|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 21:15:51 GMT -6
Why can't I get YouTube Volume figured out? I'm not talking about mixing for YouTube. I'm talking about why, no matter how hard I seem to try, it's always so loud as fuck when I go to watch videos.
Is there some trick I'm missing? I just don't want YT to blow everything up everytime I play videos.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 21:06:11 GMT -6
For those of you with kh310s, or who have at least used or tried them, to what degree did you adjust any of the eq settings on the back versus flat?
I'm asking because, though I know Neumann recommends flat settings for studio environments, I've been messing around with the +1dB treble setting on the kh310s and been "maybe" getting better results. The jury is still out, but it's a little closer in the high end to what the Lyds do at a flat setting.
Which then opens Pandora's box as far as what I might be able to achieve with either the Lyd OR kh310 if a Sonarworks/Trinnov/Dirac/etc. comes into play...
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 14:09:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 11:36:15 GMT -6
So you prefer the Lyd 48s to the KH310, or at least think they are of similar quality? I can't make up my mind just yet. I will say that the Lyds are inspiring in ways that the KH310s don't seem to be. Now granted, that may be because the 310s are actually the flatter speaker, which should in theory be the preferable thing. I'm just unclear on why I am preferring the Lyds and struggling to figure that out. I do ultimately want a flat monitor. I just need to figure out if the Neumann is actually flatter or just boring. One other observation I've noticed has to do with the sweet spot. I realize that the wave guide on the 310s is supposed to allow for a wide sweet spot. However, one thing I sort of like about the Dyns (my old BM5As and the Lyd 48s) is that you KNOW when you enter or leave the sweet spot. Which, even if it may not be as wide of a sweet spot as the 310s, you have confidence that you are in it and not second guessing yourself. I suppose I'd get used to it, but I feel like I might be constantly wondering if I'm truly in the sweet spot when using the 310s, and getting all of the information. The sweet spot on the Dyns is strong and you know when you're in it or when you leave it. One last post and I hope this helps in context.. Just for a contrast I ordered a pair of Genelec 8341's, if you read any technical specifications they seem to score even better and in terms of flat GLM (DSP, phase etc. correction software) will make sure they win every time.
They sounded nothing like the Neumann's, the Genelec's were much more inline with the LYD 48's. So IMO if you're looking for a correlation in terms of what's "right" IME you're barking up the wrong tree, I've yet to find out what's the ultimate reference even at a pricier levels than this. If you truly want flat look into room correction software or a pair of speakers with proper DSP correction or even both. From there on it's just what you get on with the best..
The Dyn's have a strong phantom centre and it's wide enough to understand where you need to be. It also helps with placement because out of that the image collapses, now the 310's are quite coaxial in their representation but for lack of better words I found the staging a bit more distant if not wider. Neither wrong, just different I guess.. For another comparison the 59's have a huge sweet spot, far larger than the LYD's but it's a lot more defined in my room than the KH310's.
In the end it came down to price, the Neumann's started somewhat knocking on the door of the Core 59's. In a loose translation after taxes the 59's are $5K here, the Neumann's are $4.2K and the LYD's are $2150.00. I certainly don't think they're $2K better, ultimately it seemed like a minor upgrade with some shortcomings as opposed to a must have and the price just threw them out of the equation. So I guess it depends what you can get them for? At one point on sale I saw the KH310's for $3.5K and I nearly bought them.
