Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[zakco]

itsapleasure wrote on Sat, 08 May 2010 10:49

Way off topic, but this so true.  I was listening to some music on shuffle through my big JBLs a few weeks back and could pretty much tell exactly what albums were mixed strictly w/ nearfields.

OT maybe, but interesting. What aspects of the mixes suggested nearfields to you?

[itsapleasure]

well I'm probably full of crap on this one, but it's definitely worth discussing...

Some albums have very defined low end, and others just seemed a bit "guessed" (if that makes any sense).  The difference is never that apparent when listening through nearfields.  

It's funny how much equipment gets blamed for the advent of 'suck' in audio, but I'm beginning to think that "bookshelf speakers" play an important role...

[compasspnt]

Speakers don't kill music.

People do.

[Wireline]

compasspnt wrote on Mon, 10 May 2010 11:19

Speakers don't kill music. People do.

The reverse is not true, though...'music' has killed plenty of speakers.

People still do.

Doo-wop-do-waaaaaaaaah

[itsapleasure]

itsapleasure wrote on Mon, 10 May 2010 10:37

well I'm probably full of crap on this one....

I meant to say "totally full of crap"  

[jetbase]

itsapleasure wrote on Tue, 11 May 2010 00:37

well I'm probably full of crap on this one, but it's definitely worth discussing... Some albums have very defined low end, and others just seemed a bit "guessed" (if that makes any sense).  The difference is never that apparent when listening through nearfields.   It's funny how much equipment gets blamed for the advent of 'suck' in audio, but I'm beginning to think that "bookshelf speakers" play an important role...

Some years ago I was mixing a song on my NS10's whilst my main monitors were out for repair/service. I felt like I couldn't really tell what was going on in the lower frequencies (I had only recently started using NS10's) & eventually I thought "too hard", printed what I had, figuring I'd remix later when the mains were back. When I did get them back I played the mix through them & it was perfect. Go figure.

I know what you mean though. Sometimes I get mixes in to master & I just know by the silly bottom end that no-one's been listening to what's going on down there, probably not even guessing.

[wwittman]

itsapleasure wrote on Mon, 10 May 2010 10:37

well I'm probably full of crap on this one, but it's definitely worth discussing... Some albums have very defined low end, and others just seemed a bit "guessed" (if that makes any sense).  The difference is never that apparent when listening through nearfields.   It's funny how much equipment gets blamed for the advent of 'suck' in audio, but I'm beginning to think that "bookshelf speakers" play an important role...

I think bookshelves often have a kind of homogenising effect.
mixes on 'big' monitors are more likely to end up with things really loud or really soft in the mix.
Bookshelves make you want to make everything more 'even', or 'democratic' as I sometimes call it.

[wwittman]

compasspnt wrote on Mon, 10 May 2010 12:19

Speakers don't kill music. People do.

an interesting analogy

yes, guns don't kill people without people.
but guns make it EASIER to kill people

bookshelves make it easier to kill mixes


now teabaggers can start to opine how "Obama wants to take our bookshelf speakers away!"

it's as true as most else they say...

[d gauss]

guns don't kill people...
bullets do!

well, maybe if you pistol whip them.  

[Fletcher]

wwittman wrote on Mon, 24 May 2010 16:40

bookshelves make it easier to kill mixes

I start to question what is defined as a "bookshelf" speaker?

There are all kinds of monitors on the market that can certainly give you the "horse power" of mains [at least in their direct path] and then there are little itty bitty things like KRK's that seem to be doing their level best to be "modern" Yomama "NS-10M"s or [watch me date myself] Acoustic Research "AR-15"s

[Nicky D]

I would say have ten (of the same) fast ones and four(of the same) slow ones...so two styles of pres...good quality...away you go...for me...too many variables makes me want to try them all and then I become ineffective...of course the above is if you are tracking beds...if not...who cares?