DiyMobileAudio.com Car Stereo Forum banner

21 - 40 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
PS. This is always the case though. M2 for example may sound “impressive”. And that’s the goal of hifi perhaps. As a worker though, if those are the huge ones I heard awhile back, they sounded impossible to actually work on. There are some good JBLs, from way back in the day. The new ones I can’t hang with... If you/ your friends get a chance to hear some big ATC stuff, see what you think. It may not go super deep in the lows (some models) but everything else is far more natural sounding than most stuff out there.
Many were into atc pmc a decade or so back. Imo the home stuff cannot hold their own anymore. Bruce Botnick, Frank Filipetti and Kenny Mixx have switched and YouTube about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
I really think some of the speakers you mentioned switching from are more impressive for their cost than their audio playback acumen but my Wilson exposure is limited but what I have heard left me questioning people’s sanity. I’ve heard the JBL M2s and they are impressive though definitely need a sub when pushed. And the 708Ps are a nice smaller speaker. Also heard the JBL 4722s (with upgraded comp driver) and they were effortless in a med size home theater room, which makes sense since they were designed for an actual theater.

I build large home theater subwoofers and I am constantly annoyed how poorly some sound engineers neuter or wreck the low frequency extension on movie soundtracks.

You are in the know then. Yes the 4722 is impressive with that beryllium comp driver. I think your criticism of the eggleston and Wilson are correct but in a slightly different context. Seems like you are a pro at multichannel and look at it from that lens. The big Wilson's and egglestons were impressive in 2 channel rooms built around them at moderate listening levels. As far as the scan speaks and dynaudios could go. Implemented to the max, then those guys who dropped a ton of cash still realized they were still listening to a 6 inch or two and a dome tweet. They weren't "Live" sounding, they couldn't boogie and Gedlee came and opened people's eyes and they realized jbl and Altec and tannoy mastered this decades ago. Then the tons of diy big driver coax kits and ob kits made way for 4429 the big heritage tannoys k2 then the pro stuff to make their way into the hardcore 2 channel guys homes.

So while you might criticize the m2 in a multichannel system it's absolutely a monster in small to medium 2 channel rooms. I'm glad they are starting to overlap though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
Oh and st7 I've got two Accords a 7th and 9th gen and might be able to help on your 8th where they overlap. Redoing my ib wall right now, maybe my single 15 baffle would for the 8th gen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
I agree. I’ll take decent speakers in a well-planned room than great speakers in a mediocre (for audio) room.
I’d probably agree but that’s not what I meant. I meant my definition of a great speaker is one whose PHYSICAL properties work such that DSP isn’t needed (or other weird newfangled tech that is “impressive” but often sacrifices fidelity). It’s really common for modern speakers to look great on paper cause all they print is loudness, sensitivity and frequency extension. But that tells us nothing about phase or timing (you can have flat frequency response and still have a speaker that sounds like crap because it’s all phasey in the crossovers or for other reasons, or because the timing is horrible, perhaps it doesn’t “resolve” well and you lose the ends of reverb tails - SUPER common in modern active speakers but no one knows cause they haven’t heard stuff that does resolve.. or at least that was me a few years ago).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
Hmmm.. I've only heard them a handful of times. Perhaps it was the amps they were on (likely at Guitar Center. Not exactly a think-tank over there). What I heard sounded awful, nothing near the realm of the higher end ATC studio stuff (scm50 / 100 / 150). But perhaps the M2 is as sensitive to amps/signal chain as my SGM (which sound amazing when set up properly, but can be pretty weird sounding when not).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
Not to take away from pmc at all! They are well loved for sure. Not sure those were m2 at guitar center they are Synthesis dealer purchases like Westlake, Sweetwater, GC ect. The top amps they are paired with 2 Crown iTech 5000HD though you can use a BBS DSP and whatever pair of amps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Not to take away from pmc at all! They are well loved for sure. Not sure those were m2 at guitar center they are Synthesis dealer purchases like Westlake, Sweetwater, GC ect. The top amps they are paired with 2 Crown iTech 5000HD though you can use a BBS DSP and whatever pair of amps.
GC Pro, not regular GC. Unless JBL makes some other monstrous PA-looking studio mains like that, I think it was M2s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,296 Posts
Welcome to DIYMA, St7_77.

