Mixing with monitors or headphones?

[CYSYS8993]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

[mcatalao]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

I prefer using monitors, if possible, multiple monitors.

That being said, headphones are great for checking details and issues with recordings, and getting an overall feel and relation between bass and treble.

What i usually do is mix with a main pair, that at this time, is a pair of Focals Alpha 80, then i reference listen in a pair of Adam A7 (they are great but the bass is way more colapsed than in the focals), and i also have the headphones.

[aeox]

I mix 100% with HD600s at pretty low volume. This is just a personal preference and would probably be frowned upon.

[amcjen]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

I prefer using monitors, if possible, multiple monitors.

That being said, headphones are great for checking details and issues with recordings, and getting an overall feel and relation between bass and treble.

What i usually do is mix with a main pair, that at this time, is a pair of Focals Alpha 80, then i reference listen in a pair of Adam A7 (they are great but the bass is way more colapsed than in the focals), and i also have the headphones.

Side question--how do you like the Focals? I've been hearing (ha!) a lot about them lately.

[mcatalao]

Side question--how do you like the Focals? I've been hearing (ha!) a lot about them lately.

I like them a lot. I keep hearing people saying studio monitors should be revealing and sound bad, but imho that's a freaking ugly way to tell the whole story. While the Alphas are enough revealing they are also great to hear music, and you will really like the experience of making and producing music with them. When i bought them i compared them to Yamaha's, Rokits, and of course my Adam's. The rokits where to heavy on the bass, and the yamaha's had higs more similar to my A7's a bit strident. I needed a more "Hi-Fi" feel, thouhg still very revealing and the alphas seem to do the trick. We measured the monitors at my studio, and apart from a valley at 50 Hz, and a peak at 125 Hz (that is related to the room and we noticed it also with the A7's), the frequency response is very very linear in the whole spectrum specially if you consider a 600 eur or less Pair!

The focals alpha 8 are great if you want a nearfield that almost works as a mid field. They are really big, and the bass is really strong, and imho are a better option than buying 6" or smaller cones, that you have to add a sub.
Most of these hybrid systems are really unbalanced and prone to phasing issues, and the focals can come down to 35 Hz, wich is very near if at par to most subs on the market, so you don't need to add a sub. IMHO they are one of the best bang for buck in the market. They are also quite revealing, and are not as prominent in the mid/highs as my A7's (maybe a characteristic of the ribbon tweeter).

[etyrnal]

"I keep hearing people saying studio monitors should be revealing and sound bad"

I've literally never heard anyone say that.


It doesn't make any sense that monitors should sound bad. Monitors should be transparent. Completely. Theoretically, transparent monitors should reveal what sounds bad in the music, but it should have nothing to do with the monitors themselves. The monitors should just be replaying what's the FED to them exactly. Monitors should not be making your mix sound worse or better.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[amcjen]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

Though I really like the idea of mixing with headphones because of convenience and not disturbing others, you just can't get an accurate stereo experience out of them, since they're so isolated.

In a room with monitors, both ears will hear both speakers, (at different volumes depending on pan/balance), but with headphones you won't, so what you think sounds good in the stereo field on headphones will sound different (not necessarily bad, but not the same) as mixing on monitors.

Though I suppose that if the *only* method people would listen to your final mix was using headphones, then it might not matter.

Another (and probably bigger) issue is that it's hard to hear phase issues with headphones because each channel of the stereo mix can't cancel each other out via mono. I just had this issue show up on a mix of mine and its remarkable how thin it makes my mix when switching to mono.

[amcjen]

Side question--how do you like the Focals? I've been hearing (ha!) a lot about them lately.

I like them a lot. I keep hearing people saying studio monitors should be revealing and sound bad, but imho that's a freaking ugly way to tell the whole story. While the Alphas are enough revealing they are also great to hear music, and you will really like the experience of making and producing music with them. When i bought them i compared them to Yamaha's, Rokits, and of course my Adam's. The rokits where to heavy on the bass, and the yamaha's had higs more similar to my A7's a bit strident. I needed a more "Hi-Fi" feel, thouhg still very revealing and the alphas seem to do the trick. We measured the monitors at my studio, and apart from a valley at 50 Hz, and a peak at 125 Hz (that is related to the room and we noticed it also with the A7's), the frequency response is very very linear in the whole spectrum specially if you consider a 600 eur or less Pair!

The focals alpha 8 are great if you want a nearfield that almost works as a mid field. They are really big, and the bass is really strong, and imho are a better option than buying 6" or smaller cones, that you have to add a sub.
Most of these hybrid systems are really unbalanced and prone to phasing issues, and the focals can come down to 35 Hz, wich is very near if at par to most subs on the market, so you don't need to add a sub. IMHO they are one of the best bang for buck in the market. They are also quite revealing, and are not as prominent in the mid/highs as my A7's (maybe a characteristic of the ribbon tweeter).

