# Reference tracks for monitors Purchasing?



## dannymc (Nov 14, 2015)

hi guys i"m hopefully going into my audio retailer in the next couple of weeks to A/B a couple of makes and models of studio monitors. these will be my first pair, up to now i"ve had to rely on headphones. 

my question is around the reference material to bring. obviously i will be referencing some of my own compositions to be horrified to what i've not being hearing all this time  but since it is 2015 the majority of my personal favorite music collection is now in the form of MP3's on Spotify. but since MP3 files by their very nature are compressed audio files of a lower quality i"m wondering of the wisdom of using reference tracks via Spotify or MP3's at all? and i'm not even sure does Spotify software do even more compression and audio altering that would additional distort what i"m listening too? should i instead dig into my old CD collection and bring those instead as they would be CD quality less compressed references? appreciate some feedback thanks 

Danny


----------



## tokatila (Nov 14, 2015)

Spotify (Premium) has a bitrate of 320 kbps. If your ears are that golden that they can tell the difference between that and uncompressed audio; great. That's still completely irrelevant.

You say that you don't have monitors beforehand; I then also assume that you will use them in a non/only some - acoustically treated space. Which will be completely different than the space in the store. Your monitors will sound completely different anyway; overpowering any minuscule difference between 320kbps and uncompressed audio.

You can find tests from the Internet where you can test if you even can hear the difference. And still; it's not really relevant.


----------



## muk (Nov 14, 2015)

What tokatila said. As long as the audio quality isn't downright bad it doesn't matter so much. Much more important is that you really know how the track you're listening to is supposed to sound. Bring you headphones with you to have a direct comparison. Way back there was a Cd from BBC with tracks they used to test monitors. See if you can find it, that would be perfect. It has a few tracks to check phantom middle, soundstage, clarity...
Bring a track of somebody speaking in a natural way, that can be most revealing as we are accustomed to human voices and can pick up even slight colorations. Personally I also like Enya's Orinoco Flow to test speakers. You can make out even subtle tonality changes, and the middle section really shows how a speaker handles low frequencies.


----------



## dannymc (Nov 14, 2015)

thanks guys great advice. thank you so much. 



> You say that you don't have monitors beforehand; I then also assume that you will use them in a non/only some - acoustically treated space. Which will be completely different than the space in the store. Your monitors will sound completely different anyway



i"m hoping that the retailer will let me take home those shortlisted monitors for a day or so to listen in my own room. i dont have any room treatment yet so this would be a good way to find out what kits i should buy for room treatment. 



> Bring a track of somebody speaking in a natural way, that can be most revealing as we are accustomed to human voices and can pick up even slight colorations.



this is a great tip thanks. 

ah good aule Enya, great love her stuff anyway, i"ll check that out


----------



## Anders Wall (Nov 14, 2015)

Try this:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep03/articles/testcd.htm
Still relevant info.
Best,
Anders


----------



## wst3 (Nov 14, 2015)

opposing view...

If you are shopping for studio monitors you need to listen to material in a format that does not use lossy compression.

First and foremost, I'd have to guess that you work with uncompressed audio when you track and mix. It just makes sense to audition with the same kind of material.

Second, I would find it difficult to believe that you can't hear t he difference between an MP3 file, even at 320 kbps, and an uncompressed file. If you can't hear the difference I'd first suspect the monitor system. It is hiding stuff from you. For most folks the most obvious problem is the sound stage. Other anomolies may be more difficult to detect.

As far as specific suggestions go, that's difficult. Surely you have a list of albums or tracks that you consider to be well produced? Just go with them.

My own evaluation track list changes often, and it probably a bit bizarre, if you are curious I will dig it up.

FWIW, I am going through this very exercise right now. I have a loaner pair of Sceptre S6s in the studio. I've been listening to all sorts of material, and having a blast.

So above all else - have fun!


