KRK Monitors

[mostapha]

Those ns-10s also have a ridiculous history. Every studio since they came out has had a set because they kinda sound like generically good but not amazing hi-fi speakers that don't specifically mess up sound with "processing", whatever that means to Sony and Pioneer.

[deathstarchris]

Yes, mostapha, the flatter the response the better, but there is one more point I can make here.

Most of you are familiar with 'active' monitors. But before there were active monitors, there were passive. The NS-10M's are passive. This is huge.
Why?

With active you are expecting the manufacturer to do a certain amount of work for you and have them choose your amplifier for you. You are hoping they make the right decision with matching the amplifier to the speakers.

I have spent many hours studying the difference between amplifiers.
I use 3 different amplifiers with my NS-10M's.



I have 2 niles switches that allow me to switch inputs and outputs to 3 different amplifiers. The first amp is a custom built tube amp with balanced EL34A's. The second is a early transistor amp from the 60's that also was a custom built kit from Dynaco, and the last is a modern day transistor amp, that I routinely switch out to compare against newer designs.
The three different amps really allow me to analyze how the NS-10M's are being influenced by different harmonic distortions at different frequencies.

Here is a shot of my mixing desk. These NS-10M's are the bookshelf version that came with covers. This helps minimize the shrill high's of the top frequencies. (Shown with one cover off)



Once you really take your audio seriously, you find yourself exploring and answering more questions than anything else. This has been a maddening pursuit and I would advise against it unless you really must know why something sounds the way it does.

[jimbrowski00]

I debated getting KRK's or Thumps for the same purpose as you... I went with a single Mackie Thump 12" for its portability/durability. I agree that the sound is nothing to brag about but it gets the job done for a small house party or casual dj practice at home.

If you are not going to be moving your speakers around very often, then I would suggest the 8" KRK's since they will sound better, but if you plan on taking them places then just go with some Thumps or even Behringers since they will transport easier. You are compromising either way really... you could get better sounding PA speakers but the price jumps quite a bit.

[mostapha]

I have spent many hours studying the difference between amplifiers.

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

AFAIK, no one's been paid yet.

Not specifically insulting you, but I have yet to see or hear anything that implies that any not-broken amplifier sounds different than any other until you're running them hotter than you should anyway.

"Warmth" tends to mean the beginning of power stage saturation. Good for guitars…arguable for full songs…bad for monitors.

[deathstarchris]

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

AFAIK, no one's been paid yet.

Not specifically insulting you, but I have yet to see or hear anything that implies that any not-broken amplifier sounds different than any other until you're running them hotter than you should anyway.

"Warmth" tends to mean the beginning of power stage saturation. Good for guitars…arguable for full songs…bad for monitors.

No offense,
You need to do a little more homework for yourself and quote from personal experience, not the results from someone else.
Apples and oranges my man, apples and oranges.
I have had several engineers show me otherwise, and I hear the difference myself loud and clear.
Like the difference between MP3 and vinyl. Obvious.

[djproben]

No offense,
You need to do a little more homework for yourself and quote from personal experience, not the results from someone else.
Apples and oranges my man, apples and oranges.
I have had several engineers show me otherwise, and I hear the difference myself loud and clear.
Like the difference between MP3 and vinyl. Obvious.

Is the challenge still running? If this is true it seems like an easy way to make $10k. I read through the challenge and it seems pretty interesting if his results are true; it's one thing to hear a difference when you know what you are listening to but if you can't hear the difference in an ABX test that would seem to indicate the differences are somewhat less than objective.

I didn't see this mentioned in the challenge but would it be legit to compare a tube vs a transistor amp? I could see there being little to no difference among amps of the same kind but I would think you could hear the difference between tube and transistor pretty clearly. At least that was my experience listening to tubes in the Manley showroom at CES last year (and I'll check it out again this year), but of course I knew what I was listening to so it wasn't a blind test, and the Manley amps were paired with certain speakers and sound sources that were different from the other amps I listened to, so the test didn't necessarily measure the differences between amps alone.


