# Recommended Studio monitors for around 3K?



## passenger57 (May 7, 2012)

I kinda struck gold with asking about studio headphones (thanks again!) - so if it's ok, just one one more question!
Recommended studio monitors for around $3K? (or $1,500 each) :D 
thanks!


----------



## José Herring (May 7, 2012)

What music do you do? What kind of a room do you have(how big, angle of walls, ect..)?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 7, 2012)

You might do a search, passenger57.

No prickliness intended! It's just that this comes up all the time.

What does make me prickly is "that" post: sometime within the next four hours, it's almost a guarantee that someone will say "spend half your budget on room treatment."

Just wait, it's coming. 

By the way, I assume you want amps included in that budget? Powered monitors?


----------



## passenger57 (May 7, 2012)

First off... thanks for the help! I seem to have an issue with the search function finding the topics I'm looking for. If you could provide links to the threads I'd be very grateful. However, I might be able to get some 'custom' info based on my personal room information.

And yes, powered monitors. 

I score TV movies and direct to video DVDs, etc... (mostly orchestral scores) I work constantly and have very little time to get my room setup properly. Any extra tips help me tremendously. 

My room is 13'X12' wide - 9' tall. 
I have some acoustic foam panels on the walls and carpeting on the floor. The ceiling is beamed craftsman style not flat. The wall to my left is curved - not flat. The sound is pretty dry, when I clap my hands no echo, very little reflection.


----------



## ed buller (May 7, 2012)

ADAM


xxxxxxxx


----------



## studioj (May 7, 2012)

Hearing great things about Focal monitors. Just got their sub and I love it. Talk to someone at sweetwater about these.


----------



## germancomponist (May 7, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 07 said:


> What does make me prickly is "that" post: sometime within the next four hours, it's almost a guarantee that someone will say "spend half your budget on room treatment."
> 
> Just wait, it's coming.



Here I am.... . o-[][]-o 

But no, I will not write anything about room treatment. I suggest the question asker to google! The only thing I will tell: Room treatment is much more important than picking up this or that monitors...! 

o-[][]-o o=<


----------



## mark812 (May 7, 2012)

studioj @ Mon May 07 said:


> Hearing great things about Focal monitors. Just got their sub and I love it. Talk to someone at sweetwater about these.



Focals are very nice indeed. I A/B'd a lot of monitors and preferred (for TV and soundtrack work) Focal CMS 65 (with sub if you want the whole spectrum), Adam A7X and Yamaha HS50m with Yamaha HS10W sub (fantastic and ridiculously underpriced speakers). 

But if you want to spend $3000 anyway..then you should probably take a look at K+H, Genelecs (which I don't like at all personally) or Dynaudio AIR 20/25 or something similar.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 7, 2012)

passenger57, don't bother buying monitors. Just spend all your money and more on room treatment. Monitors make no difference - the only thing that matters is room treatment. Don't buy this or that monitor - buy this or that room treatment. If your budget is $3000, spend $5032 on room treatment. Experts disagree on that - some say $5033 - but definitely don't even listen to monitors, just buy lots and lots of room treatment.

Why? Because room treatment is so much more important. What's more, I wouldn't even buy monitors. Just use headphones and buy room treatment.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 7, 2012)

Also, make sure to buy acoustic treatment. It's almost as good as room treatment.

But way more important than monitors.

We hate monitors.


----------



## RiffWraith (May 7, 2012)

^ What Nick said. 

*NOT!*  



ed buller @ Tue May 08 said:


> ADAM



Wouldn't spend a dime on Adams.

If I were you, p57, I'd go with these:

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/8040A/


----------



## Simplesly (May 7, 2012)

mark812 @ Mon May 07 said:


> studioj @ Mon May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Hearing great things about Focal monitors. Just got their sub and I love it. Talk to someone at sweetwater about these.
> ...




Why sweetwater specifically out of curiosity?


----------



## germancomponist (May 7, 2012)

Nick, I do not understand your reaction at all. Room treatment is the most important thing, if you want to do professional mixes! 

You can buy a Fiat Bambino and you can buy a Ferrari, both are cars. But, if you drive on a bumpy road, you will never know the difference!


----------



## Simplesly (May 7, 2012)

Also Nick's punchy  post has a point. You can treat a 10x12 room for 120 bucks and a staple gun. 