----------



## D.Salzenberg (Nov 14, 2015)

Hi Danny, I would say shopping for studio monitors is a really difficult challenge for many reasons. As mentioned they will sound different in your home studio to the dealers room, so if you can try before you buy that is great. Also as I'm sure you know monitors need to have a revealing and detailed but very flat sound which doesn't flatter the recordings by adding warmth or hyping up the bass as many hifi speakers do. However when you listen it's only natural to gravitate towards the pair that sound the nicest if you know what I mean. 
I'm a guitarist originally and when I went shopping for monitors the first time took loads of my favourite well produced guitar cds and of course ended up buying the ones that made the guitars sound fantastic. Big mistake!
It's really hard to be objective and walk away with the most transparent pair you can afford.
I would always take some well produced cds with complex music that you know well, and try them with really high end monitors even ones way out of your price range, then you have something to compare the affordable ones against.
Good luck!


----------



## D.Salzenberg (Nov 14, 2015)

Forgot to mention, be slightly wary of one's that pump out loads of bass, as that can be a real problem in a small home studio, even if they sound great in the big room at the dealers. Been there and done that one!


----------



## wst3 (Nov 14, 2015)

Fantastic advice from Mr. Salzberg! Do listen to well respected monitors that are out of your price range as part of the process of calibrating your ears. Really good idea!


----------



## mc_deli (Nov 14, 2015)

On one hand you should listen in your own room, on the other hand you will get used to whatever you buy...
On the third hand, you should consider room treatment in proportion to how much you are going spend.
On the fourth hand, you should know what you are listening to.
I just had 2 sets of monitors for a couple of weeks. But with them I used Sonicworks to measure each set in the room, and then I used Sonicworks to correct them so I could really compare much flatter responses. I was also able to set up a sub very well. (no affiliation)

...If you are going to spend real dollars on monitors in an untreated space without measuring the room... at least consider what you might be missing out on...


----------



## wst3 (Nov 14, 2015)

Not everyone can make, and interpret accurate measurements. But that's good advice still.

The monitor system includes everything from the output of your 2-mix through your ears - amplifiers monitors, room, ears. You can train your ears, you can treat the space, you can buy the best (read for your applications and budget) amplifier and loudspeakers you can find. I think that the end result depends more on learning what the system is telling you (aka training your ears). I've mixed tracks (only a couple of times) on really crappy desktop computer loudspeakers. The only reason I got away with it (such as I did) was that I'd listened to a LOT of music on them over the years. And I had to work really hard to get a mix I liked.

It just so happens that I recently acquired a TEF25 - the granddaddy of acoustical test sets. It can measure a loudspeaker in a space as if it were anechoic, which was the original application, or it can make insanely detailed measurements of an entire monitoring system. I plan to do both, just as soon as I begin to understand all that it can do.

Now I'm doing this because I work as an audio engineer by day, and this is a tool that will help me do my job better. But I am REALLY curious to see how much of a difference it makes when I use the TEF25 to tweak my monitoring system. I know it will make a difference, I've used acoustical analysis tools for over 30 years, and there is no substitute. It's how much of a difference that intrigues me... I've been mixing on the same monitors for a very long time, probably since the mid 1990s for the YSMs and a little longer for the 809s. So I have a really good idea about how a mix will translate.

My expectation is that the new monitors will tell me more, and thus make it easier to mix (and track.) That's my expectation anyway<G>...


----------



## dannymc (Nov 14, 2015)

hey guys dont worry i'm not going in totally blind.



> As mentioned they will sound different in your home studio to the dealers room, so if you can try before you buy that is great. Also as I'm sure you know monitors need to have a revealing and detailed but very flat sound which doesn't flatter the recordings by adding warmth or hyping up the bass as many hifi speakers do. However when you listen it's only natural to gravitate towards the pair that sound the nicest if you know what I mean.
> I'm a guitarist originally and when I went shopping for monitors the first time took loads of my favourite well produced guitar cds and of course ended up buying the ones that made the guitars sound fantastic. Big mistake!



thanks for this D, actually learned all this from another great composer here Mihkel Zilmer so i hopefully know what to listen for when trialing the monitors. also going to try get them allow me take them home to test in my room.

i've already shortlisted to 3 models.