Wonderful! Exactly the sort of feedback I was hoping to glean. Thank you! [emoji4]

[etyrnal]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

Though I really like the idea of mixing with headphones because of convenience and not disturbing others, you just can't get an accurate stereo experience out of them, since they're so isolated.

In a room with monitors, both ears will hear both speakers, (at different volumes depending on pan/balance), but with headphones you won't, so what you think sounds good in the stereo field on headphones will sound different (not necessarily bad, but not the same) as mixing on monitors.

Though I suppose that if the *only* method people would listen to your final mix was using headphones, then it might not matter.

Another (and probably bigger) issue is that it's hard to hear phase issues with headphones because each channel of the stereo mix can't cancel each other out via mono. I just had this issue show up on a mix of mine and its remarkable how thin it makes my mix when switching to mono.

So, it would be interesting, when using headphones, to temporarily pass the mix through a convolution reverb with a map of the room loaded into it.

So get a great stereo probe of the room from the mix desk chair, at the ear positions...

Then when mixing, run whole mix through it, but when rendering out, bypass it... Lol

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[mcatalao]

"I keep hearing people saying studio monitors should be revealing and sound bad"

I've literally never heard anyone say that.


It doesn't make any sense that monitors should sound bad. Monitors should be transparent. Completely. Theoretically, transparent monitors should reveal what sounds bad in the music, but it should have nothing to do with the monitors themselves. The monitors should just be replaying what's the FED to them exactly. Monitors should not be making your mix sound worse or better.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Well, it's not me really...
http://www.recordproducer.com/why-your- ... -sound-bad

"make your mix sound bad"

http://www.nethervoice.com/2013/12/04/t ... -monitors/

"It is not suposed to sound good"
"They’re not designed to please the discerning audiophile."

Sound on sound on yamaha NS-10
" and investigate why a monitor whose sound has been described as "horrible" became an industry standard."
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/yamaha-ns10-story

I can get more if wish...

[mcatalao]

So, it would be interesting, when using headphones, to temporarily pass the mix through a convolution reverb with a map of the room loaded into it.

So get a great stereo probe of the room from the mix desk chair, at the ear positions...

Then when mixing, run whole mix through it, but when rendering out, bypass it... Lol

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

I don't think this is enough, as the room acoustic is not the only variable at stake when you mix with headphones.

As there is no CrossTalk region, a mix in the headphones sounds way wider than a mix with monitors, because the mid section is completely colapsed. This often results in a stereo range thinner mix.

Also, the mid region sounds don't have phasing and as you already said you won''t notice phasing issues not only for the worse, as also for the better (mid region sounds get thicker with phasing, while sides get thinner). Our perception of depth is also a lot different with rooms and monitors, than with headphones.

Sometimes vocals end up sounding on the top of our head instead in our front because of the lack of phasing.

I think there is an Re that does what you're saying but i don't know if it takes care of the crosstalk but if it does, i don't know if it is natural enough to rely on it for mixing.

Anyway, i prefer to do it the way around. Mix it first with monitors and check with headphones. Even if the mid is a bit more colapsed in the headphones at most it will be a pleasing experience for the audience on both situations.

[RandyEspoda]

I've always mixed with headphones, not because of preference, but because I have to. I have no monitors

Had a LOT of issues with it, lots of flawed mixes, but by now I can say I've learned to somewhat guestimate things like reverbs, delays, but also EQ'ing which is surprisingly difficult to get just right using only headphones.

It has its flaws and difficulties, but it isn't impossible.

Mixing with headphones also can have advantages, which are most beneficial when ALSO using monitors to check back and forth,
like for instance only by using headphones can you emulate a 100% neutral environment. Some times that can be very helpful, but only if you can reference that 'clean' environment with a monitor setup to find the golden line in between...

Disadvantages are the stereo-field (which completely lacks), affecting the way you interpret the amounts of reverb, delays,... and also the issues with EQ'ing f.e., which always seems to be too much or too little, but mostly the way that every headphone is everything BUT neutral in its frequency curve makes mixing with heaphones difficult.

Actually, it was not until I bought some Beyerdynamics, and then counter-EQ'd its own frequency curve, making it truly 'flat', that I could start to notice the way I had been interpreting reverbs and stuff, and start to learn how to guestimate them properly.

