|
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
Speaking of Genelec specifically, do you know of any major classical recording teams that use them consistently? I wish all recordings would list major equipment used in recording, mixing and mastering. As it is, only a few do. I am of the opinion, from those who do list equipment, that B&W remains a favorite. And, from what I know, professional B&W monitors do not differ, except cosmetically, from their audiophile consumer bretheren.
Hi -
I agree with your general points on what's quickly becoming possible with the new technology - this is probably all true. (I just lack personal experience in this regard.)
As for who's using what, BIS has relied on Genelecs, and Extron/Triton/Cryston on ME Geithains. Bauer Studios in Germany (where ECM records) likewise use Genelecs, and ME Geithain is a big favorite among German radio stations (I recall something like 70 % of them use MEGs). I'm not sure of the others, because the equipment is listed in CD booklets (the most readily accessible source for this information) only if there is a sponsorship agreement between the label and the manufacturer/distributor, I guess. But I'm sure you can find out more about this if you do a bit of Net search (search for the studio name in quotation marks and "equipment").
B&W at least in the past was used by DG/Emil Berliner Studios and at EMI's Abbey Road studios, but that was precisely because of such sponsorship agreements (or "friendly" deals against acknowledgement - that's how B&W and Classe ended up on Abbey Road as a package deal). But B&W to all I know terminated such sponsorship agreements (those budget cuts...) and so they are no longer noted in the CD booklets, either. Not sure if this also means that the recording companies/studios have switched monitors - it probably depends on whether, as I suspect was the case with at least some notable ones among of them, the B&W speakers were more or less basically loaned to the studio/record label against the acknowledgment. I know that some studios subsequently switched their over to other brands, but don't remember the facts clearly enough to want to speculate which ones.
The reason why B&W gets noted so frequently is that they are perhaps the biggest and the most powerful actor on the scene right now, so they have been able to afford subsidizing studios through sponsorship deals. Also, that was a main strategy of theirs when they made the decision to grow up from the niche-market "audio secret" that they were during their Matrix period (remember that?) to their current position as a market leader with investments in multiple branches of the industry (like Classe and Rotel and global distribution networks).
A lot of the pro gear makers, too, have a separate "home hi-end" line (ME Geithain and PMC come to mind), which, as you note about B&W, basically differs from the pro line only in cosmetic aspects (and in price tag, to make the home units look more desirable to the audiences that bring in the biggest profit margin).
I'm not a pro actor in this field at all but have simply spent a lot of time researching the area when gradually building up my system since early youth. It becomes very addictive, as I'm sure everyone here knows; a fascinating subject and a nice hobby, although one that can become very expensive and not so fully rewarding in the end without proper preparation.
Cheers,
PT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
We have few writings or reviews of such setups, and direct listening auditions, even in stereo, are much harder to come by.
Just one more quick point: there *are* numerous reviews of pro gear; they just don't appear in places like Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, and the rest, which to the pro crowd must seem more like fiction magazines. They can be found in pro journals and trade publications, but you can also find many posted on the net as well (and some on manufacturer websites, too).
In the past, there were some notable efforts in giving pro quality reviews of consumer gear, but that didn't fly in the increasingly esoteric atmosphere of the audiophile world following the 1980s (The Audio Critic was one such project). On the other hand, the pro audio crowds couldn't really care less about the consumer type hobbyists building systems for home enjoyment, whom they view as totally susceptible to nonsense and disinformation. It's a big problem trying to communicate between the two worlds these days.
But this is becoming a very much OT discussion; apologies to the original poster.
|
|
|
Post by Nagraboy January 14, 2011 (33 of 265)
|
|
No need to apologise, carry on! I'm enjoying hearing about (active) pro speakers...
What do you think of Harbeth loudspeakers? They are from the BBC school of thought and are very popular in the Far East and are used in some big TV show productions in the UK.
They don't go out to make a big impression in the home hi-fi world and often seem to appear slightly bemused at how much home hi-fi users love them. The owner/designer of Harbeth speakers Alan Shaw, says they are making tools for listening and are not artists in the sense that some hi-fi designers are considered eg. Japanese valve-amplifier designers Shindo, Kondo etc.
Any thoughts people?
|
|
|
Post by Nagraboy January 14, 2011 (34 of 265)
|
|
Polarius T said:
Hi -
As for who's using what, BIS has relied on Genelecs
Out of curiosity I just checked some BIS discs I own. None of them mention Genelecs in the equipment used notes. In fact, they all said B&W 802 Nautilus!
Maybe that's not generally the case...I checked:
JS Bach - Oboe Concertos (Alexei Ogrintchouk)
JS Bach - Brandenburg Concertos/Orchestral Suites (Masaaki Suzuki)
JS Bach - Das Wohltemperierte Klavier II (Masaaki Suzuki)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nagraboy said:
Out of curiosity I just checked some BIS discs I own. None of them mention Genelecs in the equipment used notes. In fact, they all said B&W 802 Nautilus!
Maybe I'm misremembering, then; although it may also depend on the producer and the recording/mixing location they used for the sessions. I'm not sure what sort of a deal they might currently have and with whom.
I checked mine and only one, which is a recent BIS release, disclosed this same information (B&W). The other BIS discs I have give a pretty exhaustive-looking equipment list on the last page of the booklet without, however, disclosing the monitors used. Maybe there's then a new sponsorship deal in place where there never existed one before; not sure.
(Robert, are you lurking?)
But at least at home Bissie seems to be relaxing (if he's ever capable of doing that, judging from what he gets done) to the sound of Genelecs... bissie.
