WHAT IS BEST: Studio Monitor Speakers or passive Towers in the receiver Yamaha 667? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 Old 01-17-2012, 01:46 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
aacasarin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Recently I was in the one recording of a CD in a studio and was impressed with the detail of these studio monitor speakers (it was a Genelec). The guitar looked like it was "inside the box", like the newly recorded. I really enjoyed! The impression I got was the same when I saw the first full HD video, but now in the audio.

How it came time to choose the front speakers in my set 7.1 (already I have 5.1), I thought, "could I use studio monitor speaker in front channel in place of the towers in a 7.1 system?"

In this logic, I believe it would:
- A outstanding stereo to listen to music! And it is my intention, music. I would use the mode "pure direct"of the Yamaha 667 receiver.
- A good 7.1. Films is in the background for me ...
- I would eliminate the need to buy a power (when with towers passive reference speakers), because the studio monitor are amplified and my receiver would be in debt with passive towers speakers.

MY SET:
- Receiver Yamaha RX-V667 with pre-outs for all channels.
- HTPC with ATI HD 5770 with integrated audio. It's the only with HDMI and DTS HD and Dolby TrueHD ... Can I buy a Audiophile 192 just for stereo listening (is there another?).
- Speakers 5.1 Infinity Primus (four P153 for surrounds + sub PS312 + center PC251).

The idea was a KRK Rokit Series 8 "(http://www.krksys.com/krk-studio-mon...t/rokit-8.html).

1) What do you think? Could put in place of the towers a studio monitor connected to the receiver via pre-out?

2) What are the advantages and disadvantages in the use of KRK studio monitor in place of a passive towers?


Cost / benefit ... yet it's no time to buy integrated amp + audiophile towers!

aacasarin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 01-17-2012, 02:25 PM
Member
 
dannut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 51
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
your home and a studio are probably two very different acoustic environments. Ditching the Primuses for the KRKs are not going to be a huge step up - mostly a step sideways. Look at the Genelecs, they are mostly more similar to your current gear sans the integrated amp in them. Why not make your home environment acoustically as close to the studio first, correctly calibrate everything, then worry about the speakers?
dannut is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 01-17-2012, 04:28 PM
Member
 
Robo162's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi aacasarin,

I'm have a Yamaha RX-V665 and a set of JBL LSR6325P-1 active studio monitors.

I've been very pleased with the results; plenty of power, the highs are clear but never harsh, very balanced sound with good placement.

The only real disadvantage is having to run the extra power cords, and improvising a way to have them turn on/off remotely.
I use the 12volt trigger on the receiver to switch on/off outlets on my APC power conditioner,
and supply power to the studio monitors and sub from those delayed-switched outlets. Works great, and no on/off thumps.

I use a Velodyne F1800R II for my sub, and crossover at 80hz.
This provides a good blend, when combined with good placement/phase/level matching.

I also have an Onkyo TX-SR876 and I get better sound overall using the Audyssey MultEQ XT correction than I do with the Yamaha's YPAO,
although I believe that the YPAO also made an improvement.

I like the fact that the amps and drivers in active monitors are engineered to work together as a system,
and I believe that that results in better sound.

I also use an HTPC and music sounds very good over HDMI,
just check to be sure that the sampling frequency is matched to the content being played ie: 44.1 Khz, 48 Khz, etc.
Robo162 is offline  
post #4 of 13 Old 01-18-2012, 05:02 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
aacasarin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ok, tks for answers!

Between an tower Energy CF50 or Klipsch F20 (with or without power) and Studio Monitor KRK 8, without sub, which is your choice?! Remember that I use Receiver Yamaha RX-V667 and no an integrade power (ex: Rotel high end)...

This disadvantage (connect to energy) is not problem for me.

"just check to be sure that the sampling frequency is matched to the content being played ie: 44.1 Khz, 48 Khz, etc." WHERE I CHECK? http://www.krksys.com/krk-studio-mon...t/rokit-8.html

Abç
aacasarin is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 01-18-2012, 06:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wayne A. Pflughaupt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Katy, TX USA
Posts: 2,000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12

Studio monitors are designed for near-field use (read “up close and personal”), so they typically will have reduced highs and a wider dispersion pattern compared to home speakers that are designed for distances 10 ft. or further away. Naturally, the highs can be re-adjusted if needed, and the wide dispersion might give a great, broad soundstage from further away.

Still, don’t make the mistake of getting the KRKs thinking you’re going to hear the fabulous sound you heard in the studio. Most of that immediacy and “detail” you heard was because you were probably listening to raw tracks. The final product is going to be compressed and equalized and processed to the point that you’ll barely recognize the sound and detail you originally heard from that guitar.

I mean, if you’ve personally heard the KRKs and like the way they sound, fine. But don’t get them thinking your home theater is going to sound like what you heard in the studio. You’ll be disappointed.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt



Wayne A. Pflughaupt is offline  
post #6 of 13 Old 01-18-2012, 05:26 PM
Member
 
Robo162's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by aacasarin View Post

Ok, tks for answers!

