hi,
i own now a pair of Samson Resolv50a and i am not really satisfied with the sound.
it may also be because of the room which is not treated...
now should i:
1. upgrade my monitors to something better (krk?) the budget is about 700 euros
2. keep the monitors and treat the room (with panels?, which ones?)
3. point 1+2?
4. other solution?
i know this is very subjective, the choice of the monitors is personal... but i really don't have big experience with this, so every suggestion is welcome
monitor upgrade advice
Hi
I think that treating the room 1st is the best thing to do. If your room is not great, it dosnt matter which speakers you put in, theyll allways be colourd buy the room. This is ok if the room is reasonably neutral, but if its a bad room you wont get accuracy even from the best speakers.
If you treat your room, your speakers will sound much better. Even if you still dont like the sound from them, at least youll know that you are actually hearing the speakers, and not the room, so then you can think about upgrading them.
The other point to make is that even is a speaker dosnt have a totally flat frequency response, you can still use em if you know which frequencys are off, and how you have to compensate. Yamahas ns10 are a good example, every producer has used em at some stage, they are an industry satandard but they sound horrible, everyone knows how they sound but you have to compensate within your mix.
Does that help?
I think that treating the room 1st is the best thing to do. If your room is not great, it dosnt matter which speakers you put in, theyll allways be colourd buy the room. This is ok if the room is reasonably neutral, but if its a bad room you wont get accuracy even from the best speakers.
If you treat your room, your speakers will sound much better. Even if you still dont like the sound from them, at least youll know that you are actually hearing the speakers, and not the room, so then you can think about upgrading them.
The other point to make is that even is a speaker dosnt have a totally flat frequency response, you can still use em if you know which frequencys are off, and how you have to compensate. Yamahas ns10 are a good example, every producer has used em at some stage, they are an industry satandard but they sound horrible, everyone knows how they sound but you have to compensate within your mix.
Does that help?
-
Bunky Freaks
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:45 am
Hi Jesso,
i recently completed a complete accoustic treatment of my studio and the sonic
results are even better than I expected. It is definitly the way to go before
investing into upper class monitor speakers. You have to do some reading
about room acoustics before you consider investing into such treatment but
the benefit will be a big one. Here are some excellent infos about room
acoustics and how to treat a room with only a low budget available:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end- ... traps.html
http://www.radford.edu/~shelm/acoustics/bass-traps.html
http://webpages.charter.net/jdgeisen/Ba ... sTrap1.htm
greets
i recently completed a complete accoustic treatment of my studio and the sonic
results are even better than I expected. It is definitly the way to go before
investing into upper class monitor speakers. You have to do some reading
about room acoustics before you consider investing into such treatment but
the benefit will be a big one. Here are some excellent infos about room
acoustics and how to treat a room with only a low budget available:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end- ... traps.html
http://www.radford.edu/~shelm/acoustics/bass-traps.html
http://webpages.charter.net/jdgeisen/Ba ... sTrap1.htm
greets
hi jesso, hi bunky freaks,
thank you for your helpful advice!
ok, then i will look what i can do to treat the (small) room where i make music.
to treat the room i would more like to find a "finished solution"... i mean some finished-non-expensive-panels....
i have had a look at the prices and find them much more expensive as i had thought.... but i can't really build them by myself (no time, no place, and not really able to make something well done....)
do you think that with about 300 euros (or less) i can do something useful?
thank you for your helpful advice!
ok, then i will look what i can do to treat the (small) room where i make music.
to treat the room i would more like to find a "finished solution"... i mean some finished-non-expensive-panels....
i have had a look at the prices and find them much more expensive as i had thought.... but i can't really build them by myself (no time, no place, and not really able to make something well done....)
do you think that with about 300 euros (or less) i can do something useful?
I agree with this post 100%. I've flirted with Mackie monitors for years, but I know that in my untreated bedroom studio, they wouldn't make a huge difference. Thus, I keep producing on my cheap Alesis M1 Active monitors because I know them, and I know where they are good and where they suck, so I can produce decent mixes using just those and a good pair of headphones. If I got the Mackies, they wouldn't give me a better result UNLESS the room was properly treated first.jesso wrote:Hi
I think that treating the room 1st is the best thing to do. If your room is not great, it dosnt matter which speakers you put in, theyll allways be colourd buy the room. This is ok if the room is reasonably neutral, but if its a bad room you wont get accuracy even from the best speakers.
