Are you mixing on nearfield monitors?

[Al Acuff]

Recently I discovered a bad amp in one of my nearfields. So I've been researching the topic of nearfield monitors and reading everything I can find. (A new pair of Genelec M040's are on their way.)

While researching the topic I ran across an interesting post by Bob Katz, a respected mastering engineer and author. Bob Katz makes some interesting observations here and although I'm working on nearfield monitors myself I'm inclined to agree with him. What do you folks think of this?

Nearfields were originally proposed as a way to deal with large consoles which get in the way of stand-mounted loudspeakers. But as large consoles are disappearing, this justification goes away. Project studios often put nearfields on tables, which cause serious acoustical anomalies such as resonances and comb filtering. Nearfields have often been cited as helping to reduce acoustical problems of bad rooms, but all the other problems they introduce hardly justify their use.

One problem is that nearfield monitoring is like wearing big headphones! The stereo imaging is so wide that it discourages you from making a “big” master that will translate to home systems. The second problem is that the high frequency response of speakers that are to be used as nearfields has to be tailored for such close use, so they won’t bite your ear, so not just any speaker can be used as a nearfield. The third problem is that very few of the speakers designed as nearfields have adequate dynamics and low frequency extension (with some exceptions, I’ve seen engineers use Meyer HD-1s as nearfields, but these can sound overbright when used this close). The fourth problem is that nearfield monitoring exagerrates transients and affects your perception of the relationship of lead and solo versus rhythm. The fifth problem is that nearfield position exagerrates ambience, creating a higher ratio of direct to room sound. So nearfields are not particularly good for anything, either mixing or mastering!

Mixes and masters made on nearfields will have a great deal of trouble translating to other systems. I don’t recommend nearfield monitoring for any purpose except in remote truck control rooms with extremely limited space, where they are usually not used for mixing, but to verify that the recording (tracking) is going well.

[RedJoker]

So what is the alternative? I use headphones because I won't drop the $$$ needed for real monitors.

[Brent Hahn]

I'd say if you've got a very well treated room and the space to try out a larger pair of "mid-fields" further back and on stands, go for it. See for yourself.

I've mainly been tracking and mixing both commercials and music on KRK 6000's, which were designed to be nearfields, since around 1995. Almost every day. They may be bad for everything, but it's a bad I've gotten very accustomed to.

I've only had one situation in my recording life where I had the real estate to do the mid-field thing, which I did with KRK 7000b's in some semi-treated raw office space. As a compared-to-what, I probably mixed a couple hundred radio commercials there including over a hundred "Simpsons" promos, and to me they sound the same as the ones I did when I moved into the "real" studio and mixed on nearfields.

Just curious -- when did Bob Katz write that?

If it was around the time people first started using NS10's (and before that, AR18's and Small Advents and Radio Shack Minimus 7's) then sure, I can see how his comments about the effects of the console reflections might apply. The folks who designed those speakers had consumers and bookshelves in mind -- they probably didn't even know what a meter bridge was.

As for the stereo spread thing, you can put the speakers as close together as you want.

[Bob Womack]

I agree with him. I started as an engineer before near fields became the fashion and remember the problems of recordings made in control rooms with bad monitors. Near fields first began to come into vogue in the second music business budget glut (1983) where a band and production team might record in ten to fifteen studios during the course of the creation of an album and production teams were moving back and forth extremely often. Because they came to distrust various control rooms, they needed a solution that could move with them and, as much as possible, eliminate the control room acoustics and monitors from the equation. From that point were born the MDM-4 "Davids" near field time aligned monitors. It just mushroomed from there and eventually many ended up using Yamaha NS10M systems.

When that occurred I began hearing over-compressed albums, albums with either no bass or way too much bass, etc., and it was all because the engineers and producers couldn't really hear what was going on below about 80hz, because overly transient monitors were causing them to crush the mixes, and because the darned Yamaha NS10M monitor had a high-end that would rip your head off within a very short amount of time, even with the legendary "tissue paper over the tweeters."

The big deal with monitors is that they manipulate you, and you want them to manipulate you, but you want them to manipulate you RIGHT. You can overcome monitors that steer you wrong, but will you? Unfortunately it takes time and effort to learn a system well enough to overcome it. Monitors are supposed to warn you about problems in your mix, not create them.

