|
Post by aremos on Aug 15, 2019 16:23:12 GMT -6
So, the ME you bought these from gave them up for the ATC's? Have to agree with Nomatic. My room isn't the best designed & the D&D's, when honed in, were amazing!
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Aug 15, 2019 20:03:58 GMT -6
So, the ME you bought these from gave them up for the ATC's? Have to agree with Nomatic. My room isn't the best designed & the D&D's, when honed in, were amazing! Were? As in you didn’t keep them?
|
|
|
Post by aremos on Aug 15, 2019 21:57:17 GMT -6
Referring to Nudwig. Should've quoted him.
|
|
|
Post by nudwig on Aug 16, 2019 15:45:26 GMT -6
So, the ME you bought these from gave them up for the ATC's? Have to agree with Nomatic. My room isn't the best designed & the D&D's, when honed in, were amazing! He designed his new room for ATC 110's, but being as they're about double the cost of D&D's he used the 8c's as a stop gap. If my room was as nice as his I'd probably do the same as I love ATC's. However it's not and like you said, once honed in they're amazing! I can't believe the performance I'm getting in my room. I'm friends with him now so I'll invite him to RGO and he could probably fill in the story much better than I.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 8, 2020 14:23:11 GMT -6
I’m really still stuggling with putting out cash to upgrade - whether it will make a tangible difference. Been lusting over the Footprints, but I want to KNOW if it’s something that will have me putting out a better product. It’s probably yet another one of those things that you put off and then when you finally do it, you wonder why it took you so long. That just happened with the Axefx for me. My whole goal is to narrow down my gear to the things that either make my product better or allows me to get there more quickly. I have a lot of stuff that is in somewhat superfluous - not that it’s bad or doesn’t work - it just isn’t what I need or crucial to make money. I could probably find a new pair of monitors selling that in my current monitors.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 8, 2020 15:01:21 GMT -6
I’m really still stuggling with putting out cash to upgrade - whether it will make a tangible difference. Been lusting over the Footprints, but I want to KNOW if it’s something that will have me putting out a better product. It’s probably yet another one of those things that you put off and then when you finally do it, you wonder why it took you so long. That just happened with the Axefx for me. My whole goal is to narrow down my year to the things that either make my product better or allows me to get there more quickly. I have a lot of stuff that is in somewhat superfluous - not that it’s bad or doesn’t work - it just isn’t what I need or crucial to make money. I could probably find a new pair of monitors selling that in my current monitors. I'm going to get up on my soapbox and harp a little bit again about these footprints.. I did not like them. The tweeters were like lasers and the sweetspots were tiny little points in space. There's some kind of "hole" in the lower mids where things like bass harmonics just disappeared into nothing. I was actually rather surprised at these things after hearing how awesome they were, but these issues were deal killers for me and certainly didn't make sense considering the reputation for highly accurate speakers Barefoot has. To this I say don't sell what you have until you've at least tried the footprints. They might work for you, but after knowing what you got out of the ACs and the Amphions I have a feeling you won't like them either.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 8, 2020 15:30:44 GMT -6
I’m really still stuggling with putting out cash to upgrade - whether it will make a tangible difference. Been lusting over the Footprints, but I want to KNOW if it’s something that will have me putting out a better product. It’s probably yet another one of those things that you put off and then when you finally do it, you wonder why it took you so long. That just happened with the Axefx for me. My whole goal is to narrow down my gear to the things that either make my product better or allows me to get there more quickly. I have a lot of stuff that is in somewhat superfluous - not that it’s bad or doesn’t work - it just isn’t what I need or crucial to make money. I could probably find a new pair of monitors selling that in my current monitors. Room correction can only correct for phase and Freq, nothing else, all speakers distort, in fact mics and speakers are the largest source of distortion in your signal chain. All speakers suck, it’s a matter of how they suck and what kind of suck you like that matters.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 8, 2020 15:52:37 GMT -6