1. the Neumann kh120's (heard nothing but amazing things about these looking forward to hearing them)
2. the Yamaha HS8's (another highly recommended flat response monitor)
3. Genelecs (i don't know a lot about these but the guy in the shop was really hyping the 8030/8040's up so gonna give them a spin.

i know its about budget when it comes to monitors so i'm looking to spend no more than 1,200euros.

Danny


----------



## mc_deli (Nov 14, 2015)

wst3 said:


> Not everyone can make, and interpret accurate measurements.


That's what software that comes with a measurement mic is for

Now the OP has named names... I had the KH120A (1200€) up against the KRKvxt6 and 10s sub (1000deal€).
With no room measurement the Neumanns were an easy winner. I couldn't hear much around 60hz, and the rest of the response is so flat and things are detailed. With no room measurement the KRK with sub was just a mess - crazy to dial in the sub. 

So, turns out my small, designed, well treated room has a big build up at 60hz - maybe augmented by the ports on these monitors - and a bit of dip in the 250 area. The KRKs without sub already have a smile curve and extra dips in low mids, with the sub it was just crazy like 12db at 60 hz.

Without measuring the room - with the Neumanns I would not "know" that I had so much fiabby nonsense at 60 (woomph of bass drum) and a hole at 250 (pretty important for bass and drums!).

So, after positioning the sub as well as possible, and half an hour with Sonarworks, I have 2 correction curves on my DAW output to switch between, for the two sets. I was also swapping physically by the way - so both sets in optimum position. And the measurement is done with a pre-calibrated mic in around 30 positions, via easy to follow on screen instructions.

All of a sudden I can compare almost flat - and with the KRKs down to well under 40hz - and the Neumanns down to... well er... 60 ish.
And then I just couldn't pick between them for top end detail, transients, reverb tails, width etc etc. listening to Stevie Wonder, Paper Tiger (oh Paper Tiger for speaker testing) etc etc

But with the KRKs I can actually hear what is happening in Timberlake, Timberland, Outkast, Toxic (I know!)... 
So I risked the ire of the G*****tz community and sent the Neumanns back.

What I really learned is that the room - especially an untreated/small/undesigned room - is going to have a cataclysmic effect on what you hear - probably a lot more than your choice of monitor!!! Elephant in the room

The cost to me was 250€ for the Sonarworks software/mic - and with that we also did the new Amphion 15s in big room (2 computer licenses included).

So I spent 25% of my speaker budget on measurement/correction. Knowing what I know now that was a bargain.


----------



## wst3 (Nov 14, 2015)

two cents - worth less actually - from your list I'd choose the KH120s. I find the HS8s and the pretty much any Genelec I could afford to be fatiguing. They are probably honest, but brutally so<G>, and it tires my ears to listen to them for any period of time. That's one person's perspective only.

My list included the KH120s, the Presonus Sceptres, the Equator D family, various models from both Adam and Eve (love that play on company names!), and the DynAudio BM family. I've nearly settled on the Presonus S6s. The Adam and Eve monitors I've listened to are among the smoothest I've heard, likely due to the ribbons used for the HF driver. The KH120s are very close, which is surprising since they use a dome tweeter in a horn. Aside - of all the monitors I listened to the KH120s strike me as the most flexible, I think they'd behave well in almost any room.

The Dynaudio monitors sound terrific, but it would have been a bit of a stretch financially (can't ignore budget entirely), and I wasn't sure the difference was worth it. I'm still considering them though.

The Presonus S6 just blew me away - which hasn't happened in a long time. First, the stereo image is striking, and extends well beyond the on-axis sweet spot. The cross-over is inaudible, and since it sits in the mid-range that is often a problem, although attributing any particular problem to the cross-over is problematic. The low end does not extend as far as I might like - or rather as far as I might have liked. After several listening sessions I am getting used to it, and I think it is honest enough. I may end up adding a sub-woofer one day for work where the last octave is critical.