If you treat your room, your speakers will sound much better. Even if you still dont like the sound from them, at least youll know that you are actually hearing the speakers, and not the room, so then you can think about upgrading them.
The other point to make is that even is a speaker dosnt have a totally flat frequency response, you can still use em if you know which frequencys are off, and how you have to compensate. Yamahas ns10 are a good example, every producer has used em at some stage, they are an industry satandard but they sound horrible, everyone knows how they sound but you have to compensate within your mix.
Does that help?
then i would start by treating the room,
i have found a website which sells isolation panels
at a reasonable price here
http://www.schaumstoff.com/produktvorsc ... ktgruppe=1
which size should the panels have? and where should i place them?
i suppose that this depends on the size of the room, the volume, the monitors and so on... but i would like to have a vague idea to start from...
i have found a website which sells isolation panels
at a reasonable price here
http://www.schaumstoff.com/produktvorsc ... ktgruppe=1
which size should the panels have? and where should i place them?
i suppose that this depends on the size of the room, the volume, the monitors and so on... but i would like to have a vague idea to start from...
-
Bunky Freaks
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:45 am
The only reason to build acoustic elemtens yourself is to save a huge
amount of money. If you don't want to build them yourself be prepared to
spent a lot of cash.
You need different elements for a standard room treatment going from
acoustic foam (Akustikschaum), which focuses on high to mid frequencies
balancing, broadband absorbers for mid to low mid/bass response and
basstraps which handle bass and subbass response (surprise surprise ).
To my findings there were two main factors contributing the the particular
sound of the room: frequency response and reverberation.
To get an idea on the first do a slow sinesweep from 30 to 300 Hz you will
notice, that some frequencies will be louder and some will be quiter, a result
of phase canceling and doubling. Testing a room on reverberation is far
more delicate, but you can snap or clap to get a first impression on that.
Also try to playback a short signal like a bassdrum to hear where sound gets
muddy due to reflections.
The broadband absorbers I built had the biggest impact on the particular
sound of my room. They flattened the peaks in the frequency response and
greatly enhanced the stability of impulses and the stereo image of the audio
signal.. More than any "better" speaker could have helped to improve the monitoring situation.
The only thing I bought were the acoustic foam elements which you can
hardly build yourself ( http://www.aixfoam.de were the cheapest in my
region). I don't have any further experience with commercial products tho..
amount of money. If you don't want to build them yourself be prepared to
spent a lot of cash.
You need different elements for a standard room treatment going from
acoustic foam (Akustikschaum), which focuses on high to mid frequencies
balancing, broadband absorbers for mid to low mid/bass response and
basstraps which handle bass and subbass response (surprise surprise
).To my findings there were two main factors contributing the the particular
sound of the room: frequency response and reverberation.
To get an idea on the first do a slow sinesweep from 30 to 300 Hz you will
notice, that some frequencies will be louder and some will be quiter, a result
of phase canceling and doubling. Testing a room on reverberation is far
more delicate, but you can snap or clap to get a first impression on that.
Also try to playback a short signal like a bassdrum to hear where sound gets
muddy due to reflections.
The broadband absorbers I built had the biggest impact on the particular
sound of my room. They flattened the peaks in the frequency response and
greatly enhanced the stability of impulses and the stereo image of the audio
signal.. More than any "better" speaker could have helped to improve the monitoring situation.
The only thing I bought were the acoustic foam elements which you can
hardly build yourself ( http://www.aixfoam.de were the cheapest in my
region). I don't have any further experience with commercial products tho..
-
Bunky Freaks
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:45 am
I suggest you read through the gearsluts threat I posted in the above
message. It summarizes the whole process of building these broadband
absorbers. Because of the good documentation of the original poster,
using the example as basis led to a pretty easy and straightforward building
process
For the broadband absorbers and basstraps mineral wool is prefered over
foam because it is of higher density and absorbs more energy. I used high
density stonewool made by isover.
greets
message. It summarizes the whole process of building these broadband
absorbers. Because of the good documentation of the original poster,
using the example as basis led to a pretty easy and straightforward building
process
For the broadband absorbers and basstraps mineral wool is prefered over
foam because it is of higher density and absorbs more energy. I used high
density stonewool made by isover.
greets