flattest studio monitors?

[Last Alternative]

My first rhetorical question is why tf aren't all "studio monitors" and "studio headphones" flat to begin with?!?

I've had a few different speakers, including Rokits and rn Yamaha Hs5. I guess I didn't research enough on the frequency response and believed the Yamaha hype. Yeah they sound good but they aren't flat whatsoever. In fact they have a steep bass roll-off and high peak in the mids. Therefore, I do not trust my speakers. My room is fairly treated. Not perfect but also no echoes going on either. I use reference tracks to mix but still my mixes are never clean like pro stuff which I know can be done in a home studio with the right gear. So now I'm looking to sell my HS5's and upgrade but what do you guys use/recommend. I'll spend $1000 for a good set.

For headphones, I have Sennheiser HD280 pro and the HD650. I love them for the sound but they aren't flat either. I want FLAT frequency response to get a true representation/production.

This inquiry is for the audio purists who actually know what they're talking about. Please advise. Thanks in advance!
-Jace

[jam-s]

.... I use reference tracks to mix but still my mixes are never clean like pro stuff which I know can be done in a home studio with the right gear. ...

It's not the gear alone which makes somebody a pro. Actually the gear is the least part in this.

[Last Alternative]

OK correction: pro comes from good sound source and mixing skills but also gear obviously has a lot to do with it. My basic question is regarding the flattest speakers. In order to provide the right listening to work with.

[visheshl]

I used to use a pair of good studio monitors in my studio.
But then i had to move, and now i have a small space so i had to use regular speakers because they're small in size.
But surprisingly the mixes I made on these regular speakers turned out way better than those which i did on the studio monitors.
I'm just telling you a personal experience.
Get any decent monitor set. But i think what's important is to test the mixes on different speakers, headphones etc. And knowing that if the mix sounds a certain way on your monitors how it sounds on regular speakers...

[crimsonwarlock]

Instead of selling your current monitors and buying new ones, use that money to get Sonarworks (be sure to get the boxed version with the reference mic). It made a world of difference for my setup, and my mixes translate much better to other systems. This will do much, MUCH more for your monitoring than getting other speakers. Also, get a pair of cheap HIFI speakers into your studio to reference on. I used to have two additional sets of speakers with hugely different character in my studio. They are currently in storage until my new desk is built, and I can place them again.

Sonarworks (boxed version) is around 250 bucks, but you can get it much cheaper during a sale. I got it for around 150 euros myself.

[raymondh]

Instead of selling your current monitors and buying new ones, use that money to get Sonarworks (be sure to get the boxed version with the reference mic). It made a world of difference for my setup, and my mixes translate much better to other systems. This will do much, MUCH more for your monitoring than getting other speakers. Also, get a pair of cheap HIFI speakers into your studio to reference on. I used to have two additional sets of speakers with hugely different character in my studio. They are currently in storage until my new desk is built, and I can place them again.

Sonarworks (boxed version) is around 250 bucks, but you can get it much cheaper during a sale. I got it for around 150 euros myself.

+1 on Sonarworks. Not only for compensating for speaker EQ, but also variations in distance to sweet spot, and some room acoustics (to an extent).

Another wild-card is to try Sonible EQ. Not because you want to be dumbed down to using AI for mixing, but because it's a great learning tool and it does make excellent choices from your source material, so you can then see what a pro engineer might do (and then decide whether you agree or not). I found the Sonible EQ to pick up frequencies to tame that I couldn't hear, either due to my monitoring or my ears.

[miyaru]

Another one on Sonarworks....... I use for two years now, and I am very happy with it. My monitors (Presonus Eris E8) and headphones (Beyer Dynamic DT 770 Pro - 250 Ohms) aren't flat. Also the room is importend, and Sonarworks can help a bit with that too.

I have smallish room to work in, but get the best out of it with Sonarworks!

Cheers....

[bxbrkrz]

https://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/iloudmtm/

ARC self-calibration adjusts to any room

&

LyxPro Desktop Microphone Stand, 9”- 14” Adjustable Height Desk Mic Holder, Weighted Cast Iron Base, 3/8" - 5/8" adapter screw, Table Top Non slip Rubber Feet x 2

[crimsonwarlock]

https://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/iloudmtm/

ARC self-calibration adjusts to any room

Knowing (from using SonarWorks) how much mic measurement positions are involved in finding all the irregularities of your studio environment, I question the approach with putting a measurement mic only in the sweet spot. Furthermore, their claim about low-end seems a bit of BS to me, as you simply cannot get (low) frequencies from a speaker that can't emit them in the first place. They call it 'physics defying'.....