Cheers,
PT
|
|
|
Post by tektaff January 15, 2011 (36 of 265)
|
|
This has been quite an interesting thread to follow. My background was in studios for 25 years, and here's my abridged view on pro/vs hifi speakers.
For me what defines a studio speaker from a hifi speaker is it's ability to solo an instument and not self destruct. Many a time a speaker manufacturer had sent me their latest greatest speaker for evaluation. Whilst they sounded perfectly acceprtable with full bandwidth music playing it was different when you listened to a bass guitar, snare drum or other difficuly instrument in isolation.
One of the last projects i did before retiring was a very large project in a remote location. Due to the fact that there were no local hire companies available we stocked the studio with pretty much every nearfield/midfield monitor available. Probably 20 pairs in all. KRK, JBL, ATC, Dynaudio, Quested, Genelec, Tannoy....
In isolation, some may have been acceptable but when A/B'd next to the reference, they were some shockingly bad examples, which left us wondering whether we were out of touch with contemporary speakers or they were really that bad.
Overall three speakers stood out B&W, Genelec, and ATC. Genelecs sounded better for composing music, ATC's for mixing, and B&W for impressing the clients.
In any project where the owner did not specify main monitoring, i always defaulted to ATC. The nice thing about them is that their studio monitors are their hifi speakers, and whilst they offer a number of cabinet finishes they sound identical.
ATC's were used by Telarc from the mid 80's onwards, and a lot of mastering rooms use them as their final reference, the recent, albeit controversial DSOTM floyd remix was done on them too.
In the mid 80's a number of manufacturers started using the ATC mid range unit to create their own monitors, Genelec, included but the ATC mid was so expensive that it was dropped in exchange for something simpler.Dynaudio even made a cheap clone. PMC's are similar to ATC except they use transmission line loading.
Genelec have since grown to become quite a force to be reckoned with because their range is so extensive, and the tonal balance of all their speakers is similar. This made it very easy to specify them for a broacast facility where there may be 50 or more different sized rooms with monitoring, and they all needed to sound reasonably consistent.
Getting back to the original point for which was MCH for small rooms, even though the rear or side speakers make up for a lot of the ambience of the listening experience, the acoustics of the back part of the room need to be more carefully considered than in a system where sound only comes from the front. There is only so much clever DSP can do to overcome bad acoustics, so it does warrant studying what the rear speakers are pointing at.
Most of the friends MCH audio systems i've listened to are primarily set up for video, and suffer considerably from it, centre speakers are inevitably lying on their sides with a completely different dispersion pattern to L&R, with the surrounds being mere afterthoughts.
Probably as an after effect of dealing with QUAD in the 70's i've never been that convinced of the need of a centre speaker in a small MCH system. A good set of stereo speakers can easily resolve a holographic centre image, but it's the rears that make all the difference. MCH music would have completely superceded stereo by now had it not been the justifiably bad press that Quad got from it's incompatible standards, and flawed vinyl reproduction systems.
Finally, the only realistic "in the room" MCH I have ever heard has to be ambisonics. oddball in that there was really only one mic that could record it but brilliant.
Great to see that there is still an interest in MCH audio, but a real shame that so many of the original quad masters were lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never heard them, but these Genelec monitors seem to be devised for small spaces. Since these are active speakers, all you need is the player and a preamp. The combination of Integra with Oppo that Fitzcaraldo has been touting would seem absolutely ideal
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/8030LSE/
|
|
|
|
|
|
tektaff said:
Finally, the only realistic "in the room" MCH I have ever heard has to be ambisonics. oddball in that there was really only one mic that could record it but brilliant.
Well, ambisonics can be excellent but I don't buy it as 'the only realistic "in the room" MCH.' Besides, it doesn't use only one mic but an array of microphone elements.
Kal
|
|
|
Post by rammiepie January 17, 2011 (39 of 265)
|
|
Kal Rubinson said:
Well, ambisonics can be excellent but I don't buy it as 'the only realistic "in the room" MCH.' Besides, it doesn't use only one mic but an array of microphone elements.
Kal
I have about 40 UHJ encoded RBCD Ambisonic discs released by Nimbus which my Meridian will decode but still prefer Nimbus' discrete DVD~As (of which they only released a handful). But I never invested in height channels, etc., which I would imagine would render a much different soundfield.
I'm surprised that Meridian bought into Ambisonics but still stubbornly refuses to go the SACD or BD route!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nagraboy said:
No need to apologise, carry on! I'm enjoying hearing about (active) pro speakers...
What do you think of Harbeth loudspeakers? They are from the BBC school of thought and are very popular in the Far East and are used in some big TV show productions in the UK.
They don't go out to make a big impression in the home hi-fi world and often seem to appear slightly bemused at how much home hi-fi users love them. The owner/designer of Harbeth speakers Alan Shaw, says they are making tools for listening and are not artists in the sense that some hi-fi designers are considered eg. Japanese valve-amplifier designers Shindo, Kondo etc.
Any thoughts people?
The founder and designer of Harbeth speakers was ex BBC engineer Dudley Harwood who I knew (together with fellow BBC engineer Spencer Hughes founder of Spendor). designed & patented polyprolene cones. Harbeth was aquired later by Shaw but I do not know the circumstances of the takeover but probably due to retirement.. I used to own the first Harbeth speakers which were very good for their time however better speaker cone material arrived as does the continual advance of technology. I have not heard the latest Harbeth speakers.
|
|
