If I were to upgrade my towers, which one of these is the best deal?

[GranteedEV]

As an example, if you want rap music as the artist intended, which is going to get you closer, a pair of Philharmonics or Beats by Dr. Dre?

Having actually heard rap music on both of those, I just want to point out that the latter does serious violence to vocal accuracy which is obvious with nasal colorations among other things. So even if the "mixing levels" might be closer to the original intention (which I doubt), it means nothing if the instruments' timbre sound unnatural (in this case vocals, something no mixer would "alter").

I can only hope recording studios mix on playback accurate system regardless of genre.

 

[Steve81]

I can only hope recording studios mix on playback accurate system regardless of genre.

Unfortunately in the real world, you can hope in one hand and sh*t in the other, and see which fills up faster. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if everybody is listening to your music on an iPod with stock ear buds, that's what you should be targeting your mix for, not Philharmonics. The reality is that speakers like Philharmonics are a significant minority. That's not to say they don't sound good (everything I heard through them sounded great as a matter of fact) and that there isn't music mixed with the hopes of being played back on such speakers. But in the pop music world...I'd doubt it.

(in this case vocals, something no mixer would "alter")

You clearly haven't heard much rap and pop music...

 

[Steve81]

Just to expound upon this further,

As I've posted here previously, I've seen it put before like this:

It (the circle of confusion) is only broken when the professional monitor loudspeakers and the consumer loudspeakers sound like each other - when they have the same sonic signature, i.e., when they are similarly good. (Of course, sounding alike also includes the interface with the room and the listener within it.) Then, and only then, can we hope to preserve the art. All else is playing games.

Now think about this from the standpoint of a recording studio: the writing is on the wall; while maybe tens of thousands of people are listening to music on speakers comparable to a Philharmonic, tens of millions of iPods are sold every year and people spend billions of hours using them to listen to music on what are likely to be considered substandard headphones. What's going to break the circle of confusion? Mixing tracks with those hundreds of millions of iPod users in mind, or mixing for a few thousand and too bad so sad for everyone else? Given that these companies want to sell music to as many as people as possible, I think the answer is pretty simple...

 

[GranteedEV]

The reality is that speakers like Philharmonics are a significant minority.

Not in the professional world.

You clearly haven't heard much rap and pop music...

There's a difference between altering the voice IE autotune etc, and altering the actual timbre of the voice to sound more realistic on crappy systems. The latter ain't happenin.

Take Eminem as one simple example: whats the target market likely going to be listening to music on, Philharmonics or Beats by Dr. Dre? Do you think the engineer mixing the tracks will take that into account? Do you think the fact that Eminem is signed to Dr. Dre's record label has any impact on the matter? No offense, but I think you need to get real.

Instead of conjecture, where are the non-marketing facts?

Dre's 2001 was mastered by a guy named Brian Gardner. His website states this

A tuned and calibrated listening room is vital to successful mastering. Our full-range monitors employ Tannoy components with custom cross-overs and cabinets.

Here is Ocean Way Studio's Sherman Oaks mixing room, which Dr Dre uses:

They look like custom horn speakers to me. NOT "Dr beats"

Here is Just Blaze`studio. Those look like genelec monitors to me:

Ryan West has done a lot of mixing for Eminem. Here is his mixing setup

Tough to see exactly what those waveguide tweeter monitors are, but they look... almost exactly like the foundation for a damn good speaker.


Now in just about all of the above, you'll find some famous Yamaha NS10 monitors too. They're NOT good speakers but they've got a massive upper midrange peak that helps identify errors.

My point is that there's a lot more to the industry - Pop or otherwise - than meets the eye when it comes to equipment. It's naive to assume that trained professionals only care about making something sound good on ipod earbuds. yes they make a distinct effort to balance things out so things don't sound bad on ipod earbuds - but that's not the reference system for any recording.

 

[Steve81]

Instead of conjecture, where are the non-marketing facts?

It may be conjecture, but there's a fair amount of logic behind it, logic that you've got no answer to other than to point to the impressive systems that recording studios use.

There's a difference between altering the voice IE autotune etc, and altering the actual timbre of the voice to sound more realistic on crappy systems. The latter ain't happenin.

Maybe, maybe not. I've not visited every recording studio and interviewed the engineers to find out, and neither have you.

They look like custom horn speakers to me. NOT "Dr beats"... It's naive to assume that trained professionals only care about making something sound good on ipod earbuds.