I’m really still stuggling with putting out cash to upgrade - whether it will make a tangible difference. Been lusting over the Footprints, but I want to KNOW if it’s something that will have me putting out a better product. It’s probably yet another one of those things that you put off and then when you finally do it, you wonder why it took you so long. That just happened with the Axefx for me. My whole goal is to narrow down my year to the things that either make my product better or allows me to get there more quickly. I have a lot of stuff that is in somewhat superfluous - not that it’s bad or doesn’t work - it just isn’t what I need or crucial to make money. I could probably find a new pair of monitors selling that in my current monitors. I'm going to get up on my soapbox and harp a little bit again about these footprints.. I did not like them. The tweeters were like lasers and the sweetspots were tiny little points in space. There's some kind of "hole" in the lower mids where things like bass harmonics just disappeared into nothing. I was actually rather surprised at these things after hearing how awesome they were, but these issues were deal killers for me and certainly didn't make sense considering the reputation for highly accurate speakers Barefoot has. To this I say don't sell what you have until you've at least tried the footprints. They might work for you, but after knowing what you got out of the ACs and the Amphions I have a feeling you won't like them either. The only place I heard them was at VK - and I thought they sounded unbelievable...but that’s in their treated room. I thought they were punchy as hell with a really smooth top end. Of course, maybe none of that would translate in my room - especially considering the size of it. I feel like I’m getting really good translation from the ATCs and sonarworks...but they sure as hell aren’t as exciting as the Amphions were...and I miss that. I never had and room correction with the Amphions...makes me wonder if that would have helped a bunch.
|
|
|
Post by BenjaminAshlin on Jan 8, 2020 16:13:24 GMT -6
I'm going to get up on my soapbox and harp a little bit again about these footprints.. I did not like them. The tweeters were like lasers and the sweetspots were tiny little points in space. There's some kind of "hole" in the lower mids where things like bass harmonics just disappeared into nothing. I was actually rather surprised at these things after hearing how awesome they were, but these issues were deal killers for me and certainly didn't make sense considering the reputation for highly accurate speakers Barefoot has. To this I say don't sell what you have until you've at least tried the footprints. They might work for you, but after knowing what you got out of the ACs and the Amphions I have a feeling you won't like them either. The only place I heard them was at VK - and I thought they sounded unbelievable...but that’s in their treated room. I thought they were punchy as hell with a really smooth top end. Of course, maybe none of that would translate in my room - especially considering the size of it. I feel like I’m getting really good translation from the ATCs and sonarworks...but they sure as hell aren’t as exciting as the Amphions were...and I miss that. I never had and room correction with the Amphions...makes me wonder if that would have helped a bunch. Hi John, The Barefoot micromain 45 use drivers from their other micromain range. The Barefoots use considerably worse drivers to bring the speakers into a cheaper price range. I would shoot those two out and see if you like the 45s better.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2020 16:26:36 GMT -6
I tried Sonarworks with my PMC two-two 8+sub2 rig and didn't like it. The funny part is my dislike was not in the low end response -that improved- but no matter how I adjusted the software, it made the upper mids strident, too forward. My room is large but not treated so that probably made a difference. I calibrated many times, I really wanted to believe but in the end I didn't purchase. The software seemed to take the character out of my monitors.