Get a pack of Roxul Acoustical Fire Batts, some 1x2 from home depot, and some heavy garden plastic for the backing and you will have kickass broadband noise reduction that will offer something like double that of OC 702. 

And you can't get K&H (at least not the O300's that you'd want) for $3000 (new). And don't get Dyn Air's unless you live in the LA area. They're total shop queens and you have to send them back to TC (woodland hills I think) for service. Can't do it yourself - they won't sell you the drivers. 

Focal, Adams, maybe Event Opals - honestly anything is decent in that range you just have to get acquainted with it.


But whatever you buy, you should buy it from sweetwater :D :D :D :D :D


----------



## Arbee (May 7, 2012)

Below your price point but I use Adam A7X and a cheap 2.1 sub system in a room the same size as yours. In conjunction with headphones this makes 3 listening environments - couldn't be happier (and yes my room is well treated)


----------



## rgames (May 7, 2012)

There's really no point in asking for recommendations. You might as well look at the selection at a few retailers - at some point, you will get a recommendation for everything you can possibly buy.

I got new monitors last year (Adam A7x) and I spent a fair amount of time listening to different monitors. I did the same thing many years ago when I bought my first real monitors (Mackies). Result was the same: different monitors sound different. Shocking, I know.

Notice I said different, not better. I'd say "better" stops somewhere around $600 - $800 per monitor. After that price point, I can hear some differences (sometimes not) but "better" becomes hard for me to define. It's religion at that point.

The only thing you can do is have a listen. However, it is true that the room has a large impact on the sound, particularly the frequency response and most particularly the bass. The transient response is probably more a function of the monitor design but frequency response (assuming it's a decent monitor, i.e. beyond the $600 range) is probably more a function of the room because they're all pretty freakin' flat at those price points. So take that into consideration.

If it were my $3k, I'd spend $1500 on monitors, $500 on acoustic treatment and put the rest in the bank.

rgames


----------



## Arbee (May 7, 2012)

rgames @ Tue May 08 said:


> If it were my $3k, I'd spend $1500 on monitors, $500 on acoustic treatment and put the rest in the bank.
> 
> rgames



+1


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 7, 2012)

hahahaha

Told you.


----------



## passenger57 (May 7, 2012)

rgames @ Mon May 07 said:


> There's really no point in asking for recommendations. You might as well look at the selection at a few retailers - at some point, you will get a recommendation for everything you can possibly buy.


Perhaps, but I asked about studio headphones here and am totally thrilled with them, thought I'd try for monitors as well. This site is a wonderful place to ask you pros that do the kind of work I do as opposed to music stores which cater more towards rock/pop music. 

If anyone knows an affordable 'goto guy' in the Los Angeles area for sound treatment / studio setup, etc... I'd love to know! I also know of a studio that is going to be building a new sound room soon and I'd love to refer someone to them and maybe pick up some more tips.

Thanks!


----------



## mikebarry (May 7, 2012)

Devil's Advocate:

I suggest getting the good speakers - I have the Focal Solos which would fit your budget nicely. Reason why? Inner security. 

When I invest in my studio I like searching for end game units - things I will never really have to replace. Things like high quality monitors, reverb, computer screens - I don't cheap out on them. I bought good monitors, now I need not ever worry about them. Sure there are many great speaker companies, but seek opinions from those you trust and go for it. Especially in the age of loudness.

Just my opinions, go for it. PS The focals are highly recommended.


----------



## passenger57 (May 7, 2012)

Mike - thanks for the tip! I have to laugh because I was just on a walk thinking to myself I should contact the cinesamples guys and see what they use. And you beat me to it! =o


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 7, 2012)

mikebarry @ Mon May 07 said:


> Devil's Advocate:
> 
> I suggest getting the good speakers - I have the Focal Solos which would fit your budget nicely.



I love those monitors and I wish I could justify the expenditure.


----------



## rgames (May 7, 2012)

Here are two more things to think about with regard to monitors: First, if you're a composer, you're not the guy making the master. Second, the vast majority of people who hear your music will be using audio hardware that is basically crap compared to what you're using.

You tweak your mix to get it sounding the way you like it then you send it off to some other person who mixes your track with a bunch of other tracks to get it sounding the way he likes it. Then the people who actually listen to it hear it on systems that respond completely differently compared to the monitors that you or anyone else used in the production process. Do you really think there's any way to predict the outcome of that process? No way.