It's also naive to assume that Dr. Dre doesn't care what his music or the music coming out of his label sounds like on the headphones he's trying to sell. It doesn't matter what equipment the monitoring is done on, the point is what you allude to here:

yes they make a distinct effort to balance things out so things don't sound bad on ipod earbuds

Of course they do, because that's how the vast majority of music is consumed today. The corollary to this though is that rebalancing content to sound good on these headphones drastically changes things: the Monster Beats by Dr. Dre earphones for example are up 15dB at 100Hz relative to 1000Hz and the curve rises further the lower you go in frequency. You can't balance things out for this kind of response and still expect "reference" output from a pair of Philharmonics.

http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php?graphID[0]=3411&graphID[1]=2571&graphID[2]=2991&graphID[3]=1263&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

but that's not the reference system for any recording.

And there's the next problem: there is no reference system. This isn't like THX where they attempt to control what's heard in the studio, and then duplicate that in a theater or home theater (albeit with varying degrees of success). There is no "reference standard" for music, which makes trying to confer ultimate accuracy on speaker X rather pointless in my view.

 

[GranteedEV]

It's also naive to assume that Dr. Dre doesn't care what his music or the music coming out of his label sounds like on the headphones he's trying to sell. It doesn't matter what equipment the monitoring is done on

It doesn't matter what the original artist and mixer uses to produce music, specifically because he has a conflict of interest?

Sorry, I can't agree.

The corollary to this though is that rebalancing content to sound good on these headphones drastically changes things: the Monster Beats by Dr. Dre headphones for example are up 15dB at 100Hz relative to 1000Hz and the curve rises further the lower you go in frequency. You can't balance things out for this kind of headphone and still expect "reference" output from a pair of Philharmonics.

Forget the Philharmonics, and go right back to the Genelecs in Just Blaze' mixing room. If it sounds adequately bassy on the exaggerated beats, and bass-less on the Genelecs, does that mean the mixer/producer is satisfied?

The reality is that "dre beats" are not the only final playback system. People's radios, people's TV speakers, people's computer speakers, people's ipods, and yes, people's hi fis, are all relevant. There's a crap ton of variation in consumer level gear and no standard in place regardless of what x person may endorse. It's only sensible for the sound to be good on the certifiably accurate system (like the Genelecs) than for the accuracy to be thrown out the window altogether. And you're overstating the Beats' frequency response - they're not that bad when you factor in our actual hearing mechanisms WRT headphones. They are flawed headphones which can be heard using Dr Dre or Eminem (We one time A/B'd Eminem's "Til I collapse" on pairs of DN-HP1000, ATH-M50s and Beats and a lot of the RECORDED material in the track was completely obscured on the beats, slightly obscured on the M50s, and distinct on the denons - are you suggesting this very specific instrument wasn't intended to be heard at all??)

Are adjustments made? Sure. But to assume that preference is given to inaccurate sound reproduction - WHICH VARIES GREATLY in every direction and frequency band, over accurate sound reproduction - which varies very little, is silly.

There is no "reference standard" for music, which makes trying to confer ultimate accuracy on speaker X rather pointless in my view.

There is a reference standard - the sound of the original instrument. Mixing or Mastering people are NOT the artists of studio recordings. They may try to improve intelligibility or balance of different subtracks within a track, or obscure unwanted recording noise, but pertaining specifically to equipment used, they are not the Guitars, the Vocalists, the Drummers etc.

A lot of contemporary music has very small dynamic range so sometimes we the end user are left with a big "F U" but that doesn't mean we should compromise the other aspects. Everything in a recording is intertwined and we can't get caught up in trying to hear how the mixer heard something. We can only try to hear what the microphone would hear. Sometimes that could mean extra recorded sibilance being heard on a good speaker but that's a recording issue NOT a playback issue.

The solution is not to compromise the playback system assuming its inaccuracies will match the chosen inaccuracies in the recording studio. The inaccuracies vary far too greatly for that.

 

[GranteedEV]

=3411&graphID[1]=2571&graphID[2]=2991&graphID[3]=1263&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones]Learning Center - Build a Headphone Graph | HeadRoom Audio

The ideal headphone graph does not directly correlate to frequency response of a loudspeaker. It's NOT a 15db 100hz peak it's roughly a 4-5db exaggeration below 200hz.

Enough to color the sound of an instrument (or add a bit of bass "thickness" to an 808).

But that does not mean a speaker with that sort of response curve would sound anything like those headphones' response curves.

And again - all of those has a crap ton of variation in different directions from "accurate". Which one does the mixer strive for? The answer is that the mixer does have better playback equipment. Perhaps a pair of beats or ipod headphones or car speakers is used as a check - but that's different from a primary playback system.

 

[Steve81]

It doesn't matter what the original artist and mixer uses to produce music, specifically because he has a conflict of interest?...Sorry, I can't agree....The reality is that "dre beats" are not the only final playback system.

I never claimed that "Beats" is the only playback system, however, the aforementioned conflict of interest makes them an interesting example of how things very easily can go sideways. Whether you agree or not, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to understand what I'm saying.

