Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] [OT] good studio monitors
From: Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano (nando_AT_ccrma.stanford.edu)
Date: Fri Jul 23 2004 - 03:27:35 EEST
On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 16:04, Florin Andrei wrote:
> I'm quite familiar with a wide range of high-end studio headphones, but
> i'm much less familiar with studio monitors.
>
> [MUNCH]
>
> I've heard some people saying that the Adam monitors are the best thing
> since sliced bread (especially the mid-fields and above, such as the
> S3A). Quote: "more accurate than most high-end headphones" which i find
> hard to believe.
They are very good (IMHO). We compared a bunch of speakers for one of
our spaces at CCRMA (8 speakers in a ring around the listener), using a
pro cd player connected to a switcher box and then to the speakers
directly (in the studio, so no noise or external interference), levels
calibrated to within a db and the S3A's were the best, we ended up
buying four S3As and four 2s (the lineup included Mackie 824's, Tannoy
800A and JBL - can't remember the model, something like 32's - and Adam
2 and S3A). This is what I candidly wrote at the time:
> Obviously the Adams are still the best. Best image, best midrange and
> widest stereo image. No surprise there.
>
> The JBLS: with a lot of materials both high frequency drivers buzz (Jay,
> I'll show you tomorrow), IMHO the drivers have to be replaced.
[Note: they were broken indeed]
> When compared with the Adams (and the others as well) the high end is
> noticeably harsher, but turning on the -2db high frequency pad makes
> them too mellow so it is a really small difference (or maybe the
> difference is just in a small range of frequencies).
>
> Tannoys: not too bad but they seem to have something funny in the
> midrange (a bump?). I had to set them to full space to make the bass
> response a bit better when compared to the others.
>
> Mackies: cannot be compared to the Adams, but as usual good performance
> for the price. They did not sound as good at the beginning and I think
> that was because both the Mackies and the Adams were left/right
> mismatched, and I think in opposite directions. I set them to half space
> and flat. Or maybe at the end I was just getting tired and everything
> started sounding the same.
>
> ObviousMan attacks: for some materials all of them sound the same to me.
> I see big differences in voice tracks. In almost all of the music I
> listened to, the Adams had the best imaging. Again, on some tracks it
> did not seem to matter (I guess those are bad mixes and/or bad
> recordings and/or bad music :-)
What I mean by imaging is that with the S3As you heard the music, not
the speakers, if you know what I mean. On everything else the speakers
were definitely there. The bass on the S3As was also very very tight.
> How about Mackie?
I have four 824's at home and they are fine, very good the the price (a
little too much bass), but after listening to the Adams, well... but you
have to have a fat wallet :-)
-- Fernando
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 23 2004 - 03:30:46 EEST