It's great to have another member here with experience and perspective from the engineering/studio/pro audio side of things. :)

I'm not an engineer, just a wanna-be drummer & saxophonist with a basic home studio setup (like everyone these days, LOL).

But I'd also love to have a pair of those big boy ATC SCM150s. :D I'm currently working off of a pair of the smaller SCM25A and the little Neumann KH120 monitors + a Transaudio/Subwoofer Pros Studio Sub 18, along with some small, late 70's bass reflex Rat Shack Realistic/Optimus bookshelves as my "NS-10's", LOL.

I used some of the info, techniques, and software from Carl Tatz to setup my monitors and room and it's worked out nicely. https://www.carltatzdesign.com/phantomFocus-system.html

I'm really happy with the monitors I've got, but I recently had the opportunity to listen to some of the Swiss PSI Audio monitors and was really impressed. They're touted as being very phase accurate using all analog circuits within the monitors (not DSP), as you obviously want to minimize latency especially when monitoring a tracking session. If you have the time, here's a really interesting video by Roger Roschnik of PSI Audio...




Are you mixing ITB, on a console, or hybrid with some outboard gear, and what genres are your bread & butter?

Oh, and where are you located? I'm in SoCal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
Welcome to DIYMA, St7_77.

It's great to have another member here with experience and perspective from the engineering/studio/pro audio side of things. :)

I'm not an engineer, just a wanna-be drummer & saxophonist with a basic home studio setup (like everyone these days, LOL).

But I'd also love to have a pair of those big boy ATC SCM150s. :D I'm currently working off of a pair of the smaller SCM25A and the little Neumann KH120 monitors + a Transaudio/Subwoofer Pros Studio Sub 18, along with some small, late 70's bass reflex Rat Shack Realistic/Optimus bookshelves as my "NS-10's", LOL.

I used some of the info, techniques, and software from Carl Tatz to setup my monitors and room and it's worked out nicely. https://www.carltatzdesign.com/phantomFocus-system.html

I'm really happy with the monitors I've got, but I recently had the opportunity to listen to some of the Swiss PSI Audio monitors and was really impressed. They're touted as being very phase accurate using all analog circuits within the monitors (not DSP), as you obviously want to minimize latency especially when monitoring a tracking session. If you have the time, here's a really interesting video by Roger Roschnik of PSI Audio...




Are you mixing ITB, on a console, or hybrid with some outboard gear, and what genres are your bread & butter?

Oh, and where are you located? I'm in SoCal.

Which PSI specifically? ... I mix ITB or with a summing amp. Genres all kinds of “indie” stuff I guess you could say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I’m surprised there was no talk about B&W. I saw them mentioned and that’s it. I’m not a professional. But I don’t understand why it would be any different than high end 2 channel audio for the home.

In my experience Bower & Wilkins makes one of the most neutral speakers in the world. I have owned several iterations of their flagships over the years starting with the Matrix and then The nautilus. These speaker designs I find superior to pretty much every thing mentioned above. And I actually have some experience with most of the companies you mention.

I also did a brief search on the topic and it seems to be the going consensus in the pro community as well. B&W tweeter design is revolutionary in terms of enclosure addressing standing waves and distortion. The extends to their midrange too. Simply one of the best midrange driver/enclosure

I feel the only way to improve on this design would be to somehow make their speakers more efficient. Because in my experience the only way to get better sound is using superior amps. And it’s my informed and very vast experience that amps are far more important than most realize. Until you have heard a properly matched combo of speaker and low powered set amp using the 45 or 2a3 you don’t know what is possible reproduction.

Now please I’m not saying you don’t. Maybe you have heard what I’m talking about and for some reason you didn’t recognize it as superior to anything else you ever heard. But I would be have to believe that something was off if you came to that conclusion. If you have not heard what I’m talking about then you absolutely need to.

I moved away from bowers and Wilkins when I experienced what amps designed around the 2a3 and 45 can do. I actually tried to drive the 802 nautilus with a 2a3 push pull amp from japan using tango transformers. It had a whopping 10 watts. I still heard the magic I just couldn’t play it loud enough. I went directly to advantgarde unos I did side by side comparisons with everything the same except amplification. Giving the low powered [email protected] amp the environment needed to perform properly was a game changer

As far as the powered monitors and towers mentioned above. I wouldn’t even consider something like that in a million years.

If I’m missing something I would love some feed back. As far as alignment and phase all the speakers I’ve mentioned address this in their design.