I also wonder about the theory of having ruler-flat response during mixing. I get removing nodes, but I see that as a room treatment thing whenever possible. I would rather have a pleasant sounding monitor setup that translated reasonably well than a curve manipulated so that it's technically flat. And for me, it turns out that I prefer relaxed upper-mids, and that I like my PMCs just how they came out of their boxes. It took years, but I've finally learned my room. Turns out that, for once, not changing things has yielded a benefit.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 8, 2020 16:35:48 GMT -6
I tried Sonarworks with my PMC two-two 8+sub2 rig and didn't like it. The funny part is my dislike was not in the low end response -that improved- but no matter how I adjusted the software, it made the upper mids strident, too forward. My room is large but not treated so that probably made a difference. I calibrated many times, I really wanted to believe but in the end I didn't purchase. The software seemed to take the character out of my monitors. I also wonder about the theory of having ruler-flat response during mixing. I get removing nodes, but I see that as a room treatment thing whenever possible. I would rather have a pleasant sounding monitor setup that translated reasonably well than a curve manipulated so that it's technically flat. And for me, it turns out that I prefer relaxed upper-mids, and that I like my PMCs just how they came out of their boxes. It took years, but I've finally learned my room. Turns out that, for once, not changing things has yielded a benefit. Yep this is why I will use DSP on the LF and that’s it!!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 8, 2020 16:38:24 GMT -6
I tried Sonarworks with my PMC two-two 8+sub2 rig and didn't like it. The funny part is my dislike was not in the low end response -that improved- but no matter how I adjusted the software, it made the upper mids strident, too forward. My room is large but not treated so that probably made a difference. I calibrated many times, I really wanted to believe but in the end I didn't purchase. The software seemed to take the character out of my monitors. I also wonder about the theory of having ruler-flat response during mixing. I get removing nodes, but I see that as a room treatment thing whenever possible. I would rather have a pleasant sounding monitor setup that translated reasonably well than a curve manipulated so that it's technically flat. And for me, it turns out that I prefer relaxed upper-mids, and that I like my PMCs just how they came out of their boxes. It took years, but I've finally learned my room. Turns out that, for once, not changing things has yielded a benefit. No speaker is truly ruler flat even with DSP, well unless you turn the smoothing function on the measurement software on. Had a guy do that once by mistake, thought he had the audio holy grail.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2020 16:50:40 GMT -6
I tried Sonarworks with my PMC two-two 8+sub2 rig and didn't like it. Yep this is why I will use DSP on the LF and that’s it!! That's a good thought, I need to try it.
|
|
|
Post by nudwig on Jan 8, 2020 17:17:03 GMT -6
I'm going to get up on my soapbox and harp a little bit again about these footprints.. I did not like them. The tweeters were like lasers and the sweetspots were tiny little points in space. There's some kind of "hole" in the lower mids where things like bass harmonics just disappeared into nothing. I was actually rather surprised at these things after hearing how awesome they were, but these issues were deal killers for me and certainly didn't make sense considering the reputation for highly accurate speakers Barefoot has. To this I say don't sell what you have until you've at least tried the footprints. They might work for you, but after knowing what you got out of the ACs and the Amphions I have a feeling you won't like them either. The only place I heard them was at VK - and I thought they sounded unbelievable...but that’s in their treated room. I thought they were punchy as hell with a really smooth top end. Of course, maybe none of that would translate in my room - especially considering the size of it. I feel like I’m getting really good translation from the ATCs and sonarworks...but they sure as hell aren’t as exciting as the Amphions were...and I miss that. I never had and room correction with the Amphions...makes me wonder if that would have helped a bunch. Hey John, I don't know if this helps but my speaker journey was Barefoot MM35 to One18 and now on ATC 20's and D&D's, for my ears it was an improvement everytime. When my Barefoots went down with DSP issues I took my ATC's (with sub) into the studio and brought the MM35's to the home studio. After they were repaired I found trying to work on them after being used to the ATC's in that room a bit confusing. I didn't realize how strange their phase was, especially in imaging (in comparison to Amphion and ATC) until I had them in the same space. In contrast I was reminded how awesome ATC's are when they replaced the MM35's in the studio. I agree that Barefoots are much more exciting and I've only heard the footprints at VK my only memory was thinking they didn't sound as good as MM35's. As far as interacting with the room the MM35's required the most care with placement. I don't want this to seem like I have anything against Barefoots as I still think they're awesome speakers and who knows all what's changed as mine were Gen 1's from 2010. I've only heard demos of all the other models at VK, no time working on them.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 8, 2020 17:56:04 GMT -6
I think I've been talked off the cliff as of now. Was PMing with Eric and I said I just kind've feel like I'm just reaching for the next plateau so to speak. I might wait until I can really swing for the fences before upgrading.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Jan 8, 2020 18:17:44 GMT -6
I’m in a similar boat JohnKenn.. I don’t have the cash to get the monitors I need, and I probably won’t for a while. I have a great NS10m/amp setup which allow control over anything in the 500-3k range: extreme detail, easy to hear 1/2 dB moves, and easy to hear how terrible certain processing sounds. But none of that matters if the 100Hz and 15kHz is 15dB louder than it should be.
