active or passive monitors?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Gear Gab > active or passive monitors?
Posted on Apr 22, 2004 07:03 pm
Slytleestoopid
The Dumb Idiot Poo-head
Member Since: Apr 11, 2004
Which am i better off getting? a pair of active monitors for $350-ish or the passive monitor/amp combo? what are the differences?
[ Back to Top ]
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
Apr 23, 2004 12:01 am I personally prefer a good set of active. The amp and drivers are integrated for the best possible sound. Basicaly matched set amp and speaker.
WillumIdiot.Member
Since: Apr 22, 2004
Apr 23, 2004 03:29 am I've been thinking about this too - I'm going to be setting up a small home studio type thing in a garage (typical huh?).
I'm going to want some reasonable monitors for mixing etc and I'm wondering what type I should look to get, as I'm on a bit of a budget...
Is there a point where cheapish ones become much of a muchness with excellent ones? I'm asking 'cause the rest of my gear isn't going to be amazing, so it'd be silly to get AMAZING monitors with a kinda budget setup otherwise...
Apr 23, 2004 06:43 am How can anyone really answer that without sitting down and listening to them side by side?
Based on specs I would roll with the Tannoy and Alesis amp because the Tannoys have a bigger woofer and a front tuned port. In addition, I personally prefer seperate components between amp and speaker...at least when it comes to budget speakers and amps such as these.
But, it's really impossible to say for sure without sitting and listening to them...I am basing my opinion on initial impression.
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
Apr 23, 2004 10:15 pm Gotta agree with Db. The best monitor is the one that works best for you. Most everybody I know as well as most folks I have heard from here have to "learn" their monitors. A process of mixing on the monitors and listening to the mix on many systems to see how the mix translates. Take some music with you that you know well, very well and listen to different monitors. Don't listen so much to be entertained as to access accuracy. Are the frequencies balanced or flat? Can you precieve spacial placement of sounds in the sound field? The one you find easiest to work with is the best.
BobMember
Since: Jun 20, 2003
Apr 25, 2004 12:01 am Active or Passive monitors? How about both? If you're recording at home like most of us, consider using a set of smaller active monitors (smaller woofers = less $), which are optimized for lower volume mixing, mounted in a 3' triangle above your mixing station. My theory is that a smaller woofer is not as significant at lower volumes. The mix may in this case be influenced by the Fletcher-Munson curve will cause you to hear more midrange and respond by eq'ing to boost highs & lows. I know that sounds bad, but as part of the learning-your-monitors process, you need the ability to immediately hear your mix on a different set of speakers, and even better, in a different room. The different speakers / different room scenario causes you to reset your automatic equalization process that occurs with your human sense of hearing. The way I accomplished this was to run coaxes over to my stereo in the next room (about 50' away). I have to physically get out of my chair and walk into the next room to hear it. But I can make the switch rapidly (just turn down my monitors, walk in the next rooom, turn up the stereo). That's way quicker than burning a CD. This makes A/B comparisons between studio monitors and a 'typical' home stereo (which I consider to be the sound system of choice for my target audience). I really like being able to stand up and walk away from my monitors and then hear the mix in the far field, right away. The one other H/W widget I needed (to make my setup work with hi-fidelity) was between my sound card outputs & the coaxes over to my stereo, I added a JK Audio Pureformer (600 ohm : 600 ohm isolation transformer, 2 Ch), to reduce ground loop noise problems.