On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 10:54 -0800, Tim Howard wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 05:11:54 -0800
> > From: Mark Knecht <markknecht@xxxxxxxxx>
> > You know, it probably isn't as necessary as you think. All studio
> > monitors do (IMO) is give you a good listening environment when you're
> > mixing. However, they are not 'required' to get a good mix.
They're not required to do a passable mix, but for a good one you need a
good reference point. Not many things, other than good monitors, can do
that.
Well I think you may have taken things a bit more literally than Mark
intended, had to go back and read the thread though myself;)
The above comment is DEFINITLY true. However there is a point where
monitors(that approaches quickly) will make less of a difference than
skill. I have a pair of TR8s, I would consider them fairly entry level
monitors, flat enough to do mixing on. It is true that when you get
used to monitors you can compensate a little by nature for some errors
in EQ or the mix, but it is still not as accurate as doing it correctly
the first time on a good set of monitors. The TR8s are at least
accurate enough for my purposes, and give me a place to work on refining
my skill level to allow me to take advantage of better equipment
sometime later.
It is VERY hard to refine your skill level when a LOT of the error in
your mix comes from your speakers being completly wrong for the purpose.
For instance if I tried to mix on my wife's computer speakers I would
HATE my mixes, they would never have enough bass, very uneven response
and overall sound absolutely like crud due to her computer speakers
being designed to play MP3s and are EQd to make up for MP3s
shortcomings, and to sound 'good' to your average listener.
That being said though better monitors quickly become useless when the
acoustics of your space cant support them. For example there is no
point to me having better monitors in my space right now because my
space is not accurate enough to really support a better quality. While
better monitors may make some difference, there will be a noticeably
better increase in quality from me working on the space sound, for
probably noticeably less money.
> I have a "home bedroom" studio with wierd acoustics, which makes it
> very difficult to get accurate sound, even from the highest quality
> studio monitors. So I use a set of high-quality headphones to do my
> mixes.
Then fix the room's acoustics.
Headphones are for specialized listening during the mix. They should not
be the primary listening devices. Yes, even high-end phones.
My Sennheiser HD 600 headphones (which some people argued were the
world's best phones before being superceded by the HD 650) are way more
"accurate" than my Alesis M1 Active Mk2 studio monitors.
Yet I would never attempt to mix anything primarily on phones. The
result does not translate at all on real-world speakers.
Also very true. Headphones != monitors. I can always tell when someone
has mixed something on headphones instead of on monitors, there is a
completly different sound to it and the balance is completly off
typically. While they are VERY good at examining things in close detail
to find errors, they are not something I would want to use for a
complete mix.
Also of note though is even if you have monitors, this is no substitute
for listening to your mixes on various types of speakers, be it your
home system, car stereo, etc to see how it sounds on many different
qualities of sound systems. There are exceptions to this, but typically
not in music mixing(I am thinking of install systems for art displays
for example you only need to listen to it on the install system, or
theater systems it is more important to listen to it in the space).
As a side note SOS(Sound On Sound) is a good resource for this, and the
eSub with them aint a bad(Read somewhat inexpensive) choice at all. Not
to mention they have a linux music forum that occasionally gets some
activity along with their rather good forums on music technology in
general. Enough of the advertisement there though, the forums are free;)
Seablade