The differences among (decent) monitors are *significantly* less than the differences that arise as a result of that process. As long as they're decent monitors, you're wasting your time worrying about which ones to get. Yes - they're different. But that's not the same as better/worse.

Spend accordingly.

rgames


----------



## passenger57 (May 7, 2012)

rgames @ Mon May 07 said:


> Here are two more things to think about with regard to monitors: First, if you're a composer, you're not the guy making the master. Second, the vast majority of people who hear your music will be using audio hardware that is basically crap compared to what you're using.


This brings up an interesting topic and one that I was asking about in another thread that lead me to reassess my monitor needs. In a nutshell, I feel like scores go through so many compressions - the movie output, the DVD compression, Netflix, etc.. that by the time its heard on average people sound systems, the fidelity is a fraction of what it was in the studio. I know there is nothing I can do about that, but I'm trying to figure out a way to make sure what I deliver is as top notch as possible and leaves enough headroom for whatever dreaded compressors or crappy sound systems it has to go through. Thats why I'm hesitant to use plugins like izotope to slam the sound too much. At the most I'd love to have the high and low end at least audible since that is what cuts through sound fx.


----------



## Scrianinoff (May 8, 2012)

passenger57 @ Tue 08 May said:


> rgames @ Mon May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > .... the vast majority of people who hear your music will be using audio hardware that is basically crap compared to what you're using.
> ...



Or think like Bach. When he was asked why he wrote such complex and sometimes hard to follow music for the average listener, he allegedly replied that he was playing this music for himself and for the few persons that could follow everything, and for possible one person in the audience that he could learn a great deal from.

During my chase for good monitors I searched primarily for one thing: DETAIL.
Frequency response can be corrected through a mastering EQ in your ouput channel. Sadly, this is mostly the criterion people focus on when choosing speakers or monitors. Transient response cannot be corrected; although it can, with limited success in the bass freqs.

I auditioned Focals, Genelecs, Mackies, Adams and even the ribbon Samsons, and a few I forgot. Some of them ended up on my short list. I found a shop that would let me borrow the Genelecs, Adam A7(x?), Mackie HR824 and the Samson Rubicon R8a. That was the price range I could afford at the time. I set them up alongside my Acoustat full range electrostats. The monitors were punchier in the bass and had a straighter freq response. What they all lacked in comparison was detail. With detail I mean those little details in your music that are almost drowned out by other parts of the music. Think of the details that you do hear on your current monitors now but not in your car. In my situation, I could hear them much more clearly, and much more of them, on the electrostats. My decision: stick to the electrostats. Yet, now I want to move to 4 channel (or 5.1), the horror, try to set that up with electrostats that are taller than I am, and extremely hard to find in good condition.

Here's why I think clarity of *detail is important*. First, some of the people in the processing-listening-decision-consumption chain might be able to hear them; think like Bach. Second, don't be fooled into thinking that a (good) mastering engineer will only compress those details away, some of the details will be brought forward.

Another thing, during the at-home-auditioning I did with a couple of musician friends, some could perceive more details on the Mackies, while some others could hear more on the Adams, etc. Edit: Yet, all of them could hear more details on my Acoustats. So your ears might also be a factor.

Richness of detail is a double edged sword. What still sounds clear on your super detailed set, can sound rather muddy on an average set. So keep an average set of speakers handy. Also, if you are a perfectionists and like to tweak details all day long, then protect your productivity and lower your budget to $3h


----------



## Dan Mott (May 8, 2012)

Listen to some PMC monitors if you can.


----------



## Patrick_Gill (May 8, 2012)

A lot has been covered here already.

Again it really depends on your requirements. It's worth locating your local retailers if you can - where ever they may be, and listening to some monitors yourself, your ears will do the recommending for you.

Acoustic treatment is just as important but in no way shape or form does it prioritise over your monitoring and vice versa. Everything is a contributing factor to your sound, it's up to you to invest.

3k will buy you a decent pair of monitors from a lot of the brands mentioned here. As 'rgames' said once you've tweaked your mix using your environment it's all subject to change as soon as it hits the mastering suite and a fresh pair of ears. You can only do the best you can do with what you have at this level.

