|
|
Post by MorEQsThanAnswers on Feb 20, 2019 2:32:18 GMT -6
Hi everybody.
I usually mix on a set of Focals with Sonarworks Reference 4 instantiated, but recently decided that I wanted to add a mono Mixcube to the set-up.
Unfortunately, Sonarworks hasn't released a way to perform a standard mono treatment method, so I will opt for RoomEQ Wizard and use FF Pro-Q 3 (set to "natural phase") to perform the EQ. ("Natural phase" makes sense, right?)
Something I am worried about is that the Mixcube is supposed to sound bad, so should I really be doing treatment on it? Would you only list to REW for the midrange adjustments (I'm expecting it to want lots of top and bottom because the speaker is all mids). Would flattening the Mixcube's midrange ruin the point of using it?
Thanks guys!
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Feb 20, 2019 3:04:48 GMT -6
I don’t correct mine. I don’t think you could/should correct it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MorEQsThanAnswers on Feb 20, 2019 4:23:36 GMT -6
I don’t correct mine. I don’t think you could/should correct it. Can I ask about how well-treated your room is? I would say that I'm well treated for a home studio, but still fighting the laws of physics. My Sonarworks curve does some narrow boosts/cuts of up to 8dB at times, which is why I'm concerned. I have found this curve to be very effective in terms of translation and do feel that it is accurate. Click for picture of my corrective curve |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,921 
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Feb 20, 2019 7:17:19 GMT -6
Yeah
The whole idea of a mono mix cube is to sound like a consumer POS in a consumer situation. EQing and phase correction on one just seams counter intuitive to the whole concept behind Auratones.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Feb 20, 2019 7:39:24 GMT -6
My room is very well treated with a pro design. I don't have a picture of my curve handy but Sonarworks still has work to do, and it works great for me. I don't see any use in trying to correct the Mixcube. In fact, usually I don't bother to turn off the correction of the mains when I switch to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Feb 20, 2019 9:20:09 GMT -6
I would think you would be Ok without it. Unless you have big mid-frequency issues in your room. I actually use it on my NS-10 but it’s not doing much and dialed back. Just helps with a low-mid bump I have in my room.
But I wonder if there is some way to trick Sonarworks? Like just sum the LR outputs to the amp? Did you ask them?
|
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on Feb 20, 2019 10:13:00 GMT -6
If you must, I would probably approach it like I would with my car stereo. However, I usually leave my car stereo flat. But, a "smile" curve with the LF/HF shelf could help with how it will respond in a stereo with "boosts". It would all boil down to how mixing on that thing translates to the real world of re-production speakers.
|
|
|
|
Post by MorEQsThanAnswers on Feb 20, 2019 13:13:26 GMT -6
In fact, usually I don't bother to turn off the correction of the mains when I switch to it. This was my next question. Thank you! |
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Feb 21, 2019 2:38:52 GMT -6
I have stereo mix cubes and I check mono using the mono button on my monitor controller.
I also don’t switch off Sonarworks when switching between my A7x and the mix cubes ... most of the room correction is happening above or below the mix cube frequency response anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by MorEQsThanAnswers on Feb 22, 2019 2:30:50 GMT -6
Okay, day 1 with the mono Mixcube. Damn this thing is freaky... and I’m crazy for thinking there wasn’t gonna be a serious learning curve!
I’m in the process of burning it in...
Any tips, besides studying good mixes on it, that will help me utilize it more effectively and sooner?
I love my Focals because I find them so revealing when it comes to finding room tones and resonances in vocals. These are usually the starting points of my treatment. On the Mixcube, I understand why it would be revealing of ugliness like nasal tones and boominess, but I'm not perceiving any "detail" that would help me lock onto these finer issues and fully evaluate a recording.
It makes me wonder how people start on these and THEN move to the full-range speakers. In my limited experience, it almost seems more like a "here is what you missed" reference than a "mix through me for the majority" type of reference.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Feb 22, 2019 3:11:15 GMT -6
I think of it as a 3-way speaker that has the highs and the lows broken  The point for me is not that it sounds bad - I don't think it does! It's severely band limited but the frequencies it does have ARE high fidelity, and the sealed enclosure means no time-domain smearing. The way I see it, you take away all the "impressive" parts of your mix (shiny highs, thundering lows) and are left with the mix itself. |
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Feb 23, 2019 2:54:34 GMT -6
I know I’m on the right track when I can be working on something in a mix and I can forget I am listening on them.
Another thing I look for is that when switching between them and my nearfields that the lows and highs fall away but the balance does not change ... ie I don’t suddenly hear more lead guitar or less vocal ..
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 24, 2019 1:40:03 GMT -6
Hi everybody. I usually mix on a set of Focals with Sonarworks Reference 4 instantiated, but recently decided that I wanted to add a mono Mixcube to the set-up. Unfortunately, Sonarworks hasn't released a way to perform a standard mono treatment method, so I will opt for RoomEQ Wizard and use FF Pro-Q 3 (set to "natural phase") to perform the EQ. ("Natural phase" makes sense, right?) Something I am worried about is that the Mixcube is supposed to sound bad, so should I really be doing treatment on it? Would you only list to REW for the midrange adjustments (I'm expecting it to want lots of top and bottom because the speaker is all mids). Would flattening the Mixcube's midrange ruin the point of using it? Thanks guys! It seems to me somewhat contrary to the purpose of the mixcube.
The idea of something like a Mixcube or Auratone is to give you an idea of what it might sound like on a crappy playback device in a dorm room or similar. Or on your dad's table radio. Or the stock radio in a '56 Chevy.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Feb 24, 2019 3:46:06 GMT -6
Can’t agree with that. There’s no playback device that sounds like the Mixcube, past or current.
|
|
|
|
Post by dwpthe3rd on Feb 24, 2019 22:18:13 GMT -6
Howdy all,
First post here, and thought I'd toss my thoughts out on the Auratone conversation as I bought a pair of 'em back in '83... OMG - do the math Dave - that's 36 years ago.
All passive models back in the day. Type of amp didn't seem to make any difference. I still have 'em and they sound as bad today as they did way back when lol.
Did someone earlier made a reference check comparable to a clock radio? Yep. Pretty much sums it up.
At least I was fortunate enough to have bought into the marketing when the cost was under $100 USD per pair.
That's how it sounds to me, +/- 3db.
Dave P.
(Looking forward to learning lots through the site)
|
|