I haven't heard the Equator yet, so that's the last variable. I've heard good things about them from people I respect, so I do want to audition them.

Price wise, at around $1200 for the pair the S6 falls towards the bottom of the range, and usually I'd be suspicious, but they really do sound good to me.

Disclaimer - I 'grew up' listening to Horn based systems from Altec and JBL. I still use a pair of UREI 809s. So I am comfortable with, and prefer (I think) a co-axial design. I am certain that has played a role in my decision making process!


----------



## tokatila (Nov 14, 2015)

mc_deli said:


> ...
> 
> So, after positioning the sub as well as possible, and half an hour with Sonarworks, I have 2 correction curves on my DAW output to switch between, for the two sets. I was also swapping physically by the way - so both sets in optimum position. And the measurement is done with a pre-calibrated mic in around 30 positions, via easy to follow on screen instructions.
> 
> ...



I have Dynaudio's BM Compact MKIII's

http://www.dynaudio.com/professional-audio/bm-mk-iii/bm-compact-mkiii/

(they come with Isoacoustics stands to help avoid the table reflections) and as an attachment is my Sonarworks calibration curve for my only very lightly treated room. They also go surprisingly low for such a smallish speaker.

After the calibration the difference is really between night and day.

Genelecs are great; I had baby Genelecs before Dynaudio's; I switched only because the smallest model didn't give enough bass, meaning they didn't go low enough. But they were/are great monitor speakers otherwise.

Your sound will be most affected by:
1) Room
2) Speakers
.
.
.
.
.
.
x) Everything else


----------



## JohnG (Nov 14, 2015)

Reference tracks I've seen people use are usually those with which they are extremely familiar. One engineer I worked with used Steely Dan, because of their legendary attention to recording detail etc. Personally, I can't stand Steely Dan's music even though it is recorded beautifully, so it was agony for me!


----------



## rayinstirling (Nov 14, 2015)

The only review and advice I've ever taken on home studio monitors. God help me if they go wrong because they don't make'em any more.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan05/articles/bluesky.htm


----------



## muk (Nov 14, 2015)

Digital room correction (like Sonarworks) is no panacea, but it can alleviate some problems. I tested quite a few of them, and the best results I got from Python Open Room Correction, which is free. If anybody has the stamina to try it I can highly recommend it.


----------



## mc_deli (Nov 14, 2015)

Sorry I rudely didn't share. Fully agree with the above. Tracks you are familiar with
You can see that in my room the Neumanns were heavy in the 150-500hz without correction.
I never thought I would be a sub user - but I couldn't go back now.
If I had the money for the new Neumann 805 sub... well, maybe next year, the KH120+805 would be great to test, but it came literally a day late for me (and there still don't seem to be any reviews... though surely it will be fantastic... 2800€ though all in...)


----------



## tack (Nov 14, 2015)

JohnG said:


> One engineer I worked with used Steely Dan, because of their legendary attention to recording detail etc. Personally, I can't stand Steely Dan's music even though it is recorded beautifully, so it was agony for me!


Searched YouTube for Steely Dan. Landed here. It definitely has a great stereo field.


----------



## D.Salzenberg (Nov 14, 2015)

Steely Dan album Aja on new vinyl is a fantastic quality recording that will sound just jaw dropping on a good system!
Personally I just don't get the Genelec sound at all, but fell in love with some Dynaudios I've heard recently, so when I have the funds they will probably be my next monitors.


----------



## tack (Nov 14, 2015)

I've been very happy with my Focal CMS65. And I actually bought them sight unseen (or hearing unheard, as the case may be).