As for my recommendations. You can pick up a decent pair of Quested monitors v2108 for around the 3 grand mark. Mackie HR824, PMC, ATC [expensive], Adams, Genelecs are all good brands. Each will have a different hi/mid/low performance but in time you will learn your monitors. 


Good luck!


----------



## Gusfmm (May 9, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 07 said:


> What's more, I wouldn't even buy monitors. Just use headphones and buy room treatment.



Uhhh? I totally lost you... headphones and room treatment? totally contradictory, you must have been joking, right?


----------



## Gusfmm (May 9, 2012)

I much agree with both Nick and Richard, with some deviations though. 

A $50,000 set of monitors will not sound well if your room's acoustics are poor. Thus, you need to spend money on that as well. You can't seriously treat a room with $120 worth of fiberglass and a stapler though, but you don't necessarily need to spend 5 grand on fancy helmholtz resonators and overpriced bass traps and brand acoustic foam. Plenty of reading on the web.

As far as monitors, and this is my more personal feeling on the subject, since I don't run a high-end commercial multimedia studio nor do I think there is a "best/perfect" monitor, I don't quite justify the need to invest several grand on monitors. There have been various reputable brands mentioned on here already, and this is probably one of the most common questions on music forums, so also plenty to peruse on the web. I switched to active Wharfedales Pro some years ago and couldn't be happier. 

Yes, I do believe after all you would accomplish more, and yet enjoy saving some money that you can invest in other (better) causes....

BTW, I'd also agree with Nick in that you should not limit your mixing to only monitors. You need reasonably good headphones as well, but you seem to have covered that already.


----------



## Simplesly (May 9, 2012)

Gusfmm @ Wed May 09 said:


> You can't seriously treat a room with $120 worth of fiberglass and a stapler though



You're right, I forgot to add that you need some fabric to cover them. :lol: 

I never said it would comparable to a multi-million dollar professionally designed studio, but you shouldn't knock it until you've tried it. What you get from doing this is a big improvement, not a perfect acoustic space. Once you've taken care of a decent amount of reflection, you can "learn" yourself at least most of the rest of the way. You could spend another $100 and put four 4" thick bass traps in the corners, more if you want to hang some ceiling cloud panels. Depends on how dead you want it. But I think DIY is the way to go on these, unless you have the budget to get a pro acoustician /audio contractor to do it.


----------



## Gusfmm (May 9, 2012)

I'm not opposed to going the DIY route. Treating a room in an effective manner goes beyong hanging fiberglass batts on the walls though, and that was my point. The goal should not be to make it "as dead as you'd like it". Or give you "decent noise reduction". You need to try to address the main issues with the geometry and spacial arrangement of your studio, and each case maybe very different. Standing waves are not a trivial issue. And a simple but reasonably decent handheld SPL by itself goes for over $100. 

So yeah, you can't just simply suggest that $120 worth of fiberglass and a stapler will just do it, 'cause it won't.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 9, 2012)

Gusfmm @ Wed May 09 said:


> I'm not opposed to going the DIY route. Treating a room in an effective manner goes beyong hanging fiberglass batts on the walls though, and that was my point. The goal should not be to make it "as dead as you'd like it". Or give you "decent noise reduction". You need to try to address the main issues with the geometry and spacial arrangement of your studio, and each case maybe very different. Standing waves are not a trivial issue. And a simple but reasonably decent handheld SPL by itself goes for over $100.
> 
> So yeah, you can't just simply suggest that $120 worth of fiberglass and a stapler will just do it, 'cause it won't.



Like everything in life there is a wide swath between perfect and "won't do it".


----------



## Jimbo 88 (May 9, 2012)

passenger57 @ Tue May 08 said:


> rgames @ Mon May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Here are two more things to think about with regard to monitors: First, if you're a composer, you're not the guy making the master. Second, the vast majority of people who hear your music will be using audio hardware that is basically crap compared to what you're using.
> ...




This is a very interesting topic. I find that when I have really good monitors, everything sounds soooo good that I under compose.

My favorite monitors to compose with are Minimus 7's I picked up for $40 each at Radio Shack. Very Little ear fatigue and if sounds good on the M7's it sounds good everywhere.

My favorite speakers to record/Just listen to are Genelecs

So, careful what you wish for. It might change the way you compose and not for the better.

So in a 'round about wackey way I'm in the room treatment camp.