Sorry I ran off with this. And I mean no offense and sorry if I sound offensive I’m really just asking the question why?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
No they don't, they blow and are curb stomped by dozens of others costing more and less. The are for people with money that like the design more than the sound. They are the breitling of audio. So so past, can't be considered the top tier, and blingy current offerings.

I could not disagree more and i thought you were close to what i like, exact opposite it seems
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
I’m surprised there was no talk about B&W. I saw them mentioned and that’s it. I’m not a professional. But I don’t understand why it would be any different than high end 2 channel audio for the home.

In my experience Bower & Wilkins makes one of the most neutral speakers in the world. I have owned several iterations of their flagships over the years starting with the Matrix and then The nautilus. These speaker designs I find superior to pretty much every thing mentioned above. And I actually have some experience with most of the companies you mention.

I also did a brief search on the topic and it seems to be the going consensus in the pro community as well. B&W tweeter design is revolutionary in terms of enclosure addressing standing waves and distortion. The extends to their midrange too. Simply one of the best midrange driver/enclosure

I feel the only way to improve on this design would be to somehow make their speakers more efficient. Because in my experience the only way to get better sound is using superior amps. And it’s my informed and very vast experience that amps are far more important than most realize. Until you have heard a properly matched combo of speaker and low powered set amp using the 45 or 2a3 you don’t know what is possible reproduction.

Now please I’m not saying you don’t. Maybe you have heard what I’m talking about and for some reason you didn’t recognize it as superior to anything else you ever heard. But I would be have to believe that something was off if you came to that conclusion. If you have not heard what I’m talking about then you absolutely need to.

I moved away from bowers and Wilkins when I experienced what amps designed around the 2a3 and 45 can do. I actually tried to drive the 802 nautilus with a 2a3 push pull amp from japan using tango transformers. It had a whopping 10 watts. I still heard the magic I just couldn’t play it loud enough. I went directly to advantgarde unos I did side by side comparisons with everything the same except amplification. Giving the low powered [email protected] amp the environment needed to perform properly was a game changer

As far as the powered monitors and towers mentioned above. I wouldn’t even consider something like that in a million years.

If I’m missing something I would love some feed back. As far as alignment and phase all the speakers I’ve mentioned address this in their design.

Sorry I ran off with this. And I mean no offense and sorry if I sound offensive I’m really just asking the question why?
Who were you speaking to when you wrote this? And are you referencing the videos above or things I said or things dcfis said? (as we both said very different things)

And who do you mean by "pro community"? Professional hifi salesman? Recording engineers? Mastering engineers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
Welcome to DIYMA, St7_77.

It's great to have another member here with experience and perspective from the engineering/studio/pro audio side of things. :)

I'm not an engineer, just a wanna-be drummer & saxophonist with a basic home studio setup (like everyone these days, LOL).

But I'd also love to have a pair of those big boy ATC SCM150s. :D I'm currently working off of a pair of the smaller SCM25A and the little Neumann KH120 monitors + a Transaudio/Subwoofer Pros Studio Sub 18, along with some small, late 70's bass reflex Rat Shack Realistic/Optimus bookshelves as my "NS-10's", LOL.


.

For whatever it's worth, my experience with the KH120 was a lot of bass coloration (bloated/forced) and more importantly the transients were seriously clipped no matter how I gain staged them (example - hip hop stuff like Tribe Called Quest - the snares just didn't crack like they do on the track). Perhaps the ones I heard were damaged.

I would also say if you have the $ at some point, actual NS10s will do some stuff that a bass reflex speaker won't. Those speakers aren't famous for sounding "crappy". They're famous for being useful (partly because they're sealed cabs - not much deep bass but the higher freq bass is much more coherent than in the vast majority of ported designs, yep, even almost all studio monitors on the market now)... Auratones are famous for similar reason plus the fact that they lack a crossover (no separate tweeter) so the midrange is not molested phase wise (even if it's not perfectly flat frequency wise).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,197 Posts
I've been watching this thread, lurking really, and I just don't get it. I would think that if you're mixing/mastering for the lowest common denominator system that you would use that type of system as monitors. If you're mixing/mastering for "true to the original recording" sound you would use a high quality monitoring system eq'd to your preferred house curve. But what do I know, I'm just a stupid consumer frustrated by over produced or badly mixed music.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #38 (Edited)
I've been watching this thread, lurking really, and I just don't get it. I would think that if you're mixing/mastering for the lowest common denominator system that you would use that type of system as monitors. If you're mixing/mastering for "true to the original recording" sound you would use a high quality monitoring system eq'd to your preferred house curve. But what do I know, I'm just a stupid consumer frustrated by over produced or badly mixed music.
Why would someone mix to the "lowest common denominator"? I'm confused, where did that idea come from? I've never had a band tell me "hey, we want this to sound good on an iphone speaker and don't care what it sounds like in our cars".