Regarding the rest of your post, it's going to come down to a few key things:

Are adjustments made? Sure.

Then your argument is already flawed/contradictive. If you admit that adjustments are made, but have no idea the extent of those adjustments for any given piece of material, what good is that? The circle of confusion continues.

It's only sensible for the sound to be good on the certifiably accurate system (like the Genelecs) than for the accuracy to be thrown out the window altogether.

There is no such thing as "certifiable accuracy" in this regard currently. As the quote I mentioned before indicates: preservation of the art requires a similar sonic signature between speaker A and speaker B. Whether that speaker A and B happen to be Philharmonics or B&Ws is less critical, although obviously some semblence of quality helps. As it is, there is no preservation of the art because there is no standard in recording studios around the world, let alone in the playback chains that we all utilize. Until we get there, "certifiable accuracy" is a joke.

There is a reference standard - the sound of the original instrument.

Unfortunately in quite a lot of popular music there is no "original instrument". Further, the sound of a guitar for example, is an impossible standard: the recording process destroys any possibility of reaching that reference. Again, if you want to preserve the art, you need standards, which currently don't exist.

 

[Steve81]

The ideal headphone graph does not directly correlate to frequency response of a loudspeaker. It's NOT a 15db 100hz peak it's roughly a 4-5db exaggeration below 200hz.

If a 15dB rise at 100Hz relative to 1kHz is really only a 4-5dB exaggeration, what do these equate to then:

http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php?graphID[0]=573&graphID[1]=293&graphID[2]=&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

anemic bass?

FWIW, I own these two:

http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php?graphID[0]=373&graphID[1]=&graphID[2]=2261&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones

And I'll tell you right off the bat, the Klipsch sounds a lot further off to my ear than a 4-5dB bump in the low end.

 

[GranteedEV]

If a 15dB rise at 100Hz relative to 1kHz is really only a 4-5dB exaggeration, what do these equate to then:

=573&graphID[1]=293&graphID[2]=&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones]Learning Center - Build a Headphone Graph | HeadRoom Audio

anemic bass?

FWIW, I own these two:

=373&graphID[1]=&graphID[2]=2261&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones]Learning Center - Build a Headphone Graph | HeadRoom Audio

And I'll tell you right off the bat, the Klipsch sounds a lot further off to my ear than a 4-5dB bump in the low end.

For starters, you're now discussing IEMs here and I'm discussing headphones. I might have made a mistake in the earlier post eyeballing the graphs.

I don't really have an idea what the ideal IEM response is because they so directly load the ear. But if you look at the Monster beats headphones (yellow graph) compared to the grados:

You'll see that they differ from the accurate headphones, but within reason. certainly not a 15db difference. The IEMs are an apples to oranges comparision that is highly dependant on someone's own HRTF

Unfortunately in quite a lot of popular music there is no "original instrument". Further, the sound of a guitar for example, is an impossible standard: the recording process destroys any possibility of reaching that reference. Again, if you want to preserve the art, you need standards, which currently don't exist.

If there is no original instrument, then there is no "unfortunately". Speakers are reproduction tools, so if they're just playing back artificial tones, it doesn't matter one bit what those artificial tones sound like. You can't say that about natural tones though, like the human voice. There's only one way those natural tones sound like - like the real thing.

There is no such thing as "certifiable accuracy" in this regard currently. As the quote I mentioned before indicates: preservation of the art requires a similar sonic signature between speaker A and speaker B. Whether that speaker A and B happen to be Philharmonics or B&Ws is less critical, although obviously some semblence of quality helps. As it is, there is no preservation of the art because there is no standard in recording studios around the world, let alone in the playback chains that we all utilize. Until we get there, "certifiable accuracy" is a joke.

There's no de jure standard, but I think you're selling the de facto standards pretty short in the general scheme of things. There's a ton of great studio monitors out there - whether they be Focal Pro, Adam, Tannoy, PMC, ATC, JBL Pro, Mackie, Genelec, etc. These do adhere to the objective fundamentals of good loudspeaker design - flat frequency response being a very significant one. And these are the brands you're likely to find in a given studio. of course there's gonna be some variations from that but it doesn't mean that accurate sound reproduction is a hopeless goal.

 

[Steve81]

I don't really have an idea what the ideal IEM response is because they so directly load the ear. But if you look at the Monster beats headphones (yellow graph) compared to the grados

Fair enough.

There's no de jure standard, but I think you're selling the de facto standards pretty short in the general scheme of things...

It's hard not to when I've heard songs that are relatively involving via the radio on stock speakers in an economy car, and fall flat on either of my systems or my Grados.

Further, without a true de jure standard, I think it somewhat childish to dig at various brands for lack of accuracy; I'm not talking about cheap Sony speakers at Best Buy here, but ADTG's B&Ws as an example (and of course B&W's are used in recording studios as well).