[Fotu]

+1 for SonarWorks. Even though it doesn't improve your mix or your ears, there's peace of mind knowing none of your listening devices and positions are deceiving you. (Using Adam A7X monitors and HD650s, but I've also used SonarWorks to adjust a rehearsal room to review 'live' mixes.)

[Hoboys]

Pains me to say this (because I'm ukrainian), but the only flat response mixing monitors for that kind of money are made by the russians. The dmx "mix cubes" (not to be confused with shitcubes/avantones) have a very narrow sweet spot, so you'll have to sit perfectly in the middle, but they will give you the clarity and response of high-end studio gear. http://dmaxaudio.com/ru/sc5

Their 261's are an even better value, but they cost $1400/pair http://dmaxaudio.com/ru/261

Nothing else comes even REMOTELY close for the money. Your other options that would rival this are way past $2k, I'm afraid

[bxbrkrz]

https://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/iloudmtm/

ARC self-calibration adjusts to any room

Knowing (from using SonarWorks) how much mic measurement positions are involved in finding all the irregularities of your studio environment, I question the approach with putting a measurement mic only in the sweet spot. Furthermore, their claim about low-end seems a bit of BS to me, as you simply cannot get (low) frequencies from a speaker that can't emit them in the first place. They call it 'physics defying'.....

Yes, they defied the logic of my eyes. I could not believe it.
But not physics, if you understand why they are called "Medium Tweeter Medium". Locked in phase. Moving air together.
They are compact, and very light to move around. The ARC lets you plug anything in your mixer, while your computer is off. No need for correcting software via your pc.
The OP asked for feedback on a system within his budget. I provided one based on personal experience.
Free market. Easy to understand.

[selig]

+1 for SonarWorks. Even though it doesn't improve your mix or your ears, there's peace of mind knowing none of your listening devices and positions are deceiving you. (Using Adam A7X monitors and HD650s, but I've also used SonarWorks to adjust a rehearsal room to review 'live' mixes.)

BUT - a room that measure flat on a frequency response curve (which is not actually possible, but let's put that aside for now) may STILL be deceiving you. This is because it is ignoring the time axis, which can be much more difficult to address and work around. This mainly affects the lowest frequencies, and is the difference between tight and loose bass in an otherwise 'flat' room. If certain frequencies 'sustain' longer than others (based on room modes etc), we will hear them as louder because human hearing is based on an average over a short time rather than the level on one instant. This is why VU meters use a 300 ms integration time, to better approximate how we perceive 'loudness'.

So getting your monitors flat is no big deal, in fact most that are available these days are remarkably flat for the range they cover. Built in amps, onboard DSP, and built in EQ have allowed designers to work around the typical issues of the past. This means it's more the room at play causing your monitors to not sound flat caused by reflections causing comb filtering and modes/dips in the acoustic space causing some frequencies to disappear and others to sound twice as loud!
Bottom line, these issues are all things EQ cannot address, because you can't EQ out a null or a comb filter effect in the room.

Beyond ALL of that, monitors are a personal choice and there just isn't ever going to be "one" best monitor out there, even at any price. What I look for is a monitor that does NOT sound 'great' on its own, but rather one that makes me work harder to get a great mix. What it takes to do that is going to be different for everyone since we all hear differently to some degree. So you're basically on a quest for the monitor that works in your space and allows you to make mixes that translate well to other systems, and sadly you won't know that until you've mixed on them for a while or after many years of finally figuring out what it takes from a monitor for YOU to get great mixes.

[visheshl]

+1 for SonarWorks. Even though it doesn't improve your mix or your ears, there's peace of mind knowing none of your listening devices and positions are deceiving you. (Using Adam A7X monitors and HD650s, but I've also used SonarWorks to adjust a rehearsal room to review 'live' mixes.)

BUT - a room that measure flat on a frequency response curve (which is not actually possible, but let's put that aside for now) may STILL be deceiving you. This is because it is ignoring the time axis, which can be much more difficult to address and work around. This mainly affects the lowest frequencies, and is the difference between tight and loose bass in an otherwise 'flat' room. If certain frequencies 'sustain' longer than others (based on room modes etc), we will hear them as louder because human hearing is based on an average over a short time rather than the level on one instant. This is why VU meters use a 300 ms integration time, to better approximate how we perceive 'loudness'.

