Arpangel wrote:IMO there is no such thing as a neutral, or uncloroured speaker, and every speaker has "a sound" some more than others.
If a piece of music sounds great on one speaker but a bit bad on another, then which is right? and by saying "bad" who's bad would that be?
Some of my Velvet Underground recordings are amazingly bad, and sound bad on everything, my stereo, monitors, car, Bluetooth speakers, crappy music centres, and a lot of those speakers are awful, but they still let me know that it's a rough recording. And better (whatever that is) recordings sound better on all these speakers too.
So do we actually need a £10,000 monitor to make technical/quality judgements? I'm not sure?
One theory is that the bigger the window you have the more you can see, but I don't need a wall sized window in a mansion to see that it's raining outside. An "OK" speaker will tell you the essentials, the rest is a luxury that's nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
Great records of all time have been made on all sorts of speakers, countless approaches to this whole thing, which tends to make me think it's pointless laying down rules on monitoring, it's as personal as choosing any instrument, we all have our own preferences and ideas about what things should sound like.
People I know who have made and are making music, a couple who are professional/successful, and some like me, essentially amature. There are Tannoy Little Reds in two cases, me and my 45 yo KEF"s, a pair of Alesis Monitor 1's, some Heybrook hi-fI speakers, AR Red Box, Proac Studio 1's. Quite a mixture of speakers, but I don't even think about them when I go to these people's places, they are just there.
And whether recording or relaxing, I don't have speakers for those two seperate things, it's never been an issue.
Sorry, cannot agree friend. Reading Hi Fi News reviews from the 70s/early 80s high quality speakers were tested against real sounds such as instruments in the room, jangling keys and both male and female speech. Very often the benchmark of low colouration and accuracy was the Quad ELS. Thus, the test was not for a 'nice' speaker but one that reproduced reality.
Then it all went Ts U and silly.
Such tests are not done today (why?) but it is very common to read, when Phil or Hugh are testing the latest £xxxx wonder (its a tough job but...!) that the top end monitors compare very closely to the already very high quality incumbents.
There is the logical conclusion that 'perfect' speakers would all sound exactly the same and would reproduce ALL sounds with equal fidelity regardless of frequency or SPL.
Not there yet but if you have enough mooolar, getting bloody close!