--> EDIT - I just noticed this part; so apparently comparing tubes to transistors is kosher in the test, but an eq might be involved to level the playing field: "Richard Clark allows the equalizer to be added to whichever amplifier the listener wants. It can be added to the amplifier that the listener perceives as the weaker amplifier . The EQ is most likely to be used when comparing a tube amplifier (which exhibits slight high frequency rolloff) to a solid state amplifier . In that case Richard Clark says he can usually fashion an equalizer out of just a resistor and/or capacitor which for just a few dollars makes the solid state amplifier exhibit the same rolloff as the tube amplifier, and therefore sound the same. If the tube amplifier really sounded better, then modifying the solid state amplifier to sound indistinguishable from it for a few bucks should be a great improvement. "

[deathstarchris]

Is the challenge still running? If this is true it seems like an easy way to make $10k. I read through the challenge and it seems pretty interesting if his results are true; it's one thing to hear a difference when you know what you are listening to but if you can't hear the difference in an ABX test that would seem to indicate the differences are somewhat less than objective.

I didn't see this mentioned in the challenge but would it be legit to compare a tube vs a transistor amp? I could see there being little to no difference among amps of the same kind but I would think you could hear the difference between tube and transistor pretty clearly. At least that was my experience listening to tubes in the Manley showroom at CES last year (and I'll check it out again this year), but of course I knew what I was listening to so it wasn't a blind test, and the Manley amps were paired with certain speakers and sound sources that were different from the other amps I listened to, so the test didn't necessarily measure the differences between amps alone.

mostapha brings the usual side of this argument, and I started my side of these comments in this thread stating that monitors are a personal choice.

Recently (about 8 months ago) I brought a engineer into my studio and had him sit in front of my mixing desk where I performed a blind test on him. I played the exact same 45 second wav at the same volume, playing through the three sources. He also like mostapha thought there would be little to no discernible difference, and he was amazed how much difference there was.

What really amazed me was that he correctly identified the three sources correctly! I told him there was a tube amp, an early transistor amp and a modern day amp. He correctly identified all three sources.
This tells me he knew what he was hearing and where those sources would be altered depending on the source.

One more point to absolutely prove the point.
If all amplifiers were created equal, why have so many mic pre choices? You can't tell me there is no difference between a $5000 tube mic pre and a cheap $50 mic pre. Yes there is a difference. Same with Eq's, compressors and so on. People like Rupert Neve have spent their entire lives trying to get the absolute best sound from their equipment from mic pre's to mixing desks. To state there is no difference is ridiculous.

Drooling over this desk!

[mostapha]

Preamps are different than power amps. And there's a lot more that goes into compressor, EQ, etc. circuitry than goes into a normal power amp. So, thanks for building up a straw man. I'm just going to ignore that and pretend that you're actually arguing with the point I tried to make and not something you made up.

Anyway…about the amplifiers…his results mirror my own, though mine are much less scientifically valid, mostly because I've listened to fewer amps.

My honest guess is that the amps aren't set as identically as he's going to set them. If you really think that you're right…go make 10 grand and call me an idiot. I'd honestly welcome it.

Well…realistically, I'd probably be annoyed because that'd be one more thing I have to think about. But I like learning more than I like life being simple.

And, uhh…yeah…that console is gorgeous. If music actually becomes a career, I'll probably wind up investing in a couple Neve 8816s and the audio interfaces to run them…mostly because of how amazing they'd be to work on. But that might change.

[deathstarchris]

Preamps are different than power amps. And there's a lot more that goes into compressor, EQ, etc. circuitry than goes into a normal power amp. So, thanks for building up a straw man. I'm just going to ignore that and pretend that you're actually arguing with the point I tried to make and not something you made up.

Really? Have you actually looked at the different components in an average modern day amp? Do you know how many you need for a tube amp? How about half, but it becomes the selection of those components to find the sweet spot. Mic pre's can be the same way. Technically all you need is a couple of IC's at minimum and a voltage converter for the phantom power. The tube side can be even more complicated, and don't get me started with EQ's.

There's your straw man along with a few hard facts.

I'm not going to argue with someone who is 'being simple'. I responded to this thread to keep the information flowin'. If any one else has experience with monitors specifically KRK's this is where the original thread started.

Just don't limit yourself and do some 'REAL' homework. It will pay off in the end. Maybe to the tune of $10,000!!!!!

[Nicadraus]

I agree with Chris based on his statements and explanations.