Yeah, this all pretty much tracks with the thought process I've been having on this up to this point. As there is no way to truly say what is flat, it's a crap shoot to try to hit that mark. That being said, I'm trying out a bunch of references to maybe sort of iteratively convince myself of what I believe to be the most honest playback for me in my room. I think I'm generally with you on the 310s not being worth the extra $2.5k. I did pick them up as a demo unit, so I paid about $4k for the 310s, versus the usual $5k. Even then though, if I sent the 310s back and used the savings to get a sub and/or something like a Dirac, I could see myself being happier.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 9:45:31 GMT -6
Yeah, that's what I'm trying to figure out right now. I'm trying to be brutally honest with myself and cut out as much bias as I can. If I had to pick at this very moment, I think I'd be going with the Lyds and maybe also one of those matching Dyn subs. Luckily I still have a few weeks before I need to send one or the other back, so I'm not done testing and may prefer the 310s at some point. More testing may reveal things that I'm not seeing yet. That's why I'm hoping to use the Neumann's long enough to sort of overcome the "normal" thing. have you done a mix of the same song through both monitors yet? Set one set up, come back the next day and start from scratch. Set the next monitors up and come back the next day and start from scratch. Do each mix cold so you're not biasing your ears. Take each mix and go somewhere else, like the car or work or somewhere out of your element and listen to each. You should hear pretty clear differences if one monitor or the other is coloring the sound too much. Or we can take a listen to the mixes and give feedback. Yes, I've been doing that, but I'm not done trying this out just yet.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 9:28:00 GMT -6
Those are more or less the same observations I had comparing the Lyd to the KH310. I think I prefer the mids and highs on the Lyds, but the lows on the KH310. This is why I've been considering the idea of keeping the Lyds and getting a sub to help out with the lows. It would still be cheaper than the KH310s. If you were forced to pick between the Lyds and KH310s, which way would you go? I thought about the Core 59s, but ultimately decided it was more than I wanted to spend. If I ever do decide to spend that kind of money, I think I'm going to be looking directly at the ATC SCM25A. Those seem like they would check all of the boxes for me. Maybe one day... Go with what you know. If you like the dynaudio sound and it works for you, but you just need a little more of it, then go for the Lyds. Knowing what works is worth more than trying to find a unicorn. From how you describe the difficulty in identifying any major selling points between them, they're likely going to give you similar results in the long run. Of course, the downside is never really knowing if you're missing out on something because your ears have been used to the Dynaudio sound for so long it just sounds "normal". Yeah, that's what I'm trying to figure out right now. I'm trying to be brutally honest with myself and cut out as much bias as I can. If I had to pick at this very moment, I think I'd be going with the Lyds and maybe also one of those matching Dyn subs. Luckily I still have a few weeks before I need to send one or the other back, so I'm not done testing and may prefer the 310s at some point. More testing may reveal things that I'm not seeing yet. That's why I'm hoping to use the Neumann's long enough to sort of overcome the "normal" thing.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 9:17:38 GMT -6
Those are more or less the same observations I had comparing the Lyd to the KH310. I think I prefer the mids and highs on the Lyds, but the lows on the KH310. This is why I've been considering the idea of keeping the Lyds and getting a sub to help out with the lows. It would still be cheaper than the KH310s. If you were forced to pick between the Lyds and KH310s, which way would you go? I thought about the Core 59s, but ultimately decided it was more than I wanted to spend. If I ever do decide to spend that kind of money, I think I'm going to be looking directly at the ATC SCM25A. Those seem like they would check all of the boxes for me. Maybe one day... Personally I'd save the money and go with the LYD 48's. McIrish and Ragan seem to rock with them and they do some impressive mixes..
I did try the SCM45A's and bear in mind before my different perspective gets jumped on it's just an opinion. I still preferred the Core 59's, I'm sure some of it's down to familiarity with the Dynaudio sound but there's only so much mid range clarity one needs and the Dyn's certainly go a lot lower with their uber clean bass. I had the option between PSI, ATC and Geithain, I love all of them but I saved myself a few bucks and still got an end game monitor.