So I have a set of rebuilt KEF 105 that is my second set. They require EQ, but they are opposite the NS10s.. 30hz is no problem, and the top is great too. They are great sounding vintage HiFi, and there’s a picture online of Sterling Sound using them in the ‘80s. So I know they aren’t ‘horrible’... still- when I make a mix I’ll make decisions that sound incredible in my room: Gigantic lows that feel realistic. Highs that are sweet and smooth, separation between instruments that feels great! I mean, it would be hard to make it sound ‘better’... Then I take that to the laptop speakers and it’s a total embarrassment. Nothing like the mix I made, and nothing like references. Back to square 1.
So before I go down the road of finding $5k for monitors, I’m going to try out EQ more. Instead of flat, I’m going to dial in the speakers to make the references sound exactly like how I would mix them. I know how I like things to sound at 40hz, 60hz, 80hz, 100hz,... all the way up to 15kHz+..
if the references don’t sound the way I like, then I have to match to something I don’t like. I don’t know that $5k or $10k speakers are going to change that. I feel like I might still be having to compensate for the speaker vs my ear.
Anyway.. I know it’s total taboo and won’t work for a million reasons. Still it costs nothing and you might want to try it, see what happens if you have time.. Try as little EQ as possible and use your ears to dial in the curve using 10-20 references.. be sure to to dial in the references so they sound perfect 30hz-15khz. In other words, if you know you’ll want more lows or highs or ‘point” make sure that’s happening in the references. Probably won’t work.. but I’ll try and see how it turns out anyway
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 8, 2020 18:29:42 GMT -6
I actually feel pretty good about translation (using sonarworks), but I guess I'm just looking for that next plateau where I go "OMG, I can't believe I didn't know this...and my mixes just took a big leap..." I guess "leap" is a bad way to describe it - I'm just looking to get better and not put money into yet another sideways move.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Jan 8, 2020 18:42:44 GMT -6
I actually feel pretty good about translation (using sonarworks), but I guess I'm just looking for that next plateau where I go "OMG, I can't believe I didn't know this...and my mixes just took a big leap..." I guess "leap" is a bad way to describe it - I'm just looking to get better and not put money into yet another sideways move. I personally think your mixes are well balanced and pretty pro sounding as it is. Of course I listen to a lot of louder genres so the only thing I feel they lack is some thump.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Jan 8, 2020 20:06:54 GMT -6
Probably not the best title - I’m sure this type of room correction has been around for a while - but if we (ok, me) are trusting these room correction units (e.g. Sonarworks, Trinnov, etc.) why would monitors make that much of a difference? If I have a hole at 80-100 Hz in my room, it doesn’t really matter if I get a biggie driver at all, right? I guess there’s perceived depth, width and timbre of the frequencies that can be different, but if room correction “corrects” the equalization of your speakers for the room, wouldn’t the differences in monitoring not be that large? Basically, why should I upgrade my monitors at this point? EQ wont change the time domain. The goal in room treatment is a constant RT over the frequency range. Whats about phase issues created by the room or monitors itself? EQ cant change it no matter what they tell me in thier adverts. In my experience eq can change something for smooth correction in very small doses but it wont cure a 1.2 decay in the low end. For the monitors. I think everybody agrees that the NS10 sounds not so great. To be true IMO the construction is catastrophic. Subtracting the missing low end and the hyped upper mid and the feeling your monitors create phase anomalies the NS10 tells me in no time if my mix translates well... There are many reasons for using different monitors in mix time...