Between an tower Energy CF50 or Klipsch F20 (with or without power) and Studio Monitor KRK 8, without sub, which is your choice?! Remember that I use Receiver Yamaha RX-V667 and no an integrade power (ex: Rotel high end)...

This disadvantage (connect to energy) is not problem for me.

"just check to be sure that the sampling frequency is matched to the content being played ie: 44.1 Khz, 48 Khz, etc." WHERE I CHECK? http://www.krksys.com/krk-studio-mon...t/rokit-8.html

Abç

I've always preferred separate "small" speakers and a subwoofer. Perhaps you could get the monitors first, and then add a subwoofer later on.

Wayne is right in saying that you may not like the way monitors sound in your listening environment. It's always wise to buy from a vendor with a good return/exchange policy.

Be sure to experiment with different placements of the speakers, as even a small change can make a lot of differences in the sound/soundstage.

Regarding the HTPC sampling frequency:
My soundcard has configuration software that allows me to select the proper output sampling frequency (generally 44.1 Khz for CD sourced material and 48 Khz for Movies).
The concept is that if you allow the HTPC to change the original sampling frequency it can degrade the sound quality.

To make sure, you can check in the receiver's setup menu to see what the actual frequency being received is.
Robo162 is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 02:00 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
aacasarin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Tks for answers!

Ok. The best sampling frequency in my soundcard is "24bit, 192000 Hz". I select this and never change or change to others when I play one CD in other qualit?

aacasarin is offline  
post #8 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 02:53 PM
 
dragonfyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Just a few comments…

Quote:
Originally Posted by dannut View Post

your home and a studio are probably two very different acoustic environments. ……. Why not make your home environment acoustically as close to the studio first, correctly calibrate everything, then worry about the speakers?

The design of any room or studio necessarily incorporates the interaction of the speakers and the room.

You do not simply ‘design a room’ and plop some speakers, regardless of what label one might attach to them, or of their actual power response/spatial dispersion characteristics, into the space.

The analysis and treatment of the room necessarily involves the interaction of the specific speakers and the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne A. Pflughaupt View Post

[font="Comic Sans MS"]
Studio monitors are designed for near-field use (read “up close and personal”)

SOME are.

The problem here to which I am referring is in the reference to “studio monitors” as if they imply a particular universal response. The term, unfortunately, has no real definition outside of its colloquial use.

I dare say that Kinoshita, KRK, Novo, DynAudio and NHT monitors are not simply ‘interchangeable’ without variance in the response.

Wayne’s suggestion that by simply swapping speakers that you will not necessarily obtain the response you desire or expect simply by virtue of having gone and found a speaker that has “studio monitor” attached to it is well founded.

So, while we have seemingly found fault with the original notion, on the other hand, this is not to necessarily denigrate such speakers either.

The larger point to understand is the speaker–room interaction is a holistic endeavor. Neither the speaker nor room operate independently of the other.

And a failure to approach the system in an integrated manner – whatever speakers you choose, is a recipe for sub-optimal behavior.

One bit of data that would be wise to evaluate is valid polar/power response measurements. Such plots can provide a good indication as the the degree of boundary interaction that you can anticipate in your space and how the total energy is distributed.

The advantage of dealing with some of the professional market products is that such measurements are often (but unfortunately, still not necessarily) available. Take that as a red flag.... Having access to such information makes conducting preliminary ‘napkin’ analysis and anticipating some of the treatment complexity much easier.

So, in response to your original proposal, proper speaker selection may result in a better listening experience. but please do not simply buy speakers based on the attachment of some amorphous term such as "studio monitor" on a box. There is a bit more to understanding the design and behavior than the term. But that said, I would not eliminate product aimed at the 'professional' market from consideration! Just expand your POV a bit further to include not only the specs of the speaker, but how that speaker (based upon Valid specs) can be expected to contribute to the speaker-room interaction. Having a grasp of this, and followed up with good speaker and room measurements, one can achieve a superior listening experience.


And while you are on the subject of speaker selection, another requirement for surround mixing in the studio is that ALL of the "main" speakers be identical.

Quoting from The Recording Academy's Producers & Engineers Wing
Recommendations For Surround Sound Production
regarding "professional mix environments":

"All main speakers should be identical, of the same brand and model. Only full range direct radiator speakers should be used; satellite and dipole speakers have no place in the professional mixing environment (see section 3-2). Mid-field monitoring is usually preferred for surround mixing. (Unlike nearfield monitors, mid-field monitors are designed to be used free-standing and not placed on top of a console meter bridge.) In the interest of uniform frequency response, all main speakers should be placed on speaker stands; the front speakers should not be placed on top of the console meter bridge. The use of movable speaker stands can be helpful if the rear speakers are to be shifted or angled differently from project to project because of genre-specific considerations...(see section 3.3.1)."