----------



## dannthr (May 10, 2012)

I'm going to come out of left field and suggest that you take a look at Equator Audio, aside from Ted's talking points here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWr8QNJ5ZHE

and here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWNPvxii94o

Oh yeah, and here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2csUN0HNlI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNPUzg9oYzA

Is that their new small D5s sold so well as a direct from manufacturer model that they just pulled back their Q8s and are selling them direct instead of through retailers and they dropped the price for them from the Retail price of 3k for a pair to a direct from manufacturer price of 1k for a pair.

They're really spectacular and the software for them and IN them is way more advanced than the kind of stuff JBL is pushing (the Q series has a CPU in them for DSP).

We have the Q8s and the Q10s here at Pinnacle College in two of our control rooms (as a surround setup) and I have the D5s at home, they all sound great, the 8s are really killer and I consider my 300 pair of D5s to be the best monitors you can get for under 1000 bucks.

Because those two models are sold direct, they far outclass anything else in that price range.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 10, 2012)

I don't know if I can stand going through this again.

There are many things in audio that are open to debate, and people have strong opinions. The need for good speakers that let you hear what's going on is not one of them. It's a fact.

That doesn't mean there aren't lots of other useful references. People have been using Auratones and NS10s and speakers like Jimbo's Minimus 7s for years. But if you don't have monitors that play what's in the music, you can't hear what's in the music.

Plus it's no fun listening to lousy monitors for hours on end.

As to "room treatment," it's much easier to do damage than it is to make things better if you don't know what you're doing. It doesn't matter if you spend $20,000 on acoustic treatment; if you don't know how to use it then it's useless.


----------



## madbulk (May 10, 2012)

mikebarry @ Mon May 07 said:


> Devil's Advocate:
> 
> I suggest getting the good speakers - I have the Focal Solos which would fit your budget nicely. Reason why? Inner security.
> 
> ...



Focals aside, but not dismissed, the general wisdom here is hard to top. 
Easily the most intelligent hockey fan I can summon to mind at present.

Duh, what did you think you were gonna hear? 
k&h, adam, focal, and dynaudio and those ugly ass genelecs riffwraith linked. (I don't care what those sound like.) 

Richard's right too, as usual. Pick the one that you think sounds best. You gotta live with 3k monitors for most of your useful life. You should like em.


----------



## skanafchian (May 11, 2012)

RiffWraith @ Mon May 07 said:


> ^ What Nick said.
> 
> *NOT!*
> 
> ...



I don't agree with this at all...I love my A7Xs. And way under your budget there too. Would leave you money for a sub and loads of acoustic treatment! Mmm...


----------



## skanafchian (May 11, 2012)

Also it might be worth mentioning that I've been recently working a bit in a big electronic music group's studio...they have the K&H O300s. Great monitors, and they use it with a Sub.

But they've also just upgraded to Barefoot MicroMain 27s...both setups sound great. The Barefoots are very expensive, though (but sound amazing!!)


----------



## jdieks (May 13, 2012)

madbulk @ Fri May 11 said:


> Focals aside, but not dismissed, the general wisdom here is hard to top.
> Easily the most intelligent hockey fan I can summon to mind at present.
> 
> Duh, what did you think you were gonna hear?
> ...



+1

Another one to listen to is the KRK E8B... They don't get much love on the internet for beeing KRK, but I have them for a couple of years now: very precise speakers. Very cliche, but if the mix isn't good they sound like "shit" and if the mix IS good they sound very nice... In other words, I've got the feeling it's not really the speaker you're hearing but your actual work.


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/dec07/a ... oseE8B.htm


----------



## XcesSound (May 17, 2012)

Also you should check out the Dynaudio BM 15A. It's just a great pair of monitors, and very well received. ATC make some great monitors too, some of the most natural sounding. I also have one of their smaller model, and is complementing the Dynaudio very well.

Don't forget to reference your mixed in more than just one pair if you can. Get a cheap desktop speaker or similar.


----------



## John Rodd (May 18, 2012)

I am also a fan of Dynaudios generally speaking.

I run the (discontinued) BM15 passive Dynaudios as my middle sized speaker... with a Bryston amp.