So getting your monitors flat is no big deal, in fact most that are available these days are remarkably flat for the range they cover. Built in amps, onboard DSP, and built in EQ have allowed designers to work around the typical issues of the past. This means it's more the room at play causing your monitors to not sound flat caused by reflections causing comb filtering and modes/dips in the acoustic space causing some frequencies to disappear and others to sound twice as loud!
Bottom line, these issues are all things EQ cannot address, because you can't EQ out a null or a comb filter effect in the room.

Beyond ALL of that, monitors are a personal choice and there just isn't ever going to be "one" best monitor out there, even at any price. What I look for is a monitor that does NOT sound 'great' on its own, but rather one that makes me work harder to get a great mix. What it takes to do that is going to be different for everyone since we all hear differently to some degree. So you're basically on a quest for the monitor that works in your space and allows you to make mixes that translate well to other systems, and sadly you won't know that until you've mixed on them for a while or after many years of finally figuring out what it takes from a monitor for YOU to get great mixes.

When i was younger, i didn't realise that these were just buzzwords to sell more equipment.
They would publish articles in music magazines about how important flat frequency response is.
I read in a magazine and i wanted the flattest monitor...as if getting those monitors is somehow going to make my music instantly sound better

[boomer]

And after you get your monitors perfectly flat, the only time anyone else listening to your mix will hear what you heard is when they sit in your room in your mixing position.

[thedude]

but that's not the point. The point of treating your room and using something like sonarworks is to remove the wild inconsistencies and take guesswork out of mixes. if your room is neutral and you publish your music to wherever and a listener chooses to use bass accentuated beats headphones, then that's on them, and it will just be a slightly bass accentuated version of what you made. In contrast, if you're sitting in a room with an untreated null which you then compensate with a huge spike in bass, the listener will get muddy, horrible garbage because something like bass is double accentuated.

the idea is that I don't want to waste my time remembering where my room deficiencies are and at what quantity.

[crimsonwarlock]

BUT - a room that measure flat on a frequency response curve (which is not actually possible, but let's put that aside for now) may STILL be deceiving you.

Nobody claims that calibrating your monitors is a silver-bullet solution. But it IS a means to get a better response of your monitors in your particular room. Using EQ on monitors is a decades old trick, something like SonarWorks just takes a lot of guesswork out of that trick. It won't solve ALL problems in your room, but it sure will solve at least a few. Let it be clear that using something like SonarWorks in an untreated room is nonsense to begin with.

And after you get your monitors perfectly flat, the only time anyone else listening to your mix will hear what you heard is when they sit in your room in your mixing position.

And that is exactly NOT why you want a flat (as possible) response. If you have strange irregularities in your monitoring response, your mix will translate badly to other listening systems. Using something like SonarWorks will make your mixes translate better to other systems.

but that's not the point. The point of treating your room and using something like sonarworks is to remove the wild inconsistencies and take guesswork out of mixes.

Exactly this.

[Aosta]

Another for Sonarworks

[selig]

When i was younger, i didn't realise that these were just buzzwords to sell more equipment.
They would publish articles in music magazines about how important flat frequency response is.
I read in a magazine and i wanted the flattest monitor...as if getting those monitors is somehow going to make my music instantly sound better

I will say this: NOT having flat monitors CAN make mixing far more difficult and time consuming. When I first got a chance to mix in a great sounding room I was floored. You just mix until it sounds good, done. You don't second guess what the low end is actually doing, or stress out after hearing it on different systems and realizing how far off you were. You just mix - and mixing is hard enough without adding additional hurdles and hoops to jump through in order to know what you're actually getting IMO. Having all available energy to spend on making something sound good gives me better results than having to spend some of that energy on 'un-fun' things that add time and frustration to what should be an otherwise fun process.

And after you get your monitors perfectly flat, the only time anyone else listening to your mix will hear what you heard is when they sit in your room in your mixing position.