So it sounds like you prefer the Lyd 48s to the KH310, or at least think they are of similar quality? That's sort of where I'm leaning at this point. The Neumann's are quite a bit more expensive, so I was hoping for a more noticeable increase in quality. I can't make up my mind just yet. I will say that the Lyds are inspiring in ways that the KH310s don't seem to be. Now granted, that may be because the 310s are actually the flatter speaker, which should in theory be the preferable thing. I'm just unclear on why I am preferring the Lyds and struggling to figure that out. I do ultimately want a flat monitor. I just need to figure out if the Neumann is actually flatter or just boring. One other observation I've noticed has to do with the sweet spot. I realize that the wave guide on the 310s is supposed to allow for a wide sweet spot. However, one thing I sort of like about the Dyns (my old BM5As and the Lyd 48s) is that you KNOW when you enter or leave the sweet spot. Which, even if it may not be as wide of a sweet spot as the 310s, you have confidence that you are in it and not second guessing yourself. I suppose I'd get used to it, but I feel like I might be constantly wondering if I'm truly in the sweet spot when using the 310s, and getting all of the information. The sweet spot on the Dyns is strong and you know when you're in it or when you leave it.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 8:46:08 GMT -6
When it comes to the highs, I think I might agree with you. However the Lyds are showing me things in the mids that I feel like are better than the 310s AND my old Dyns. I kind of wish the Lyds could have a baby with the 310s and keep most of what the Lyds are doing, but just with the extra tightness in the lows of the 310s. I'm definitely not done comparing, and the 310s aren't done burning in either. There will be a lot of back and forth over the next week or two.
I agree with Svart, the LYD's just sound "normal" yet detailed or flat enough to translate and spot issues. Although, I don't consider normality to be their downside, if it sounds right on those it will usually translate across a wide medium because they're directly relatable.
Ultimately though I preferred certain elements of both and in a perfect world I'd combine them. LMF detail could be better with the DYN's and the KH310's did a better job representing that portion, I will say for me the Dynaudio Core 59's were several steps above both of them. It took three months to make a decision, some of it due to delays or money but in the end I bought the Core 59's and they should last me a few decades.
Those are more or less the same observations I had comparing the Lyd to the KH310. I think I prefer the mids and highs on the Lyds, but the lows on the KH310. This is why I've been considering the idea of keeping the Lyds and getting a sub to help out with the lows. It would still be cheaper than the KH310s. If you were forced to pick between the Lyds and KH310s, which way would you go? I thought about the Core 59s, but ultimately decided it was more than I wanted to spend. If I ever do decide to spend that kind of money, I think I'm going to be looking directly at the ATC SCM25A. Those seem like they would check all of the boxes for me. Maybe one day...
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 14, 2022 2:38:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 13, 2022 20:32:16 GMT -6
now that i've had the LYDs a while now, I do kinda wish they had more power. I'm sure between the extra 20Hz down below and Sonarworks dipping my output, I'm losing a bit, but still hate that i'm adding plugs to boost the output during tracking. Seems the easiest way to fix is to just add the sub. I love how they sound and working on them and adding a sub is a helluva lot cheaper than buying new monitors. I'm still deciding what I'm gonna do, but the thought had occured to me about just taking the money I would save by going with the Lyds and buying the Dynaudio sub to take the bass load off of the Lyds. I still just don't know if I want to mess with a sub though. I'd be worried that I'd constantly be second guessing what I'm hearing because of the potential for timing anomalies and what not, due to the bass coming from a second location.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 13, 2022 13:40:38 GMT -6
Do we really need MORE plugins? Isn’t this market already saturated? I hear you. Other than some utility type stuff, my plugin purchasing has slowed way down in recent years. I basically have all the basic eq/comp/reverb plugins I could possibly need. I'm kind of at the point that, unless it's a noticeable upgrade in function and/or sound, I'm probably not going to buy it.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 20:22:15 GMT -6
