REL Quake

We all can see you dont take Prozac, more likely Viagra...

 

James,

you might like to try the D100 from Prozac. It's one of the many Prozacs used by the world reknowned Stirling Sound Studio of New York - currently being used as the main monitor in the mastering suite

 

My view on studio monitors is as follows..

They fall into two types:

1) Engineered to have a perfectly flat frequency response.

I personally find a flat frequency response boring in loudspeakers.

2) Engineered to sound the same, every pair - e.g. Ls3/5a

Great to have that level of homogenity. If you're not engineering a flat response though, your making hifi speakers like everyone else, just consistant ones (be they good or bad).

The ATC's Ive heard do both A and B...

Right for some people, wrong for others.. just like every piece of audio equipment, including my own

 

Its true! I went over to the sterling sound website and sure enough, there is a massive pair of ProAcs pictured in one of the mastering suites. Although it must be an older picture as that looks to me like a Response 4.



It's got ATC drivers bub!

 

Why? you doubting robert, didn't you believe the one in the pointy hat.

 

Have you heard about the auction of the football Becham kicked to the stand on that penalty kick...

Someone offered 10 million Euros... :yikes:

 

Is it on Ebay?

 

Looks like ProAc know what they are doing, at least when it comes to buying in the drivers.

 

Robbo,

that's an old picture - the R4's have been replaced with D100's this year. Not on stands as such, but mounted on concrete pillars that are sunk down though the basement!

Both the R4 and D100 use a pair of ATC mids. The D100 uses a brand new Scanspeak tweeter (££££) and they ditched the ATC bass drivers for new units from Volt - apparently WM told them the ATC's had no bass

 

But Merlin the concrete pillars would have to be sitting on **** otherwise there would be some massive distortion apparently.

 

Merlin,

Perhaps thats a technique you could use with your D100s. I am sure the neighbours wont mind too much.

 

AK, actually I do agree with bub about speaker supports and isolation. Except I wouldnt bother with phase 15 of mana under each speaker, i'd just do it with a couple of seismic sink speaker stands. One day I'll actually get round to putting it into practice.

 

Strangely Robert I don't disagree with him either, but where's the fun in that

 

I agree with Bub on everything in the interests of forum harmony and global peace

 

Good studio monitors are simply good speakers, full stop. This notion that they're "brutally revealing" in some way, and therefore unmusical, or unsuitable for domestic use because they're an analytical tool rather than a musical one, is complete and utter bollocks.

Actually, I do agree with Bub that most "hi-fi" speakers are profoundly inadequate. Mind you, so are most studio monitors, a handful of manufacturers aside.

-- Ian

 

Wonderfully put if I may say so Ian

Put another way, there are a hell of a lot of very expensive (ly finished) "hifi" speakers that would not pass muster in any professional capacity

 

Thanks chaps, I thought I was stuck in yet another "hi-fi versus music" discussion for a moment.

To come back to the Castle enclosure costs - yes Castle do put a lot of money into their enclosures because it has a fundamental effect on the sound of the speaker. But they don't look flashy or over-styled in the same way that the Sonus Faber range of speakers do, for instance. SF are a prime example of "waf" speakers where a lot of effort has gone in to making them look like nice expensive furniture, but unfortunately, rather less effort has gone into the sound, and it shows.

I learnt recently that the ATC enclosures are made for them by Castle, btw.

 

FWIW, Castle make cabinets for loads of household names - Proac, ATC & Living voice being just three that come to mind.

Speakers should look good though James, unless you live somewhat on the fringe of society and socialise annually

 

And of course you have heard them all to fundament your silly remarks...

Looking nice is not a sin, on the contrary, function follows form, the best sports cars look nice, also, wood properly done is the best cabinet material, as the fibres are uneven it doesnt ressonate at a certain frequency, it has a broader range of absortion as well, havent you ever hear that you should use natural materials, like wood, cotton or wool instead of syntetic for floors, courtains, rugs, furniture...

 

Sorry Antonio but you are paying for the finish with Sonus Faber.

Yesterday afternoon, I had the opportunity to sit and listen to the Stradivari, along with the Amati & Guarneri.

Firstly, they do look utterly gorgeous - more a work of art than a speaker. Sadly on listening, they were just not right to my ears, basically missing out quite a bit of information to present a beautiful sound.

Inflections, ambient clues and low level details were all missing from a £22K speaker. These reappeared when we hooked up a £5K pair of french floorstanders - but admittedly they looked like cheap Argos furniture