But that's not the point at all IMO. The point is (I would think) to get mixes that translate as well as they possibly can, not necessarily to give folks the exact experience you had when mixing.
If you consider a so-called 'flat' system sits very roughly in the sonic 'center' of all monitors out there, it is therefore the best starting point when building a monitoring system (which includes the room). It's the same reason film colorists use calibrated monitors - can you imagine trying to adjust colors on a monitor that had too much red and not enough green (or similar)? You make very different choices in that case, even when knowing things are not

Even when tuning my room, while I begin the process getting my system as flat as possible, I ALSO tune it to MY needs, which allow me to mix as "I" hear it and still have it translate well to other systems. For example, I am overly sensitive to higher frequencies and have a preference for lower frequencies. I can either suck it up and tolerate things I don't like while mixing, or I can fine tune my system to give me a dB or so DOWN on the tweeter and a few dB UP on the sub woofer, after starting flat. The result is a system I can mix on making things sound right to ME, while also having confidence they mixes will translate well. Hopefully this makes sense…

[Mataya]

All this unnecessary discussions, while sonarworks is waiting for you. The point is, you "need" a flat room which is expensive to have and the cheapest way to get a flat sound in a room is with sonarworks. I highly doubt there are professionals here that can justify such an expensive room. After all so much great music is being made without those conditions that I don't see the point of discussing it, unless you're making a batman soundtrack.

M

[Kalm]

My first rhetorical question is why tf aren't all "studio monitors" and "studio headphones" flat to begin with?!?

I've had a few different speakers, including Rokits and rn Yamaha Hs5. I guess I didn't research enough on the frequency response and believed the Yamaha hype. Yeah they sound good but they aren't flat whatsoever. In fact they have a steep bass roll-off and high peak in the mids. Therefore, I do not trust my speakers. My room is fairly treated. Not perfect but also no echoes going on either. I use reference tracks to mix but still my mixes are never clean like pro stuff which I know can be done in a home studio with the right gear. So now I'm looking to sell my HS5's and upgrade but what do you guys use/recommend. I'll spend $1000 for a good set.

For headphones, I have Sennheiser HD280 pro and the HD650. I love them for the sound but they aren't flat either. I want FLAT frequency response to get a true representation/production.

This inquiry is for the audio purists who actually know what they're talking about. Please advise. Thanks in advance!
-Jace

First issue, should’ve went with the HS8s. More low end. You can’t get flat until you have an even dispersion of sound across the frequency spectrum. Even if you manage flat in the mids and highs, the lack of bass response is gonna skew your hearing in the room anyways.

Second, you don’t need flat. Flat doesn’t exist. You need flat enough or less variable. In other words, close to flat as possible. At some point, the way your ears perceived balance will even itself out.

Honestly if you want that “studio” flat sound you’re likely to spend more than $1000 because it’s not just about frequency. You have decay time, transient response, and room integration to deal with.

There’s two options you go with within a room.

Either choose speakers that you love listening to and adjust the room/treatment in accordance with your speakers (my way)

Or you balance the room out as much as possible using any pair of full range monitors, and then go speaker shopping for the speaker that bests suits your setup

[Kalm]

Pains me to say this (because I'm ukrainian), but the only flat response mixing monitors for that kind of money are made by the russians. The dmx "mix cubes" (not to be confused with shitcubes/avantones) have a very narrow sweet spot, so you'll have to sit perfectly in the middle, but they will give you the clarity and response of high-end studio gear. http://dmaxaudio.com/ru/sc5

Their 261's are an even better value, but they cost $1400/pair http://dmaxaudio.com/ru/261

Nothing else comes even REMOTELY close for the money. Your other options that would rival this are way past $2k, I'm afraid

I have the super cubes

[Fotu]

+1 for SonarWorks. Even though it doesn't improve your mix or your ears, there's peace of mind knowing none of your listening devices and positions are deceiving you. (Using Adam A7X monitors and HD650s, but I've also used SonarWorks to adjust a rehearsal room to review 'live' mixes.)

BUT - a room that measure flat on a frequency response curve (which is not actually possible, but let's put that aside for now) may STILL be deceiving you. This is because it is ignoring the time axis, which can be much more difficult to address and work around. This mainly affects the lowest frequencies, and is the difference between tight and loose bass in an otherwise 'flat' room. If certain frequencies 'sustain' longer than others (based on room modes etc), we will hear them as louder because human hearing is based on an average over a short time rather than the level on one instant.

Great point. (Both of my rooms are treated with GIK panels and traps, so that's as good as I'll likely ever get with these rooms that were never dimensionally 'designed' for sound.) But I still find it invaluable to know I'm not hearing something significantly altered, and using both calibrated headphones (which eliminate the room issues) and monitors for mixing bolsters my confidence.

[bxbrkrz]

[Hoboys]

I have the super cubes

Nice. How's your experience with them?