I could be wrong, but I don't think the Dirac does time and phase? Regardless - this has really completely changed things for me. I'm just repeating what everyone that had one said to me before I go it. I would say maybe Sound ID will get you 70% of the way there...but as we know in this obsession, the last bits are usually more expensive and really gets you all the way there. The phase and delay adjustments are what make this stand out. The imaging is kind've nuts...and things I've previously had some issues with - reverb level, stereo width and panning resolution, trusting that what you're hearing is going to translate everywhere - it has been eye-opening. for the first few days, when dialing it in and listening to other major label releases, yeah - it sounded better than SW, but it wasn't like night and day. Those releases sounded great on SW too. Tighter and objectively better on the Trinnov, but $4300 better? I wasn't sure. But then I started mixing with it. My first attempt at a mix I had been in the middle of just came out tremendously better than previous versions. My mixes could be kind've "scooped" in comparison to major label releases. When I'd get it in the car, you could tell. There was like a plastic-ness that I couldn't get a hold of. Honestly, I had kind've attributed it to the "Oh, I guess they have tens of thousands of dollars of outboard, mixing on consoles, etc." But now I feel like mine - even with my temporary mastering sounds extremely competitive. In fact, I sent that first mix to Chad and he said he compared it to the new Keith Urban release - and he preferred mine. Now - maybe he's just being nice, but I honestly don't know if I disagree. (Not totally sure I like that new KU mix, though) It really makes me think punch and heft is less a result of transformers (sure, it's that too) and hardware, etc...and more a result in the mixer being able to actually HEAR. I feel like this is one of those purchases that can put you onto a new plateau. What speakers do you mix on? Your comments are interesting, because I got all those experiences and revelations and translation certainty when I upgraded from K&H 0300’s to ATC 25’s (used in a flat response treated room I should add) I just couldn’t trust the 0300’s even though I’d used them for 12 years - they were too soft and polite they never screamed at me to fix things! The ATC 25’s are brutally honest. The mid information is almost scary. It sounds like the Trinnov is giving you that kinda degree of certainty which is fantastic - makes mixing with total confidence possible. Tell me more about your "polite" comments in regards to the O300. I've heard similar comments about the Neumann kh310, which are more or less the successors to the O300s, and I've got a pair of those kh310s in right now for comparison against a pair of Lyd 48s. I've sort of started to feel like maybe I know what people mean when they've made such comments about the O300 or kh310. But I'd still be curious to hear you elaborate on this.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 17:20:55 GMT -6
So I'm going to give the Neumann's some more time to burn in over the next 24 hours but, at first glance, I think the Lyds sound better. I like the midrange presentation on the Lyds better, as in I feel like I'm maybe hearing more of the mids. I like the highs better on the Lyds and that could maybe just come down to the fact that's it's a very similar sound to me since I already have Dynaudio monitors with soft dome tweeters. I think the Lyds are punchier. The Lyds sound more 3D. I do think the Neumann's maybe sound a little tighter in the lows, which I imagine is because of the sealed cabinet. Now I just have to decide why I think I'm liking the Lyds better. Is it because the Lyds are just better monitors and I'm hearing the music come through better or is it because the Lyds are hyping things and the Neumann's just sound comparatively not as good (boring?) because they are actually the flatter, more honest monitor? Most likely you're used to the dynaudio sound first and foremost so it sounds most "normal". But the only real test is which one gives you a better result in translation and/or faster problem resolution. When it comes to the highs, I think I might agree with you. However the Lyds are showing me things in the mids that I feel like are better than the 310s AND my old Dyns. I kind of wish the Lyds could have a baby with the 310s and keep most of what the Lyds are doing, but just with the extra tightness in the lows of the 310s. I'm definitely not done comparing, and the 310s aren't done burning in either. There will be a lot of back and forth over the next week or two.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 16:53:32 GMT -6
So I'm going to give the Neumann's some more time to burn in over the next 24 hours but, at first glance, I think the Lyds sound better.
I like the midrange presentation on the Lyds better, as in I feel like I'm maybe hearing more of the mids. I like the highs better on the Lyds and that could maybe just come down to the fact that's it's a very similar sound to me since I already have Dynaudio monitors with soft dome tweeters. I think the Lyds are punchier. The Lyds sound more 3D. I do think the Neumann's maybe sound a little tighter in the lows, which I imagine is because of the sealed cabinet.
Now I just have to decide why I think I'm liking the Lyds better. Is it because the Lyds are just better monitors and I'm hearing the music come through better or is it because the Lyds are hyping things and the Neumann's just sound comparatively not as good (boring?) because they are actually the flatter, more honest monitor?
