Computer Forum Chat Thread

[Xuvial]

Aw and there I was feeling all special with my vertical pci slot


All this talk about vertical slots is arousing.

[Cyanotical]

Why would she want studio monitors, though?

higher quality and better sound when properly set up

[Xuvial]

higher quality and better sound when properly set up

Wait what are we comparing to studio monitors again?

[DeltrusDisc]

Wait what are we comparing to studio monitors again?

Asera is looking into buying a pair. Ghazh asked why she'd want them. Cyanotical spoke the truth. :P

[Cyanotical]

so it became apparent to me last night as i was trying to setup the workstation i built for my brother that Linux is not ready for mainstream use, even though it has a chance with Valve pushing it, and the general dismay that power users have towards W8, it's still not ready

i was doing something rather complex, trying to install both Nvidia and AMD GPU drivers, but everytime both are installed linux locks up during boot, i went through 7 distro's and had the same problem (nevermind the PITA of nvidia drivers)

installed 7 pro, and everything installed perfectly and runs fine


if a semi advanced linux user cant solve a problem, than there is no way that your average joe will be able to

[tetrisGOAT]

I still see no point at all in studio monitors for a media consumer. They are pointless. Get a hifi setup instead.

[Cyanotical]

I still see no point at all in studio monitors for a media consumer. They are pointless. Get a hifi setup instead.

studio monitors have better response and clearer sound, but that is besides the point, would you rather have Beats by Dre or HD700s?

from another standpoint, the flat sound of monitors allows you to color the sound in your sound source rather than dealing with a pre colored hifi, monitors are in a sense, the purest speaker you can get, they should play the sound exactly as they receive it

there is also the genre of music you are listening to, i don't think there is any hifi setup out there that will match a setup of monitors when playing the glitch mob, but that's my opinion

[tetrisGOAT]

Not tried the HD700s, but if they are anything like any other Sennheiser-phones, they are heavily coloured. And I like that. Sound is for entertainment, and studio monitors are pitched differently for production benefits; they may be perceived as flat, and that is the word one generally uses for them, but they aren't really neutral.

[Cyanotical]

the HD700s are designed to emulate sitting in front of a pair of near field monitors, they are more like a newer reference version of the 650s or 598s

but, what i was going more for was the difference in quality overall, most people who are into quality audio know to avoid beats by dre and bose, it's not hard to compare them to sennheisers or beyerdynamic and instantly tell the difference

the same goes for monitors vs hifi speakers, most hifi's are designed to look and sound big with little regard to the actual sound quality, and they dont need to, 90% of the people buying them will be playing mp3's off of an ipod, but from my experience, most hifis have a duller sound with muddy bass

I've listened to a bunch of stereos in the last half year, and only one matches my asus/krk setup, and it's well over $20k

[Asera]

Monitors vs Hifi can probably be compared similarly as LED backlit TN panels and CCFL backlit IPS screens are compared.

[DeltrusDisc]

Snap Asera, that's quite the comparison you be makin'.

[Ghâzh]

Not tried the HD700s, but if they are anything like any other Sennheiser-phones, they are heavily coloured. And I like that. Sound is for entertainment, and studio monitors are pitched differently for production benefits; they may be perceived as flat, and that is the word one generally uses for them, but they aren't really neutral.

That. Basically.

You might be very biased towards studio monitors but the fact is that most people in a blind test report regular speakers sounding better than studio monitors. Studio monitors aren't made to sound good, they are supposed to sound flat, neutral and clear for mixing purposes.

monitors are in a sense, the purest speaker you can get, they should play the sound exactly as they receive it

Maybe they should but they aren't. It's really impossible to transfer the sound exactly as received because every speaker sounds different. It becomes even more apparent with the cheap ones.

Not to mention that if a sound source is mastered professionally it's not meant to sound good with studio monitors .

Personally I'd buy a pair of regular quality speakers if I was purely after enjoyment purposes. Whatever floats your boat, though. You'd have to listen to different ones to know which ones you like. Buying off the internet based on other people's opinions just doesn't work that well.

[Cyanotical]

That. Basically.

You might be very biased towards studio monitors but the fact is that most people in a blind test report regular speakers sounding better than studio monitors. Studio monitors aren't made to sound good, they are supposed to sound flat, neutral and clear for mixing purposes.


Maybe they should but they aren't. It's really impossible to transfer the sound exactly as received because every speaker sounds different. It becomes even more apparent with the cheap ones.

Not to mention that if a sound source is mastered professionally it's not meant to sound good with studio monitors .

Personally I'd buy a pair of regular quality speakers if I was purely after enjoyment purposes. Whatever floats your boat, though. You'd have to listen to different ones to know which ones you like. Buying off the internet based on other people's opinions just doesn't work that well.

i don't buy it, i have several flac recordings on my phone, and i will walk down isles of sound systems at electronic retailers playing them on each one that i can, and none of them sound as good as most monitor demos at music shops

the idea of making it sound bad comes from the use of older reference monitors, if it sounded a certain way on the reference monitor, then you knew how it would sound over the radio, or on most hifi's, that is where that came from, and it no longer applies, if it is being mixed to sound bad on modern monitors then it is being mixed bad, the mixing philosophy used now is to make it sound the way you want it to sound on your monitors

this is painfully obvious if you get a chance to compare yamahas (traditional reference) to modern KRK, Adam, or Dynaudio studio monitors, the yamahas will sound like crap, but the modern ones will completely amaze you

[Marest]

I'm actually looking for a new sound system to replace my old stereo. I've been looking around the local HiFi shops but not found anything worth my time for under 35 000 SEK, including a good amp. The nearest shop has a pair of 5 000 speakers hooked up to a 3 000 amp that sounds alright, but if I'm spending that much money I'd rather push further.