I'm also a BIG fan of ATCs - most of the time i monitor on my ATC 150s.

photo of them here:

http://johnrodd.com/gallery/photos/2011 ... 2_3283.jpg

The original poster mentioned he had foam on the side walls... generally speaking this is NOT good room treatment. It tends to suck out all the top end... and most rooms have the most problems in the low end, in my experience.

I would suggest Corning 703 (or similar cotton panels) in the corners - as bass builds up in the corners.

The more accurate your listening environment (and monitors) the better mix decisions you will make... thus your mixes will translate.

:mrgreen: 

now... back to the debate here. o[]) 

:wink: 

john


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 18, 2012)

Those ATCs are fantastic, but they're $10k a pair - at least they were ten years ago.

A music editor friend of mine has them (or maybe a different model ATC?) and rents them to the production company when he's working on a film.

Now...while I realize this thread isn't all about me, I am the one being belligerent about room treatment  yet I agree 100% with what you're saying about it. My argument is different.


----------



## John Rodd (May 18, 2012)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri May 18 said:


> Those ATCs are fantastic, but they're $10k a pair - at least they were ten years ago.....



ATC 150 - they are currently $19,000 a pair.

http://www.vintageking.com/ATC-Loudspeakers-SCM150ASL

I own THREE (L.C.R.) - you do the math. :shock: 

:cry:


----------



## John Rodd (May 18, 2012)

Thomas_J @ Fri May 18 said:


> Personally I can't stand the dynaudio 15a's. They are harsh, brittle and annoying to my ears. ...



the Dyn 15 passives I use sound quite different than the actives. Different crossovers, and a very different amp (Bryston here)


----------



## JT3_Jon (May 19, 2012)

I think its time I get serious about my room treatment. Any suggestions or resources you recommend? There seems to be so much technical information out there that I get lost in it! I'd be happy to upload pictures of my room & start a new thread if you feel it warrants it. 

Thanks!


----------



## jdieks (May 20, 2012)

John Brandt has a cheap book about it

http://jhbrandt.net/

His prices for full designs are very reasonable too..


----------



## wst3 (May 20, 2012)

John Rodd @ Fri May 18 said:


> Thomas_J @ Fri May 18 said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I can't stand the dynaudio 15a's. They are harsh, brittle and annoying to my ears. ...
> ...



Here's an amusing thought...

Active loudspeakers are about as close as we're likely to get to hearing what the loudspeaker designer intended. Scary eh?

Some of the very first active loudspeakers did not, in fact, approach what the designer intended, but it was a new field, and there were obstacles to overcome. That's not so today.

So where is the disconnect? I have two theories - 

One, it could be the environment, we all know that the space plays a big role, so it's possible that a loudspeaker that sounded great in the lab, and even in the designer's home studio, doesn't work in my studio!

Second, it could be taste. The designer and I don't see eye to eye on what a loudspeaker ought to sound like.

In reality it's probably a combination.

Which is why, as much as I like the idea of a self-contained, active loudspeaker I still use passive loudspeakers with my choice of amplifier, and in some cases even my choice of crossover.

If I could afford it I'd use Bryston, and I'd use one per loudspeaker, and I'd locate then as close as possible to the loudspeaker. That short speaker cable makes a big difference, and usually a positive difference, even though the original designers likely took the longer cable into consideration.

As a benchmark, I love the sound of the old 604, but it would not be my primary monitor for mixing. That would probably be Tannoy coaxials driven by Bryston.

And to the question how can one amplifier sound better than others, well, I just don't know how. I do know they do.


----------



## JT3_Jon (May 20, 2012)

jdieks @ Sun May 20 said:


> John Brandt has a cheap book about it
> 
> http://jhbrandt.net/
> 
> His prices for full designs are very reasonable too..



Have you read his book? I find it kind of funny he starts by saying "Every acoustic situation is different and "One Size Fits All" does not apply. Advice from well-meaning friends, associates, and online forums can not give you the answers you need" and proceeds to sell his book and talks about all the forums he posts on. haha.


----------



## germancomponist (May 20, 2012)

JT3_Jon @ Sat May 19 said:


> I think its time I get serious about my room treatment.



You will not regret it! If your room is designed almost perfectly, then you will be amazed. Or rather, your ears will be amazed!

Trust me! o/~


----------



## Dom (May 20, 2012)

I'm using ATC SCM50ASL for LCR, and, while not quite as much as Rod's 150s they are also way too expensive.

