 2.1 system. Yes, they tell you that headphones provide a higher sound quality than speakers, but I beg to differ. That's bullshit. I can't think of any headphone that sounded as good as the MediaDesk setup or the Event StudioPrecision 8s for that matter. Micro-details? Yes, headphones are mighty good at that. But macro-details like imaging and spatial depth and accurate frequency response? Fugheddaboudit!!!