why are they so spendy.???
the 6.5"s cost and arm and a leg.
the 5"s just cost a little finger.
the 4"s seem affordable, but they may be too tiny.
so help me out. what size monitors do you all use?
does size matter?
the ebay deals still go high in dollars.
am I being realistic if I only want to spend 150?
I too would love to know the answer to this one. I'm looking to get some monitors shortly but the cost does seem to be a little steep.
:?
8)
I've had a lot of sobering thoughts in my time.
It was them that turned me to drink.
I use Samson Resolv 50a - $280 list, about $200 street. They have 5-1/4" woofers, and sound pretty decent.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
active monitors have amps inside. hence the larger cost. I am checjking out passive and the price is much lower and affordable. of course one needs an amp to run them. lots of options there.
recording monitors differ from regular hifi speakers in that they are more transparent.meaning they reproduce what is real rather than have enhancements built in to make the sound bigger in home theater or hifi uses.
those are less expensive still.
since I am not making high professional quality recordings I wondser if a nice set of bookshelf passive monitors would work ok.
I hooked up one of these little "T-Amps" to some old passive Bose bookshelfs I had sitting around in the closet, and I'm pretty impressed by the clarity.
http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/t-amp_e.html
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/sonicimpact/t.html
A few people have modded them as well: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/t-amp_tweaks_e.html
But you could also look at the Behringer active monitors; they get pretty decent reviews and are relatively inexpensive.
"Everybody got to elevate from the norm."
the four inchers are the most affordable of any brand.
I wonder if four inches would produce enough low end.
any thoughts?
Studio monitors are spendy because in order to be used as studio monitors, the speakers need to have flat, or nearly flat, frequency response.
Building a speaker that responds properly is a lot harder than building a speaker that just sounds ok.
Active monitors add the cost of an amplifier to the mix.
Moreover, there's a very limited market for studio monitors compared to regular speakers. So because the demand is lower, the price is driven up.
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
Hee hee - I just bought a set of Behringer studio monitors and didn't give any thought to how big they'd be.
I expected that for £200 I'd get something the size of a hi-fi speaker; kinda small like. 75 Watt amp in the woofer, and a 35 watt amp in the tweeter; that's what I got.
I got home from work and found this box in the music room which contained two other boxes, each of which had a monitor inside. It was some box, that big box - I've seen smaller cars.
Best,
A :-)
"Be good at what you can do" - Fingerbanger"
I have always felt that it is better to do what is beautiful than what is 'right'" - Eliot Fisk
Wedding music and guitar lessons in Essex. Listen at: http://www.rollmopmusic.co.uk
I bought a pair of krk rockit 5's and they sound pretty good to me. They were about $150 on sale a year ago. Now, the larger woofers held more bass and sounded a bit better, but bang for buck, the rockit 5's can't be beat, imho.
Dave
Sometimes in life you get shown the light,
In the strangest of places if you look at it right.
Rockit 5's are really nice.
at 150$ each , sure they're nice.
out of my budget range.
Rockit 5's are really nice.
at 150$ each , sure they're nice.
out of my budget range.
They sure do look the business don't they.
I may check out the Samsons that Noteboat recommended.
Thanks for all the info guys.
8)
I've had a lot of sobering thoughts in my time.
It was them that turned me to drink.
getting the best one can afford is 'sound advice'.
I am looking at passive refference monitors. less expensive.
of course, one needs a power amp. lot of options available there.
zzounds.com has a few ideas for speakers and amps.
trying to avoid MF and GC.
Gotta throw in my two bits here. This is the OPINION of one who might be considered a complete idiot at any other recording forum.
Regardless of how flat your monitors are, the one biggest impact on your mix is going to be your mixing space. If you have truely flat response with your monitors but your room rolls off everything between 500Hz-1kHz and boosts everything below 200Hz (of course numbers are just hypothetical), your mixes will sound mid-heavy and muddy with no bass response to speak of.
If you have a decent pair of stereo speakers and an amp which you are accustomed to listening to, you will likely get better results mixing through those than any "prosumer" reference monitors. Why? Because, your ears are trained to compensate for the deficiencies of the room and have probably already set your amps eq accordingly. If you mix your tunes to resemble comercial cd's which you already listen to using those speakers in that room, you will be far better off than you would be if you were to mix on an unfamiliar set of monitors which reflect the deficiencies of the space you're working in.
This isn't recommended of course if you are planning to dedicate a room to a product that you want to be marketing. As a demo studio fine. Home projects fine. But, if you want to produce professional quality recordings and market them as a means to earn a living, you'll need to spend a lot more money on room treatment and decent monitors.
I agree with Hue; pick something nice and then listen to lots of stuff through them until you get used to how they 'feel.' Near perfect flat response is nice, but it's still the familiarity factor that takes precedence in my opinion.
I agree guys. room ambience also adds something to the sound equation.
being aware of the characteristics of the factors you mention will increase the likelihood of a proper outcome.