However, my surrounds are ATC SM20 passives, powered by Bryston 3B SST, and I've put them side-by-side to the bigger ATCs and they have a very similar character, and they make a fantastic set of monitors. I'd be happy to mix on those alone.

Thosee the ATC20s together with the Bryston amp cost me around £2000 (=$3000) used.

I had PMC TB2S-AIIs before but I think the ATC20s easily beat the PMCs and are much easier to place in the room. 

But I agree room treatment comes first. For a long time a spent much more on room treatment than on speakers.


----------



## John Rodd (May 21, 2012)

Dom @ Sun May 20 said:


> I'm using ATC SCM50ASL for LCR, and, while not quite as much as Rod's 150s they are also way too expensive.
> 
> However, my surrounds are ATC SM20 passives, powered by Bryston 3B SST, and I've put them side-by-side to the bigger ATCs and they have a very similar character, and they make a fantastic set of monitors. I'd be happy to mix on those alone.
> 
> ...



I recently used the active ATC 25's at Abbey Road Studio 1 (recording the LSO) and I was very impressed.

I have not heard the passive 20's - but I bet they are good.

Bryston amps are a good bet - even if used. (if in good shape)

and FYI - it is *John* Rodd (not "Rod")

:wink: 

john


----------



## synthetic (May 21, 2012)

To OP, where do you live? If you're anywhere but Tahiti then I recommend going to the local shop and auditioning a few sets. Bring some of your CDs and I'll bet you get a favorite pretty fast. If you do live in Tahiti, then I'll bring some over and audition for you in exchange for a place to sleep and some scuba tank fills. 

ATC looks nice, but probably overkill for me. If I had that kind of money I'd just hire John to mix my tracks and listen to the results on his 150s.


----------



## Arbee (May 21, 2012)

+1 monitors (and headphones) seem daunting to choose from all the recommendations until you get to a shop that has the major contenders lined up ready to try. It is then surprisingly obvious where your preferences lie.

With my reference tracks I chose Adam A7X (over the A8X) with Dynaudio (mk 1) a close second. There were no Focals to try however and these would have probably figured heavily. None of these are in the price range though that this thread is heading towards.

It also made me realise how subjective this all is as many well regarded monitors didn't even come close for my taste.


----------



## Simplesly (May 21, 2012)

another thought - Westlake Audio BBSM6's and Bryston 4bsst (used of course for both) but you could get in under 3k I think. And you'd be blown away.


----------



## Lupez (Nov 11, 2013)

Not sure why John Rodd's room only has LCR speakers...where are the surrounds ??


----------



## John Rodd (Nov 11, 2013)

Lupez @ Mon Nov 11 said:


> Not sure why John Rodd's room only has LCR speakers...where are the surrounds ??



You would not be the first to ask this question

My surrounds are hidden behind acoustically transparent fabric - and they are located exactly where they should be. 

Basically in the side walls. But in the proper place. 

The rest of the side walls is random diffusion - also covered by the fabric 
- also what you want on the side walls. 

Cheers

John


----------



## John Rodd (Nov 11, 2013)

p.s. you can see where they are in this photo - they are to the right of the 2 racks of outboard gear that you see in this photo

http://johnrodd.com/gallery/photos/2011 ... G_0819.jpg

:mrgreen:


----------



## Lupez (Nov 11, 2013)

Very clever, although the reason of tucking away a pair of ATCs from sight escapes me...I bet they are ATC, aren't they?


----------



## Greg (Nov 11, 2013)

I love Adam A7X's, $1400.00 for the pair.


----------



## gsilbers (Nov 11, 2013)

JT3_Jon @ Sat May 19 said:


> I think its time I get serious about my room treatment. Any suggestions or resources you recommend? There seems to be so much technical information out there that I get lost in it! I'd be happy to upload pictures of my room & start a new thread if you feel it warrants it.
> 
> Thanks!



only sugestions is to check the ebay stores that sell acoustic foam. yes, real acoustic foam. there are good stores in there who otherwise wouldnt be found easily thourgh other means. even the ex auralex employees are selling there with similar foam at lower prices. 
just do the research on what makes acoustic foam different and its properties and NRC. 
for about $100 i was able to cover half of my room with 8 bass traps and all. works very good. check how much it i got on the pix =o 
left enough money to get that rondo 7 string guitar _-)


----------