To my mind, the best advice was given by mc_deli: whatever (music) tracks you use to audition, you need to be extremely familiar with them. Without a frame of reference, how will you really know what you're hearing? In fact, the last time I did a round of auditioning, I included a 15+-year-old 128 kbit MP3 from my collection (Forever by Queen), back when MP3 encoders were still relatively immature (and terrible). Because I listened the hell out of that song in my younger and less discerning days, and I knew where and how it artifacted, so I was actually listening for those artifacts.

The logic seemed perfectly cromulent anyway.


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 14, 2015)

Tracy Chapman "Tracy Chapman", a great reference recording.


----------



## dannymc (Nov 15, 2015)

> To my mind, the best advice was given by mc_deli: whatever (music) tracks you use to audition, you need to be extremely familiar with them.



yeah i imagined that to be the case. i would of thought another thing to bare in mind when using reference tracks is knowing what style of music you plan on composing. like if you are only going to be making Beethoven style concertos/symphonies then there would be no point bringing the best techno track in your collection?

so i"m kinda planning to bring a few tracks based on a couple of attributes. 
1. those pieces that i know very well and sound great and brilliantly produced to me. 
2. those pieces that cover the frequency bands that would be deemed extremely important to the style of music i planned on composing. 
3. one or two of my own compositions so i can ensure that all the mud that's obviously there is clearly heard. 

i think the idea someone mentioned about A/B with an extremely expensive high end monitor is another great idea. 

Danny


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Nov 20, 2015)

Hi Danny
I had not the time to read each article above but it seems that they all are concerning the sound. 
*Keep in mind that good monitors also should be tools for handling depth and matters of positions in a mix.* 
One speaker can give you the position of a signal razor sharp while another reproduce a more or less unidentifiable position. 
*
How to test those "tool-abilities"?*
A first good test for comparing monitors: Use a mono white noise signal. Listening to the result should give a "razor sharp" virtual point of the signal just between the two speakers. You also can control how big the area of the sweet spot is. 
Further:
Here are two files (44.1kHz/16 Bit, wav for burning a CD)
- Different positions of the signal between L and R 
- Different positions in the depth 
Checkout which monitor of your choice can do those "Tool-Jobs" the better way.

*Test the "low end abilities"*
The lowest tone of the double bass is around 33Hz. So your box should be able to handle Frequencies down to 40 Hz or lower. If you ever heard the difference between a 50Hz-dead end box and a 30Hz... So I would highly recommend to record a 30, 35 and 40 Hz Sinus tone and burn it onto a CD. Play then those tones over your favourite monitors. Which one plays the real tone or only some overtones? 
Also: increase the Volume to "loud". Some monitors will produce a lot of wind noises instead of the tone. Others will have far too little power. It is important, that monitors hold some reserves.
If you have found your dream monitor but the low end is weak you should take into account to by a subwoofer as well (maybe later on).00

*And last but not least an interesting test:* 
Let different monitors play while you are in another room (through open doors and corridors). Some monitors suddenly sound very unnatural this way while others are keeping the natural sound. Those "sound-changers" are covered bluffers when you have them face to face.

Best
Beat


----------



## dannymc (Nov 20, 2015)

thanks Beat. some very interesting tips & tricks there i"ll give them a shot. 

Danny


----------



## ptsmith (Nov 20, 2015)

Not counting what's been posted in this thread, I've heard Steely Dan's Aja mentioned more than once as a studio reference CD.


----------



## dannymc (Nov 21, 2015)

> Not counting what's been posted in this thread, I've heard Steely Dan's Aja mentioned more than once as a studio reference CD.



just had a listen to that steely Dan cousin dupree. longest 5mins of my life felt like half an hour. who actually likes this shit 

but if its a good reference track i might add it to the list to check when referencing. 