I'm also somewhat concerned about the future, given the ever declining market share of hi-fi. I know you don't think it makes sense to mix to suit stock iPod buds, but its hard to argue that if you want hundreds of millions of people to hear the music exactly as you intend it, you could make worse moves.

it doesn't mean that accurate sound reproduction is a hopeless goal.

I wouldn't say it's totally hopeless, but I think there are limits of what can be achieved sans concrete, industry wide standards, not only in terms of what the music is being mixed on, but what it is being mixed for. I aim for a reasonable degree of "accuracy" in my systems (although I may have different priorities in how I achieve it, and my systems are accurate in totally different ways) and I think tools like Audyssey take a step in the right direction, and a body like THX could very much have the potential to quantify "accuracy".

 

[Steve81]

I know you don't think it makes sense to mix to suit stock iPod buds, but its hard to argue that if you want hundreds of millions of people to hear the music exactly as you intend it, you could make worse moves.

I'd also add that given Apple's position as both a hardware and content provider, they could certainly be in a position to make such a thing a reality for their iTunes content.

 

[PENG]

Congrats on your purchase!!!!

How much did they end up costing you?

And what color did you get??

I got 3 quotes, went with the lowest one, all from authorized dealers. Was asked not to broadcast it but. Not as good as deal as DPS apparently was offered. It's the rosewood I am getting,

 

[PENG]

I listened to the R900's on Sunday at RMAF in a standard hotel room- 2-2.5k cubic ft-yowza!... Must be some sub to make up the 3k diference between the smaller speakers and the 900's. I think you'll be very happy with the 900 towers solo though
Btw- they had the 300's in the same room, but were not in use- sold? (It was late in the day) I did hear the LS 50's next door, without sub, same size room and was really impressed for their size, they were no match for the 990's bass response obviously.
Cheers, Mac

My next sub will be one of those JL Audio models, I doubt I would be ready for one sooner than a couple of years so the R900 has to go solo for quite some time.

 

[monkish54]

I got 3 quotes, went with the lowest one, all from authorized dealers. Was asked not to broadcast it but. Not as good as deal as DPS apparently was offered. It's the rosewood I am getting,

I might add the R900 to my list of speakers to own. My next pair will probably be the LSR 6332, but If I can get the R900 for 3-3.5K I will seriously consider it instead. I might be able to talk Brad down to that price. If i can make payments, I'd happily pay ~4K for them. I really like Brad and would be happy to give him some cash. Hopefully my job search will pick up. ^.^

http://www.audiohigh.com/locations.html

 

[PENG]

I might add the R900 to my list of speakers to own. My next pair will probably be the LSR 6332, but If I can get the R900 for 3-3.5K I will seriously consider it instead. I might be able to talk Brad down to that price. If i can make payments, I'd happily pay ~4K for them. I really like Brad and would be happy to give him some cash. Hopefully my job search will pick up. ^.^

Audio High | locations

If i remember right DPS was able to get them for 3.5 k, no idea who the dealer was but ADTG may know. I also consider the 201/2 but was told no discount for the ref line models. Full price is beyond my reach just for speakers for the other room.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I got 3 quotes, went with the lowest one, all from authorized dealers. Was asked not to broadcast it but. Not as good as deal as DPS apparently was offered. It's the rosewood I am getting,

The best DPS got on the offer was 30% off MSRP.

 

[monkish54]

If i remember right DPS was able to get them for 3.5 k, no idea who the dealer was but ADTG may know. I also consider the 201/2 but was told no discount for the ref line models. Full price is beyond my reach just for speakers for the other room.

That's not a bad price for them. My only qualm is the sharp edges. It causes diffraction and it doesn't look as good as these:

The S-1EX dealer wants 6K (even though he offered 5k last time I was there...) they stopped making the S-1EX and he's had the display for at least a year. He should be happy to just break even! If I find employment soon i'll find out how much he paid and attempt to negotiate a fair deal for the both of us. If I could walk away with those for 3.5K, i'd probably do so over the R900. It would take some serious thought.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I might add the R900 to my list of speakers to own. My next pair will probably be the LSR 6332, but If I can get the R900 for 3-3.5K I will seriously consider it instead. I might be able to talk Brad down to that price. If i can make payments, I'd happily pay ~4K for them. I really like Brad and would be happy to give him some cash. Hopefully my job search will pick up. ^.^

Audio High | locations

Jared, school should be number one priority.

Speakers can wait.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If i remember right DPS was able to get them for 3.5 k, no idea who the dealer was but ADTG may know. I also consider the 201/2 but was told no discount for the ref line models. Full price is beyond my reach just for speakers for the other room.

It wasn't authorized, though.

InTheIndustry could have gotten 40-50% off, but he is kind of out of action for now.