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jan 8, 2020 20:12:51 GMT -6
I've long suspected the rise of room tuning in the '70s was why NS-10s became popular in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Jan 8, 2020 21:08:00 GMT -6
That makes sense. Going from studio to studio, each place probably dialed the room to their specific choosing. So they needed some sort of standard. As a teen who started enjoying music during the NS10 era, to hear those mixes on NS10s.. man, it impresses me how detailed and flawless they are. I wish there was a new standard like that. I guess it would have to be cheap, and translate for the modern systems? I’ve been using built in MacBook speakers as the final step more than I want (I want to use them never lol)
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 8, 2020 21:19:45 GMT -6
Probably not the best title - I’m sure this type of room correction has been around for a while - but if we (ok, me) are trusting these room correction units (e.g. Sonarworks, Trinnov, etc.) why would monitors make that much of a difference? If I have a hole at 80-100 Hz in my room, it doesn’t really matter if I get a biggie driver at all, right? I guess there’s perceived depth, width and timbre of the frequencies that can be different, but if room correction “corrects” the equalization of your speakers for the room, wouldn’t the differences in monitoring not be that large? Basically, why should I upgrade my monitors at this point? EQ wont change the time domain. The goal in room treatment is a constant RT over the frequency range. Whats about phase issues created by the room or monitors itself? EQ cant change it no matter what they tell me in thier adverts. In my experience eq can change something for smooth correction in very small doses but it wont cure a 1.2 decay in the low end. For the monitors. I think everybody agrees that the NS10 sounds not so great. To be true IMO the construction is catastrophic. Subracting the missing lowbend an the hyped upper mids and the feeling your monitors create phase anomalies the NS10 tells me in no time if my mix translates well... There are many reasons for using diffrent monitors in mix time... , Well most EQ introduces phase issues that could in theory correct an issue if the stars align just right... Some of the higher end can do some time based correction.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 8, 2020 21:34:45 GMT -6
I believe Trinnov deals with this. I’m inching closer to considering the Trinnov.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 8, 2020 22:31:52 GMT -6
I believe Trinnov deals with this. I’m inching closer to considering the Trinnov. In many ways I find all this correction counterintuitive for mixing on small speakers, .001% are ever going to hear your stuff on a corrected system. The whole idea of near fields was to give an idea of every man’s speakers.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Jan 9, 2020 5:36:08 GMT -6
EQ wont change the time domain. The goal in room treatment is a constant RT over the frequency range. Whats about phase issues created by the room or monitors itself? EQ cant change it no matter what they tell me in thier adverts. In my experience eq can change something for smooth correction in very small doses but it wont cure a 1.2 decay in the low end. For the monitors. I think everybody agrees that the NS10 sounds not so great. To be true IMO the construction is catastrophic. Subracting the missing lowbend an the hyped upper mids and the feeling your monitors create phase anomalies the NS10 tells me in no time if my mix translates well... There are many reasons for using diffrent monitors in mix time... , Well most EQ introduces phase issues that could in theory correct an issue if the stars align just right... Some of the higher end can do some time based correction.
I learned something from this eric - cool thanks. But for a long decay problem in the low end.... I did try the IK multimedia thing and its not going to cure the problem. I had to build huge corner base traps to solve the ringing.
There is a different approach by an Austrian AE who cured room modes by sending phase inverted base over a corner loudspeaker into the room. But this is a very complicated approach.
Today I can understand why AE use mix cubes or NS10s for checking their mixes. Some full range speakers fool our ears, and our ear focuses on ranges which have nothing to do with the body of the music. The NS10 trains me to listen for body of the music.
If I had to start again my first monitors would be mix cubes and a pair of AKG K 701 HP for judging the lows. This would kill a lot of problems.
No trouble with low end room modes, no trouble with monitor construction phase issues - eg waveguides - ... Not believing marketing BS by GENELEC for example. And getting trained for listening to the body of the music.
Two years ago I learned in a long afternoon conversation, at the ME-Geithain factory, more about monitoring facts than ever before. It's not easy to build a good sounding NF monitor and most often they cut corners. If you try to go the least compromise, what they do at MEG, the NFMs get expensive.
BTW. If you are interested in those East-German monitors you can write the factory and you deposit the money. They send you a pair and if you don't like them you send them back and you will get your money back. For most users in home recording the 906 is interesting. The 906 is extremely phase accurate but the best of it all its an uncritical in placement. I took them to other studios and it was nothing but great. I worked on them right away. The 901 is made for not so good sounding rooms and its true I once had to work in my living room and it went wonderful.
Just in case there are props, or cultural or language barriers PM me and I will take care for it.
|
|