After a while budgets got clipped and the near field thing began to diffuse in oro circles. I began to realize that it is better to learn a pair of high-quality monitors extensively and use them as your reference and then use alternate monitors to check to see how the mix translates to other systems. I mix primarily on one system that I've used for years and have learned its vices pretty well. Now, mind you, it is a $10,000 time aligned, soffitted, and tuned monitor system in a $100,000 room. But even then I double-check on a second system from the same manufacturer, on JBL LSRs in another control room, on a Genlec 1032a system in even another room, on a set of Bag End smaller monitors, on my Harman Kardon car stereo, and on Auratones and Avantones. The Auratomes and Avantones are the only near-field systems. The LSRs and Genletcs are mid-field systems.

Mid-field monitors such as the JBL LSRs and others like them are fairly inexpensive and will give you a better reference that manipulates you to make good mixes. Not cheap, but better stuff isn't. Running monitors out of the near field helps eliminate some of the anomalies.

Bob

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

So what is the alternative? I use headphones because I won't drop the $$$ needed for real monitors.

The alternative is mid-field monitors.

Near-fields, as the name implies, are designed to be used in close proximity (1-3 feet) to the listener, in an equilateral triangular arrangement with the listener's head. The downside to that the setup really only allows one listener to hear the mix accurately.

Mid-fields are designed to be used up to about 10 feet away. One big advantage is that more people will be able to hear the mix as it's played. On the downside, you can expect to pay quite a bit more for mid-fields of the same quality as your near-fields. You also have to have a well-treated room that is big enough to use them.

[Al Acuff]

In my small home studio space is limited so I've made my nearfields sound worse by placing them a yard apart on either side of my screen on my desk. After reading Bob's post (March 30, 2017) I realize that I automatically compensate for the low mid bump, lack of low end, etc. by listening with multiple systems i.e. my hifi and car systems.

In the 70s I produced national radio spots for Budweiser and other clients using studios in NY and LA. That opened doors and gave me visiting privileges which in my case I used to make friends with engineers so I could watch, listen, and learn when I wasn't working on my own stuff. In studios such as Gold Star, MCA Whitney, National Edison, etc. I never once observed an engineer mixing on nearfield monitors. Horrortones and NS10s were used only for final checking your mix on typical mass-fi grade consumer playback.

Now the media hype represents small nearfield speakers as the first choice of celebrity engineers but I wonder how true is that?

The store is allowing 45 days to try the Genelec M040 monitors. The M040 designed for hobbyists with limited space and therefore the controls conveniently include switches to eq and to notch for desktop use. If I like them then I'll keep them, fix my broken Solo6 be and auction my Focals on eBay or keep them a spares. The Solo 6s would sound much better in a free space on stands than they do on my desktop.

Bob Katz is clearly an absolute perfectionist. Me... not quite so much. I'm not the first one to say it: The perfect is the enemy of the good.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Al Acuff

In the 70s I produced national radio spots for Budweiser and other clients using studios in NY and LA. That opened doors and gave me visiting privileges which in my case I used to make friends with engineers so I could watch, listen, and learn when I wasn't working on my own stuff. In studios such as Gold Star, MCA Whitney, National Edison, etc. I never once observed an engineer mixing on nearfield monitors. Horrortones and NS10s were used only for final checking your mix on typical mass-fi grade consumer playback.

I came into the NY studio scene a tiny bit later, tail end of the D'arcy/Bud/Karmen era. I think if you were to Waybac into National Edison knowing what you now know, you'd be amazed that anyone could reliably mix anything on those giant Urei's they had suspended over the "visitor pit."

[Halcyon/Tinker]

Well, until I can buy into a full studio with soffit mounts, I guess I'm stuck with the Dynaudios...

[Al Acuff]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

I came into the NY studio scene a tiny bit later, tail end of the D'arcy/Bud/Karmen era. I think if you were to Waybac into National Edison knowing what you now know, you'd be amazed that anyone could reliably mix anything on those giant Urei's they had suspended over the "visitor pit."

I remember Steve Karmen, Spence Michelin, Susan Cianni and the rest of the gang. Those guys were high rollers. They took me to lunch one time at the Friar's Club because they got curious after I grabbed a few small jobs away from them. Did you know that Karmen got his start composing soundtracks for porn films? That's where he learned to time the music score to the picture

I hear the jingle business has changed a lot. No more Steve Karmen million dollar a year usage fee contracts! The guy was a slick salesman!!! It's nice to meet someone here who remembers those days. What a wacky business!