What exactly is "true to the original recording"? I mean defined in a way that isn't circular. Isn't it like saying "I want a photograph that looks like a photograph"? If a band told me that, I'd be like "So you want me to just leave all the faders at the same level, or uhh?? Should I not EQ anything? It's going more lows and low mids than anything in this genre, but okay".... I'm guessing you mean true to the original music. But then I wonder "the original music from whose perspective?". To an audience member? On stage? In the studio? Or through what microphone placed where? Do you mean how it sounds at a concert? Or do you mean the band without a PA system? There are very few genres where "true to the original" is like "ok, I know what you mean". Classical orchestra/choir/symphony is one because it's only ever played in one context (a large echoey room) - pretty much just determine how distant you want it to sound. Jazz, sorta. Some folk.

I wrote something much longer but figured we should start basic. In short though, most mix engineers mix on both full bandwidth speakers (I mean speaker system, with a woofer and tweeter, I don't mean "wideband" in the car audio sense of talking about a certain type of driver) and one pair of frequency restricted speakers (lacking bass definitely, and perhaps upper treble too). Bare minimum, the mix has to sound decent on both and they have to "agree" with each other - it has to sound like roughly the same mix. In other words, you can't stick a bunch of really important things in a mix that exist exclusively below 80Hz. If you do, many people will miss major elements of a song...

I'm not trying to be argumentative above. I'm trying to make sure I understand your questions (and that you do too).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
Hmmm.. I've only heard them a handful of times. Perhaps it was the amps they were on (likely at Guitar Center. Not exactly a think-tank over there). What I heard sounded awful, nothing near the realm of the higher end ATC studio stuff (scm50 / 100 / 150). But perhaps the M2 is as sensitive to amps/signal chain as my SGM (which sound amazing when set up properly, but can be pretty weird sounding when not).
I’d assume the listening room was lacking more than the amps they were connected to. Then again, I don’t buy into some of the fancy amps audiophiles like to peddle. Many look better than they are better. Many audiophiles look with their eyes/wallet before their brain. Not saying anyone in this thread is that type of audiophile but we definitely know they exist.

I’ve heard the M2’s in a poor room and they were...poor. Heard them in a proper room with a proper setup and they were sublime. By the way, I’ve read mention in this thread that the M2s were the huge ones and they are not. Single horn compression driver over a single 15” in a nicely stylized cabinet.

And to back up my claim about the room, I have JTR 212HT (now HTR) speakers and I’ve heard my speakers in 7 or 8 rooms. Some were my speakers that I took to other people’s houses and some were their JTR 212 speakers. So I’m very familiar with those speakers and more importantly understand how incredibly much a room contributes to how a speaker sounds, which is often significant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #40
A 15 and a horn which is a floorstander (right?) is on the huge side by modern studio standards... And, just my personal opinion here, they look like 1990s PA speakers. BUT, I could care less what they look like. And I would love to hear them in anproper room. I will say they sounded worse in that same room than most anything else in there. I do believe that amps make a bigger difference on higher end speakers, and in some cases that can be true of the room too. The cleaner and more sensitive the speaker is (I don’t mean litera “sensitivity” but how revealing/articulate etc it is), the more obvious every hit of trash in the signal chain can become and has to be dealt with to not be annoying. My own mains are like this (I never heard differences in digital cables previously, not even on $3700 Ficals, which honestly sounded like crap in comparison) and they are more sensitive to room placement than other speakers I’ve had. They need to be placed i such a way to work with the bass build up in a room in a positive way. If they aren’t you’ll be like “where’s the bottom end?” and they’ll sound shrill. I prefer this over some modern speakers that sound plenty bassy in almost any position and then if you locate them more properly to get some room gain (if you’re not in the middle of an absolutely gigantic room) they can get too muddy and slow sounding.
 
21 - 40 of 50 Posts
Top