Danny


----------



## dannymc (Jan 4, 2016)

hi guys i had my first monitors reference comparisons day before Christmas at the sound systems retailer. i know this is less of a gear-head place but just wanted to give my feedback, might be useful for anyone else in the market for their first set of monitors like me or an upgrade. i was A/Bing Neumanns kh120's, Yamaha HS7, Yamaha HS8's and a set of very expensive Genelec 1238's which i think are worth about 7k just a reference.

i quickly eliminated the HS8's which i was surprised by as i was really leaning towards these from the reviews i read on gearslutz and elsewhere and because of the cost but i found them to be boomy (maybe because of their size) and seemed to have this annoying hiss across the spectrum. probably need to be in a well treated large room to work well.

as i continued i started to notice the serious lack of low end in the HS7's and they also began to tire my ears as they seemed quite hyped in the upper mids & highes. i think one would really need an additional sub woofer if trying to do any bass heavy material or trailer music. they seemed good for classical as i referenced some classical pieces through them and they sounded pretty good.

and lastly the neumanns kh120's. well these little fellas just blew me away. firstly i couldnt get over how small they were yet they packed one hell of a kick. i really cranked them up and the detail and balance remained perfectly. they have a lovely color and warmth to them, i found my ears really enjoyed listening to well produced reference tracks from classical to film score to club music. they were also very revealing when i played my own material through them. it seems every bad frequency that shouldn't be in there gets revealed to you which is kinda disheartening but its exactly what i want to improve and become a pro. the stereo spread, detail and balance were just perfection imo.

if i could fault them at all it would be they seem just a little held back in the highes, slightly muffled but all in all a stunning monitor. they actually compared well even against the 7k monster genelecs.

so i"m hoping to pull the trigger on these this week hopefully and order a set. if you're in the market for some new monitors in this price range i definitely recommend to give them a shot see what you think yourself. 

p.s. big thanks to Mihkel Zilmer for the tip off on these little gems.

Danny


----------



## MarcelM (Jan 5, 2016)

danny, if you didnt pull the trigger and have some more money... got for geithain RL906

and if you dont want to spend much you could go with jbl lsr305/308

i was told the jbl are among the best up to $1000, and geithain... well better but expensive


----------



## MartinAlexander (Jan 6, 2016)

What often is overlooked is ear fatigue.
When you're a composer and working like 10 hours with sound, it's important that the monitors do still sound good at relatively low volumes and do fatigue as less as possible, allowing to work distraction-free for a long time.
Also room plays a big role. If you listen at your dealer or another studio, even they probably have great acoustics, you're already not familiar with the room, so then do come other converters and new monitors and maybe new music...

An own reference CD with music one knows inside out of course can be helpful for a first impression, but it doesn't replace the actual experience of working with it the way they were intended for and in the environment you feel comfortable in. Such a CD is very good indeed if you get to another studio to work there to get to know the environment fast.
Also monitors can do behave very differently.
With a flawless mix (if there is such thing...) two models might sound both great, but with just 1% less, the one still sounds great, while the other drops subjectively by 10%, because the flaws are so exposed on them. One example of countless.

So imho the only way to really find out if they do match your personal artistic way of working is to actually compose and mix with them for a certain amount of time. See how good your music translates to the medium you're working for, how fast you did it, how comfortably it was and simply if it was a joy doing music with them. Don't go overly crazy about technical sheet stuff, since with time and experience you will care less and less about it anyway (cause you can hear it), but in case you want - Be aware that there is so much more than a "ruler flat response", that makes a good monitor, especially when keeping in mind, that rooms can bend the frequeny response tremendously.
Also there are tricks to make sheets look good (not only at Volkswagen). 

And by the way. Expensive and ultra super duper big and stuff isn't always better. It's really not that hard to make stuff sound impressive with speaker that can do an earthquake on their own.
But when you can make it sound good on good 2-way 8" speakers, it will let your jaw drop off when played on a wickedly expensive system. Try the other way round...


A personal tip: Look out for used high end nearfield monitors that barely anybody knows where you live. You will be able to get a 6000,- pair for 1500,- or so, if you can wait some months. Plus they will be usually in super condition and smoking every new monitors for that price with ease.
Same goes for other gear...

Hope this helps !


----------