Sonarworks does something similar, they call it 'headphone calibrating'. What they actually do is counter-eq all spikes and cuts to make the curve truly flat. Off course their 'custom' calibration is as precise as it can get,
though it IS something you can do yourself to some degree (and also fairly precise!). The curves available on the goldenears website help a lot on that account, since with the visual graph you can calculate (somewhat precise) the Q of each spike/cut to make sure the counter-boosts or spikes are wide or narrow enough to cover the range that needs 'flattening'...a bit of trial and error here and there, though if you have calculated the Q's correctly, the results are more precise than one would think.

So I used the goldenears.net frequency curve for my headphone brand and type to 'meticulously' counter-eq all the spikes and cuts...
I then went to the sonarworks website where you can find a demo of a 'calibrated' headphone for my brand/type to see if the 'flat' sound coming from my cans resembles somewhat the demo'd sound on sonarworks (just to be sure I was in the same ballpark).

To my surprise it was almost identical, so I'm now confident they are in fact reasonably flat.

Since I done that my mixes have in fact improved drastically.
Before my mixes were simply horrid. Aweful. I could never get things sounding 'right'.
Now they still aren't perfect but do sound reasonably well done, especially knowing they're still done exclusively on cans.

It has been almost a year since I've done that calibration, and my mixes have improved more in these 10 months than they had over the course of 4 years since I had started. I always 'only' used headphones, except a few final checks back and forth on my crappy car speakers.

My advice would be: calibrate your headphones to have a truly flat freq. response.
It is those spikes and boosts along their freq. range that messes up the way you hear sounds and try to manipulate them.
They cause you to make wrong conclusions about what you hear...

I've tried a few headphone speaker 'emulations' but none of them worked as well as having my cans 'calibrated' now.
They all warp the sound very unpleasantly, somewhat like a comb filter imo, and it's just not pleasant to use.

And 'calibrating' is fairly simple to do yourself too: say your cans have a spike of 7db, centered at 8khz, with a Q of about 2.5 - 3.0.
You then simply apply a cut centered at 8khz with a Q between 2.5 and 3.0 to nullify that spike. Rince and repeat for all of them.
You just have to figure out the correct Q for each spike/boost.
Using the curves at goldenears also ensures you are following the preferred curve for headphone use (the green line in every curve on the website), because having speakers right against your ears implies a curve that differs 'slightly' from the normal 'flat' curve, mostly in the low end range, because our ears react differently to low freq.'s in headphones than with normal speakers.

I wanted to pay for the custom calibration from sonarworks, but since I got about the same result and it works so well, I concluded I no longer need to. I also no longer needs those headphone speaker emulators which sound like crap.

I wish I had a monitor setup, would be so much easier to mix, though I'm fairly happy with the alternative, now that things sound 'transparent' enough for me to make fairly good guestimates, and have my mixes at least 'bareable' to listen to

[geremix]

Would you rather mix using monitors (with acoustic treatment for your home studio of course), or headphones?

I do both. In both cases I stay in MONO as much time as possible but when I mix on headphones, that time it's longer.

The problem with headphones is that you hear everything in more detail. I use to add less reverb to the tracks when mixing on headphones, and in many times I need to correct that adding more.

But lately I've been using references from start and all the time when mixing and that gave me a better idea of the amount of reverb.

I have the ULTRASONE PRO 750 http://www.ultrasone.audio/en/products/pro/pro-750 and I use them since 2009 with great results. They have a design technology that use a decentralized driver positioning, using your outer ear to make the sound go to your ear in a more natural way, sounding much better, more natural and more 3D.



--
G E R E M I X
@bygeremix

[Djstarski]

i`ve mixed in headphones once or twice for clients and they have been happy . If you know how your headphones handle the sounds going through it , yes you can mix in headphones . BUT !! monitors would be a better bet , only using headphones to check your mix . Dont forget to check your mix in earbuds because someone , somewhere will be listening to the track through those .

[QVprod]

It doesn't matter so much as knowing your monitors or headphones and using references. Chris Lord-Alge’s says it here https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/chris ... 1-mix-tip/

[syncanonymous]

Both; the less time in headphones, the better

2 sets of near fields are better than one; calibrate!

No two humans hear exactly the same thing

understand your delivery format

Personally, with the work (& play) I do, the target playback systems we deliver to are modern, tiny speakers. I prefer listener's speakers to not be blown when they playback my mixes. I do not appreciate mixes that rattle the ipad, smartphone or laptop chassis ; nor do I appreciate 2k icepicks (especially in spoken word). The world of sub 70hz is a nice place to live if you can afford it; my clients seldom if ever use audio monitoring for low end. I would prefer to retain as much low end as possible, yet I have to mix for the worst case scenario :-/

At the moment I use Avantone MixCubes (active); Adam A7x and Beyer DT770. Making sure EQ sounds good on both the Mix Cubes & A7 I find to be very helpful. Headphones are critical for mixing comped dialogue (I do quite a bit of dialogue/ interviews).