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 12:07:55 GMT -6
If that's how the Trinnov works then, yeah, that'd be the best way to do it. I didn't realize that the Trinnov could do it all in the digital realm, sans any AD/DA. Can the Dirac hardware do this? I think there is an all digital version of the miniDSP. I'm seeing that now. The studio version with AES looks to be $1000.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 9:41:17 GMT -6
I use Trinnov w/ an Avocet. AES from an Aurora(n) into Trinnov, AES out to the Avocet, so the Trinnov is doing all of it's work digitally, and the DAC is the high end Crane Song. Works perfectly. I actually have an AES splitter cable as well from Aurora, bypassing the Trinnov and going into AVOCET DIG Input 2, so with a single button on my Avocet Remote, I can bypass Trinnov completely; this is great for tracking, when I am in headhpones; bypasses trinnov and the associated latency. Couldn't be happier with this setup. If that's how the Trinnov works then, yeah, that'd be the best way to do it. I didn't realize that the Trinnov could do it all in the digital realm, sans any AD/DA. Can the Dirac hardware do this?
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 9:05:48 GMT -6
Conversion associated with DSP-based monitors is definitely something I've thought about. Thus far in my testing of the Lyd 48s, I don't feel like I'm noticing any negative impact, though it would probably be hard to make an objective comparison because my current non-DSP monitors are otherwise an inferior monitor. There's too many variables to make an objective conclusion on the direct impact of any conversion on the whole thing. And this is where it gets tricky, DSP just makes things easy and cheap as well as I can do things that would be impossible in an analog system. Is it worth the sonic price of sub par conversion ? It’s the new audio version of which came first the chicken or the egg? We can debate it but there is no real overall answer. It simply comes down to what works for you. The other fun thing is you add DSP and conversion you add latency. I can’t diss anyone for going either route, but I’ll say this I really wish more manufacturers were as focused on lowering distortion as ATC. I thought about some ATC two ways for a minute when I was looking at monitors in my price range, but I just really wanted a pair of three ways. Thus far, I'm pretty happy with narrowing my search down to only three ways. I can hear midrange in a noticeably better way, and the distortion, especially in the bass region, is noticeably lower on these Lyds than my current monitors. I suppose that, in a perfect world, I would only entertain the the idea of 100% analog monitors, but DSP does bring some things to the table that, like mentioned, would be hard or even impossible in the analog realm, especially when price is a consideration. Speaking of latency, I would guess the latency is typically really low when DSP is used in monitors. I'm talking like in the realm on 1 ms, but maybe I'm wrong about that.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 8:30:02 GMT -6
That's one thing that kind of gives me pause about these sort of hardware boxes. You spend all of this time settling on what you want for your main mix DA conversion and then you potentially end up running it through a second round of conversion that you may not be so happy with, regardless of the nice functionality that said hardware box may bring to the table. I like the idea of these boxes, but it does make you wonder. I had assumed that the Dirac probably had pretty good conversion, so this is a little surprising to hear, but it's good to know. At least you can purchase the software independently and use it on your own computer. That said, the ability to let the box just do it's thing in the background, without having to worry about cpu and things, is not without it's worth. I Agree 100% but let’s not forget if your active monitors use DSP there is no way to bypass or choose your converters. Conversion associated with DSP-based monitors is definitely something I've thought about. Thus far in my testing of the Lyd 48s, I don't feel like I'm noticing any negative impact, though it would probably be hard to make an objective comparison because my current non-DSP monitors are otherwise an inferior monitor. There's too many variables to make an objective conclusion on the direct impact of any conversion on the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 7:52:06 GMT -6
Is that the conversion guts of a Digi002 inside the the MiniDSP or something? No they just sound that bad! I like the box without conversion, almost bought the 8 ch and a Mytek to use for prototyping and tuning. That's one thing that kind of gives me pause about these sort of hardware boxes. You spend all of this time settling on what you want for your main mix DA conversion and then you potentially end up running it through a second round of conversion that you may not be so happy with, regardless of the nice functionality that said hardware box may bring to the table. I like the idea of these boxes, but it does make you wonder. I had assumed that the Dirac probably had pretty good conversion, so this is a little surprising to hear, but it's good to know. At least you can purchase the software independently and use it on your own computer. That said, the ability to let the box just do it's thing in the background, without having to worry about cpu and things, is not without it's worth.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 12, 2022 6:20:03 GMT -6
That’s interesting so it’s basically a rack mount computer that runs their proprietary OS. Wonder how it compares to some of the Mini DSP options with Dirac. Love the Dirac software, the conversion in the MiniDSP sucks, I mean digi002 sucks. Is that the conversion guts of a Digi002 inside the the MiniDSP or something?