Back then my life was split between my corporate jobs and singing in bars around Austin. I grabbed a few jingle jobs away from the big names but wasn't really a part of the NY based jingle biz. It was fun to meet the jingle mill kids but picking guitars with Ramblin' Jack and with Peter Rowan down in Austin was a whole lot more fun

PS. My first national radio spot was mixed on a pair of the Urei monitors bought second hand from the home studio of Eagles founding member Bernie Leadon. We recorded, mixed and mastered a national radio spot in a garage studio in Westwood. We checked the mix afterward on NS10s. Jerry Donahue was the guitar player. Good music and good times. Sometimes you get lucky.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Al Acuff

PS. My first national radio spot was mixed on Urei monitors.

Understood. But it was around that time folks' thinking began to embrace the concept of something midway between the "bigs" and the Auratones. And the meter bridge was the only practical place to put them.

[Al Acuff]

What I took away from the post by Bob Katz is that in small a home studio there's no point in questing after that holy grail nearfield monitor everyone wants to sell you.

Nearfield monitoring is imperfect by definition so just get you some speakers and learn their weaknesses and strengths and get on with the creative work.

I'm satisfied using nearfield speakers here in my home studio. It's all personal work and there's no client. It's fun learning to do all the stuff I used to hire professionals to do. And it makes me appreciate those guys a lot!

Except for mastering... I'm not going to try that here on nearfields. I'll leave it to the guys with great big speakers and specially designed rooms. I worked in a mastering studio. We used huge B&W speakers with 500 watt monoblocs in a specially built and heavily treated room. My spare bedroom is never gonna sound like that.

It's been a long time since I've visited a big commercial studio. I'm amazed by what I can do here in my spare bedroom with a computer, a few mics and nearfield monitors. AND the hourly rate is great!

[KevWind]

My room is a bit unusual it is in the attic with a 10/12 pitch with a 9 ft height at the peak. 21 ft wide at the floor and 50 ft long where it meats another 10/12 pitch at a perpendicular angle

I mix in what I guess you might call the near end of mid field. My monitors are Amphion One 18's they are 6' 5" from my head in the normal listening/mixing position. They sit on freestanding Sound Anchor stands. which are 9 ft from the closest gable wall.
The are angled/towed slightly out from directly pointing to center of my head with the tweeters slightly above my ear height.

[Al Acuff]

Originally Posted by KevWind

My room is a bit unusual it is in the attic with a 10/12 pitch with a 9 ft height at the peak. 21 ft wide at the floor and 50 ft long where it meats another 10/12 pitch at a perpendicular angle

I mix in what I guess you might call the near end of mid field. My monitors are Amphion One 18's they are 6' 5" from my head in the normal listening/mixing position. They sit on freestanding Sound Anchor stands. which are 9 ft from the closest gable wall.
The are angled/towed slightly out from directly pointing to center of my head with the tweeters slightly above my ear height.

That sounds like a good space and intelligent set up. My tracking/mixing room is a converted bedroom in an old house. My speakers sit on Primacoustic stands on my desktop (an old door) on either side of the monitor. It ain't ideal but it leaves room for a couple musicians playing instruments.

I'm lucky to have a dedicated hifi listening room in my converted garage where I can play back and check my mixes. I did a stint as an editor's assistant at Stereophile magazine back in my checkered past. Those guys let me enjoy some of their reference listening rooms and taught me. Mostly I use my hifi room for spinning vinyl but it's also great for checking mixes from my workstation.

A perfectionist by nature, I try to bear in mind that Robert Johnson made his recordings on portable equipment in a hotel room in a couple of days. I imagine if they had Pro Tools back then they might have made those recordings absolutely perfect... what am I saying? They already are perfect!

[KevWind]

I forgot to mention the speakers themselves sit on Isoacoustic stands which sit on the metal platform of the Sound Anchors

[Al Acuff]

I'm green with jealousy. When you get your speakers out in free space on stands like that it makes a big difference. You're lucky to have that room. Nice monitors! It looks like you're all set.

Here's where I track and mix. It's a lot of fun!

PS. I see we agree on the most important thing. The mixing desk should be red. Do you find red makes your mixes sound louder? LOL.