Last year I was working with a guy who has some Focal BE6; we set out to get the Focals to sound as close to the mix cubes as poss (I know, I know); we ended up with a +20dB boost 12dB/octave at 3.7k; the bass cut just followed the low end of the boost straight down to -24dB. I wish he woulda mixed something, I would love to hear some results. Also, of note was this same guy's headphones, when applying noise reduction to Lavalier mic recordings, my Beyer's sounded like the noise was gone...not so, his headphones had better low end and there was low end noise the Beyers didn't reach to. I do not recall the brand...starts with an F. Not all audio equipment is equal

[Oquasec]

Lmao you dont need to stick to just headphones. Good shit lasts ages an is worth the money you spend on quality. I recommend flat nearfields too.

[selig]

"I keep hearing people saying studio monitors should be revealing and sound bad"

I've literally never heard anyone say that.


It doesn't make any sense that monitors should sound bad. Monitors should be transparent. Completely. Theoretically, transparent monitors should reveal what sounds bad in the music, but it should have nothing to do with the monitors themselves. The monitors should just be replaying what's the FED to them exactly. Monitors should not be making your mix sound worse or better.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

It's a common approach to choosing monitors, which I've heard for 30 years now!

To clarify:
The monitors that are not great to mix on do not "sound bad". On the contrary, they sound GREAT. But your MIXES won't automatically sound GREAT on them as they would on some monitors.

I was taught to use monitors that force you to make your mix sound GREAT because they then translate well to all other systems. Monitors that sound great on poor mixes do not reveal the problems with your mix.

You are correct that it's the "transparent" monitors that don't sound great on raw sources (unmixed audio).

Some more colored monitors DO make your mixes sound better! Monitors sound DIFFERENT - some will make your mix sound better, some worse - no way around that!

Finally, there are no agreed upon 'good' monitors to mix with, otherwise everyone would simply use the exact same monitors and no new products would ever be introduced. For each of us, we need to choose the monitors that make us produce the best mixes - for me, that monitor will likely be different than for you.

This is such a personal issue - I really dislike Focal and Genelec monitors for example, while others love them. So you won't find agreement on which monitors to use. But among the pros I learned from you want a neutral and boring monitor to mix on, not a great/hyped sounding monitor - that's all they are saying.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Jagwah]

I mix 100% with HD600s at pretty low volume. This is just a personal preference and would probably be frowned upon.

Interesting, why is using a lower volume better for mixing in headphones? I much prefer it myself too and want to continue this way.

[CYSYS8993]

Okay another question under this topic: Which is more appropriate for what aspect of mixing? Like what benefits does the headphone provide you for your mixing judgment which the other doesn't have and vice-versa?

[aeox]

I mix 100% with HD600s at pretty low volume. This is just a personal preference and would probably be frowned upon.

Interesting, why is using a lower volume better for mixing in headphones? I much prefer it myself too and want to continue this way.

I work 12-14 hours a day with headphones, so I keep the volume low to protect my ears from fatigue and damage

[nooomy]

Okay another question under this topic: Which is more appropriate for what aspect of mixing? Like what benefits does the headphone provide you for your mixing judgment which the other doesn't have and vice-versa?

If you have good speakers and set up in a good way it is always superior to headphones in all ways.

I always strive to use my headphones as little as possible.

The only real benefit is that you won't disturb your family or neighbors.

[CaliforniaBurrito]

Headphones with VRM Box (monitor + room simulation) and the Reference 3 headphone calibration plugin.

[CaliforniaBurrito]

If you have good speakers and set up in a good way it is always superior to headphones in all ways.

I always strive to use my headphones as little as possible.

The only real benefit is that you won't disturb your family or neighbors.

I strongly disagree. It really depends on how well you know what you're using. Feel free to throw tomatoes at me but I don't care how many people rant and rave about monitors, room treatment, etc. If I listen to everything with my headphones, and I mean everything, I could easily have more experience and intimacy with what I use to produce something more preferable than a speaker fanatic with a room. I say more preferable instead of better because a mix could be subjective I guess. Anyways, that's besides the fact of having a couple software applications (mentioned above) to use with headphones.

[Jagwah]

Interesting, why is using a lower volume better for mixing in headphones? I much prefer it myself too and want to continue this way.

I work 12-14 hours a day with headphones, so I keep the volume low to protect my ears from fatigue and damage

Is that all producing / mixing time? Been reading some of your comments you seem pretty accomplished, have you got a link to some work you can share?