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 11, 2022 17:29:26 GMT -6
So I haven't had a chance to even plug the Neumann's in yet, but I'm already really liking these Lyds. They're very familiar sounding to me, as my current monitors are also Dynaudio, but everything is just ...better...
I like. The Neumann's definitely have some competition. We'll see how those sound next.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 11, 2022 8:32:41 GMT -6
John, which Trinnov did you get? There seems to be a bunch of different options.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 8, 2022 12:08:30 GMT -6
Ditto, I was about to say something similar. Not that I'm sure the Burls don't sound great, but I imagine a big part of that is due to the transformers and what not. I have a 2192 (also designed by Rich Williams of Burl) that I also prefer to my Apollo, but I similarly attribute most of what I like about it to the surrounding electronics and not so much the conversion itself. I mean, the 2192 is how old now? I'm not still using it because I think it's on the current (2022) bleeding edge of conversion. I just like the sound. I've had long talks with Rich about how he designs his converters. According to him it's not just the transformers, the analog circuit or the actual converter chips. It's all of it together. The whole being greater than the sum of the parts as it were. Transformers are not just color boxes - they perform important functions within the circuit. Each detail of the design affects every other detail. The choice of anti-aliasing filter type interacts with the choice of what transistors he uses, as just one small example. He spends many hours listening to different combinations of elements until he finds his sound. When a certain chip, transistor or some component becomes unavailable, it's a big headache to find a replacement. This is why putting some nice analog hardware in front of another converter doesn't do the same thing as using a Burl. Not that it doesn't sound good, but it's not the same thing. Take it from me, as I spent many years doing just that before Burl came along. Now I use the analog hardware and the Burls together and couldn't be happier. The Burls preserve more of what I like about the analog sound. 'Can't separate the front end from the conversion as they're all part of the "gestalt". That tracks more or less with what I've read, and I'm sure that's part of the reason I like my 2192.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 8, 2022 10:02:11 GMT -6
No desire to argue about it. I’ll just say I disagree based on my experience in the industry. most of the debate is political in nature and has little to do with better reliability or lower prices on either side. 👍 Yeah, I don't want to get into a protracted argument either. 👍
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jul 8, 2022 9:36:31 GMT -6
again no. largest share of blame is in weather. cant run a power plant when you can't get fuel. wind turbines and gas producing wells froze up just like power plants. Oh, I wasn't saying that wind and basically everything else didn't fail too. I was just saying that it was disingenuous for Abbott and others to try to create this narrative of "if only we hadn't been relying on renewables...." that they tried to do, as if everything that wasn't winterized didn't also fail. As for the weather, we'll have to agree to disagree on that. The weather is getting more erratic due to global warming and we're seeing a higher number of these extreme weather events as a result. The Texas PUC (so we're not talking about the Feds here) recommended things to harden against this sort of event a decade ago, but these recommendations weren't followed. As for higher prices, I am more than fine with that if it means we have a more reliable grid. Let's also not forget that, though the prices we pay are theoretically cheaper than what we might pay if the cost of winterization, etc. were built into the prices, the prices shot up through the roof (100s of times more per kWh) when rates increased as a result of demand, so I'd say that the "cheaper prices" argument doesn't hold water when cheaper everyday prices are basically subsidized by momentary extreme pricing. We're still paying for it one way or another. Depending on which side of the equation one is, this bug might be considered a feature, but I for one am in the bug camp. The prices shot so high that it bankrupted some local/regional electricity providers. There is something very wrong with a system set up like that, and especially when it's a system that provides something every single one of us needs.
|
|