I will seriously suggest that one would be wise to learn from the studios and to comply with this format requirement in the ‘home’ as well.
dragonfyr is offline  
post #9 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 04:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
As long as we're doing it, here's my 2p:
  • Recording studios are intended to serve a very specific purpose that's almost never compatible with listening to finished musical recordings in a relaxed environment for the purpose of enjoyment.
  • Studio monitors are designed on purpose to reveal flaws, which makes them less than ideal for the end user's enjoyment.
  • KRK ain't no Genelec!
  • While near-field monitors are hardly the only (or even primary) studio speaker system, the KRK is made to sit on a mixing desk. So it's a poor choice to replace two of seven matched HT speakers.
I'm guessing that English is not your best language, based on a few verbal clues. So when you say 'the best sampling frequency in my soundcard is "24bit, 192000 Hz"' I presume that you mean "maximum" or "biggest numbers" and not "best" as in "good, better, best".

If you work with AES/EBU-standard recordings at that native (actual) bit depth and sampling frequency, that's fine. If you're only selecting the biggest numbers with no other plan, it might not hurt. But on the other hand it will not be an improvement either.

Your question is like asking the price of a Rolls Royce. "If you need to ask, you can't afford it" is the answer for the Roller. For the audio card it's more like "if you have to ask, you don't need to change it."

Since it's a home theater, and home theater audio is typically distributed 24-bit/48kHz for most channels, setting your sound card to this default is ideal. Going higher will gain nothing, and may cause problems. If you listen to CD audio all the time, 16-bit/44.1kHz is ideal. Even then it's not likely to make enough of a difference for you to notice.

Try not to force a lower setting like 10-bit/32kHz. Although the software should correct this automatically, there's no need to test that! When it comes to 44.1 vs. 48, it's kind of like 50Hz AC in Europe and 60Hz in the US. It's no big deal unless you do any calculations, like EQ inside the computer. Even then most newer computers have more than enough power to make the more difficult calculations easily.

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #10 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 06:28 PM
 
dragonfyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post

[*]Recording studios are intended to serve a very specific purpose that's almost never compatible with listening to finished musical recordings in a relaxed environment for the purpose of enjoyment.

I disagree!

To which acoustic response model are you referring? The only prominent model that one might feel that way would be a non-environment room! And the irony is that with the overly general application of non-frequency selective porous bass traps and too thin over applied porous panels,which is (along with quite a few issues additional errors in coloration and localization that are absolutely absent in a NE room!) exactly what most folks actually come closest to achieving via inadequate analysis and treatment in a home listening space!

The various major acoustical response models vary from a total focus on the direct sound with a total exclusion of later arriving semi-diffuse energy, to a highly intelligible early arriving direct signal with a fully developed later arriving soundfield that not only allows for the accurate reproduction of the recorded behavior, but also provides for a very substantial and pleasing sense of space and envelopment as provided by the room itself while simultaneously maximizing the perception of the recording (which may also expose 'flaws' in the recording/mixing process...).

The irony is that that typical listening room, including those treated in the manner most commonly recommended on most online websites, features compromises including room contribution that obscure the full extent (duration) of the recorded source, as well featuring indirect signals that compromise the localization, imaging, intelligibility and coloring of the recorded source - which result in a veritable 'fun house of mirrors' that may be seem "enjoyable" (especially if one is unable to compare the experience with the optimal), and which are anything but what was produced in engineer's seat.

I'm sorry, but this imagined notion that an average room with an average HT configuration is more accurate or enjoyable compared to the sound in a well designed studio featuring optimized localization, imaging, intelligibility and sense of temporal and spatial envelopment is simply incorrect.
dragonfyr is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 06:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonfyr View Post

I disagree!

That is one point that I will never have any doubt of.

Quote:


To which acoustic response model are you referring?

I have no idea. I don't even know what you are referring to.

Quote:


The only prominent model that one might feel that way would be a non-environment room! And the irony is that with the overly general application of non-frequency selective porous bass traps and too thin over applied porous panels,which is (along with quite a few issues additional errors in coloration and localization that are absolutely absent in a NE room!) exactly what most folks actually come closest to achieving via inadequate analysis and treatment in a home listening space!

I'm glad it's only one who might feel that way! I can only imagine how bad my headache would get if I saw that in stereo...

I can't make heads nor tails of what you wrote. But I stand by my opinion about the differences between the tools of working professionals and the toys of idle consumers. My NLE equipment will remain in my office and my TiVo will remain facing my couch.

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #12 of 13 Old 01-26-2012, 07:08 PM
 
dragonfyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post

Recording studios are intended to serve a very specific purpose that's almost never compatible with listening to finished musical recordings in a relaxed environment for the purpose of enjoyment.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post


I have no idea. I don't even know what you are referring to.

...But I stand by my opinion about the differences between the tools of working professionals and the toys of idle consumers.


Seeing as how what I mentioned is a critical function of the acoustical performance of the spaces about which you "have no idea", you might want to refrain from making unsubstantiated statements about the performance of the that to which you "don't even know what (I am) referring to."
dragonfyr is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 08-01-2012, 07:02 PM
Member
 
Hawaiiancerveza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Hilo Hawaii
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
No Event studio monitors?
Hawaiiancerveza is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off