Cyan, if I remember correctly you were looking at the HD800 before picking up your KRK Rokits. How does the two compare, audio wise? I'm looking to build another HTPC and would like some proper speakers for playing movies and very complex music. What would you recommend with a budget of say... $500, $1000 and $1500?

I know a store in the town where I live who stock the KRK Rokits, although not sure which ones. I'll give them a listen next time I'm there.

[DeltrusDisc]

I would suggest be open to also checking out monitors from Adam Audio, M-Audio, and anything else they may stock. Adam and M are up there with KRK, that's for sure.

[Asera]

Studio monitors aren't made to sound good, they are supposed to sound flat, neutral and clear for mixing purposes.

This is basically what I am looking for. I'm sick of standard consumer speakers having extremely unbalanced sound where they have thundering bass, ear piercing high ends, and basically no midrange. Unless you go for really expensive "computer speakers", there's going to be some lack of depth somewhere. The current Creative system I borrowed from a friend has amazing bass, but everything above 120hz is viciously distorted, or very, very hard to hear..

I'm 26, the days of needing ridiculously high bass depth to beat the crap out of my eardrums is basically finished.

(I feel like that would be more like something a 40 year old would say though.)

[Cyanotical]

i was going to get the HD800s, but after hearing the KRKs through the E-One i decided it wasn't necessary, i've been using the PC350s that came with my Xense when it has to be quiet, otherwise i use the KRKs most of the time, i may still get the HD700s, as they are rather impressive, but thats more of a if/when i can

my setup was $1600, that included the RP8s the 10S sub, and the E-One DAC, you could also get just RP10s for about the same price, but they are a bit big for a desk

below that i would look at the RP6 and RP5, the RP5 is a good match for the Xonar STX when using the RCA unbalanced connectors, those will run you about $500, but without a sub they will lack the hard hitting bass, (it can still be heard, but takes more of a back seat)

another good option for a 2.0 is the Dynaudio DBM50, they are around $500 a piece iirc, but are designed for desktop use

the biggest thing i would look at is how you plan on using them, if you want a good 5.1, i would use RP5s and a 10S set in LFE mode, that will run you about $1200, preferably you would want a 5.1 reciever with XLR output, but GL with that, there is the Onkyo PR-SC886, but when the price says "call" i know its going to hurt the wallet

you will want the XLR connectors to expand the soundfield as much as you can, near field monitors are called that for a reason, you have to turn them up rather high if you are in a large room to get the full experience, my home theater is small just for that reason, they will still work in a large room, but the soundfield will sound less impressive than sitting a few feet from them

[Ghâzh]

the idea of making it sound bad comes from the use of older reference monitors, if it sounded a certain way on the reference monitor, then you knew how it would sound over the radio, or on most hifi's, that is where that came from, and it no longer applies, if it is being mixed to sound bad on modern monitors then it is being mixed bad, the mixing philosophy used now is to make it sound the way you want it to sound on your monitors

It's not that it's mixed to sound bad per se, but it's definitely taken in to consideration that it's going to be mostly played by home stereos, in cars and by mp3 players and such. If it's done right it will sound great on studio monitors and even better on your home stereo.

And to be perfectly honest, what you said about newer monitors sounding more "user friendly" applies other way around as well. The gap between studio monitors and good home audio speakers has become smaller. Both produce quality sound but other is made specifically for the task of picking up the tiniest of mishaps in the sound and the other to just sound good.

And really, generalizing it too much by saying "all studio monitors sound like X", to one way or another, is not telling the whole truth. There's different types of monitors for different sound in fact, most studios have multiple sets of speakers for different stages of mixing.

This is basically what I am looking for. I'm sick of standard consumer speakers having extremely unbalanced sound where they have thundering bass, ear piercing high ends, and basically no midrange.

I think you can still find middle ground from regular speakers. Ones that don't over exaggerate the basses and have better midrange and sound crisp but not quite as extreame as true studio monitors.

[Cyanotical]

It's not that it's mixed to sound bad per se, but it's definitely taken in to consideration that it's going to be mostly played by home stereos, in cars and by mp3 players and such. If it's done right it will sound great on studio monitors and even better on your home stereo.

And to be perfectly honest, what you said about newer monitors sounding more "user friendly" applies other way around as well. The gap between studio monitors and good home audio speakers has become smaller. Both produce quality sound but other is made specifically for the task of picking up the tiniest of mishaps in the sound and the other to just sound good.

And really, generalizing it too much by saying "all studio monitors sound like X", to one way or another, is not telling the whole truth. There's different types of monitors for different sound in fact, most studios have multiple sets of speakers for different stages of mixing.

i think the "bad" comes from when something is mixed on a reference monitor, then compared side-by-side to a hifi speaker, but the problem is that there is tons of music mixed on studio monitors that play with soundfield effects that really dont get reproduced well on a hifi, i mentioned glitch mob earlier, but there are a few others

i will not disagree that there are speakers that can sound as good if not better than standard near field monitors, but they are on average 5-10 times more expensive, a good example is the Dynaudio Contour 1.4, they are good, very good, but at $2800 a pair, they are not exactly a smart move when you can buy a set of good monitors, and match them for less than 1/4 the price, or get entry level home studio monitors for even less

[protput]

6 weeks, still no word on my RMA'd GPU...

Fuck MSI, fuck em with a broom handle