Which studio monitor do you have, and why?

[mementus]

It would be nice for me to know what you folks have as monitors and why.

Edit: I am not here asking before to buy, I just would like to hear your story and understand other people's 'listen enviroment'

I.e: I make X genre and I am in a small treated room, I had brand-model-A but they had too much bass so I switched to Brand-model-B and now I am very happy they translate better etc.

[Kaine]

I'm not sure that will tell you much, given perceived speaker frequency response can change depending on arrangement of the room and treatment in question, also peoples definition of "well treated" can vary wildly.

Check the published frequency response charts that have been lab measured, they'll give you an idea on how flat things are in an ideal situation. Getting your room to match the responses seen on paper however, that's the hard part.

[ATN69]

M-Audio BX8 carbon. Why? ..because it was decent monitors for a reasonable price. In the end of the day it is all about getting used to what ever monitors or headphones you may use. If you are used to them and know their characteristics you can also make good mixing and mastering with them. My room is not very big but I choose the 8-inch because they perform well both at low and high sound levels. I mostly mix at low sound levels.

[tehlord]

Monitor choice is as much about personal preference as it is about room measurement and technicalities.

For example when I auditioned a load of monitors I didn't like Genelecs, I did like Focals, but ended up buying a pair of Neumanns from Kaine up there^^^

[Rappo Clappo]

Think I'll purchase a Tannoy Reveal 802 set. Medium room size, little acoustic treatment. Do not want to use a subwoofer. And they're quite cheap IMO

[BertKoor]

I'm not sure that will tell you much

+1. Nevertheless I'll respond, only to give an idea of what criteria I chose.

Ten years ago I worked with a massive (about 70 cm high) pair of ancient 3-way "hifi" speakers. These were really not that "hifi", so things needed to improve but without breaking the bank.

After a process of selection (figuring out what my requirements were and what monitors match my criteria) I bought a pair of passive Alesis Monitor-One MK-II, mainly because they sound very simular to the superb hifi speakers I have in my living room. So "getting used to" does not apply.

I chose passive speakers because I already had a good spare hifi amp. Without an integrated amp I could buy better monitors.

I chose monitors with 6.5" cones because they deliver enough bass. For me. In my small studio room.


Picking monitors is very personal. You'll have to get out and listen to them.

[DJ Warmonger]

None, because I plan to move home. I will buy monitors as soon as I'm done

[PALU]

I work with KRK Rockit 6 and every time I think of changing them I come to conclusion that I don't have time to learn new monitors. I know the combination of my not-very-well treated room and my monitors (and my headphones). I'm adding a sub now to them, but I'm not sure 100% that I need a sub (I'm not doing bass-heavy music).

I will +1 people that say it's very personal and that maybe in a treated studio space with great monitors it's objective that they sound good. In home-studio with low or middle tier monitors - it's all very subjective. I once measured (for fun - so not in a very scientific way) the response in a few places in my room - and it was completely different depending on place. So I would just buy monitors and learn them .

[Kaine]

Monitor choice is as much about personal preference as it is about room measurement and technicalities.

For example when I auditioned a load of monitors I didn't like Genelecs, I did like Focals, but ended up buying a pair of Neumanns from Kaine up there^^^

And this is the perfect example. I know the Neumanns are great, I've worked on them and pin-pointing changes in the mix is a breeze, they are as accurate as anything you'll find in the price bracket and surpass most of the other options at a technical level.

This isn't all me speaking in this instance, this is the verdict of all the press I've read and working engineers feeding back to me about how astounding they find them to work on. I know many, many professionals at the top of their game working on these day in day out. I've never heard an engineer I respect say a bad word about them, and that speaks volumes.

Now the kicker is, I don't personally like to listen to them all that much.

I've been a Genelec boy for as long as I care to remember and they have this slightly forward sound to them that I expect for speakers to have now. It's not 100% correct and accurate, but it's what I subconsciously look for in a speaker setup.

Can I work as well or even faster on some other speakers? Sure, mixing choice might even be quicker on the K&H, but I'd rather take my time and spend it listening to the Genelecs.

On the other hand you have tehlord up there who dislikes the Genelec sound and went for the Neumanns, so yeah... very much personal preference!

I've spent the last 6 months demo'ing every set of speakers I could locate. From the Adam A5x's up to the Focal Trio's, if we stock it, I've heard it... hell I've even heard a load that we don't stock, but suppliers were kind enough to loan me to shoot off.

My outcome? I'm keeping the Genelecs. Sure some other speakers may have been more detailed, or a more focused sound. But once you pass the £1000/$1000 mark they start to reach the level of good enough, and from that point forward it's very much personal choice.

But with all that said, and as other people have already mentioned, room treatment and arrangement can be far more important than speaker choice. Pointless spending more, if your treatment isn't up to scratch, and the cheap foam stuff doesn't really count in those regards.

[rod_zero]

Yamaha HS80, cheap and honest, translate quite well.

If I had money maybe I would go for something fancier after treating my room.

[thecontrolcentre]

I have a pair of bi-amplified Genelecs with a sub. Bought them in the '90s because they were the best "bang for buck" at the time, and I liked the sound compared to other monitors at the time. I still like, and use them every day.

[Scotty]

Adam A7x, Event ASP8 and Yamaha MSp5. The Adams are my main speaker set and I check bass and and portability of the mixes on the other set. The Yamaha MSp5 can help me with the upper low/low mids and the ASP8s reveal the mud in the mix that is missed by the the others.

[Jace-BeOS]

One set of Mackie HR824 units. I bought them because they seemed to have good reviews and a good price for someone like me that can't spend big money (what I spent was big enough money and that'll never happen again in my lifetime). I've been happy with them, mostly because I know my bigger problem is my room/house acoustics and that my stands should be filled with sand (and aren't, because how the hell do you make that a clean and reasonable scenario??). They sit on isolation pads, but the bass still flows straight into the floor and down the structural walls.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

M-audio av40, paired with a sub from a cheap-ass 2.1 rig, and combined as an osx multi-output device.

Will upgrade to JBL LSR 305's at some point next year, maybe.

[Richard deHove]

The classic: a pair of NS10s. Bought them in the late 90s because I saw them in a studio where I was getting some tracks mixed at the time. Usual wisdom is that they sound terrible but reveal poor quality audio. If a track sounds good on NS10s then it should sound good anywhere. Meh. I don't know know if that's true but I've been mixing on them forever.