Best monitor for Axe-Fx III

[gigawatt]

Depends on the type of room acoustics and treatment you have, but to say "vertical response is moot" doesn't consider the whole shebang.

I understand what you're saying. I didn't mean "vertical response is moot," entirely, just in this case. However the OP never really made that clear, so I stand corrected:

I want monitors that give me a full and rich sound when i play at home without headphone.

Firstly - the very important premise here is that the OP asks for advice on studio monitors to give him a full and rich sound when playing his Axe III - so he is asking for a "pleasure listening option" and not a mixing / analysis tool.

Actually Rocket Brother, the OP didn't say anything about the Axe III, or a "pleasure listening option," I made that same mistake. He/She said full and rich (I wonder if that's like Big & Rich? ) , What? "Come at me bro!" ok I'll shut up…

I'm not saying there are no differences, {did you really perceive that from my writing?} I questioned the claim that there are huge differences.

Uhh yeah, I guess so…


OP also asked:

For monitors what is the best amplification class? I see there are class A/B and class D...
For my budget the option are yamaha Hs8, ktk rp8-g3, presonus eris E8 or somewhat in this range.

Anyone have any opinions between class AB or D?

 

[lqdsnddist]

I understand what you're saying. I didn't mean "vertical response is moot," entirely, just in this case. However the OP never really made that clear, so I stand corrected:





Actually Rocket Brother, the OP didn't say anything about the Axe III, or a "pleasure listening option," I made that same mistake. He/She said full and rich (I wonder if that's like Big & Rich? ) , What? "Come at me bro!" ok I'll shut up…



Uhh yeah, I guess so…


OP also asked:




Anyone have any opinions between class AB or D?

No one is going to be able to hear a difference between AB and D

D usually needs a bit smaller heat sink, or no heat sink at all, which makes them a bit cheaper to produce, thus many brands switching to class D amps, improved the profit margin.

 

[gigawatt]

D usually needs a bit smaller heat sink, or no heat sink at all, which makes them a bit cheaper to produce, thus many brands switching to class D amps, improved the profit margin.

Aren't D's also the newer super light ones? and not quite as reliable? (here I'm talking about high power PA applications). I thought I read that somewhere, that was some time ago however.

 

[lqdsnddist]

Probably the lack of heat sink contributes a bit to reliability ? Lighter weight often means skipping on quality too (unless you add cost).

I’m sure most consumers want lightweight and low cost PA applications more so than they are prepared to pay more for better quality parts, not to mention hauling heavier gear.

In all honesty though I’ve had buddies who are still running the same bargain MAudio and Behringer Truths for probably a decade plus. Things cost like $150 each, probably even cheaper back then, and still work. Just don’t hear much if monitor failure. I’m sure it happens no doubt, but as a whole no one is banging then around on a tour etc. you set them in one spot and there they stay for years. Usually not seeing temp extremes either like hot outdoor stages etc. so they have a pretty easy life.

 

[Rocket Brother]

Thanks for the response! I'm not a pro audio guy or anything, just like learning about it a lot So I appreciate the input.

Point 1) is well taken, OP asks for pleasant sound and that's preferential. Different monitors certainly do sound different and we can prefer different ones with regards to fatigue, analysis, enjoyment, etc.

Point 2) is well taken as well, and I agree specs don't necessarily tell everything and are very lacking in the low to mid budget range.
Resolution Magazine ($5 a pop) is a great source for most of the popular monitors of any budget. Keith Holland who is a PhD and professor in this stuff, and wrote a textbook on loudspeakers, makes measurements for their reviews. In his words,

It may well be that the dynamic ebb and flow of the music, the subtle timing differences and other characteristics are better exhibited by some loudspeakers than by others, but these are things for which we have no reliable, measurable descriptors. However, the overwhelming tendency is for a loudspeaker which scores highly in all the objective measurement regimes... to show the musical characteristics in a more artistic and exciting light.
​

The measurements I've seen of HS8, E8, LSR308, etc. are pretty good, nothing major to fault about them. And so I would think the "overwhelming tendency" would apply to these monitors, as it would to those expensive monitors you list. So I tend to view it like @lqdsnddist does, unless there's something real special about a set of monitors (like Kii audio, Genelec coaxial, Sceptre/Fulcrum, etc.) that's doing something special, I think monitors that measure objectively similarly are probably more same than different.

Perhaps there is something special to the Dynaudio, ATC, Amphion, etc. that are beyond objective measurements. But it's unfortunate that they don't seem to at least make good objective measurement data available. The only popular brands I know of (I don't know a lot of brands so take it with a grain of salt) that do give thorough objective measurements are Genelec, Neumann, and a few Adams high end monitors.

Hey yeky83,

Regarding point 2 and your response - I don't have a PhD in audio science and know better than to pick a fight with those who have, but I'm quite sure that most of the characteristics of any given monitor can indeed (at least theoretically) be measured, but maybe "we" don't have all the tools yet. Doing such measurements naturally requires cutting edge scientific knowledge, anechoic rooms/chambers and cutting edge scientific measurement equipment. Maybe some of these optimal conditions for doing said measurements are nearly or practically unobtainable, and maybe some of the current measuring equipment is lacking to "characterize the ebb and flow of dynamics", but that description sound more subjective than objective to me ??

What I do know is that the specs that are publicly available on many if not most of the low to mid level (and possibly even some hi-end) studio monitors are flawed, polished or at least incomplete. I've heard many with a lot of knowledge in this field comment on this and often it's not stated how or under which conditions these measurements were obtained, and as such if you just read specs you are often not comparing the same things even though you think you are.
Some manufactures do state these things correctly and I think there are generally agreed upon guidelines as to how you should report specs for monitors, but many manufactures don't adhere to these and don't tell you how they made the measurements.

With regards to the monitors you mention, I don't fully trust their published specs and in fact I don't care about their specs, as I do know that when I listen to a speaker like the HS8 (which I recommended of the ones the OP asked about) it sounds decent and you can do a decent mix on them, but they are neither inspiring to listen to for playback (IMO at least they don't show musical characteristics in a more artistic and exciting light) nor revealing and analytical enough to use to do real pro mixing work on (again IMO).
Please know that I'm not bashing these speakers, just stating that you get what you pay for and that the playback system is naturally absolute crucial. So if you want to enjoy the wonders of your 2500$ audio processor it deserves better than 350$ monitors IMO.

I have nowhere near tried/heard and much less tested every studio monitor on the marked, but I've worked on many of the classic stables and like a lot of them for different reasons - not just ATC, Dynaudio and Amphions, I just mentioned those as I find those to be both great sounding at playback and great for mixing on. In example I also like NS10 for mixing, but not for playback.

What are you missing spec wise from ATC, Dynaudio and Amphion that you get from Genelec ??

http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/professional/loudspeakers/scm50a-pro/
https://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/8000-series-studio-monitors/8040b-studio-monitor

Late? on my clock it says you posted the above at 4:30 pm. You in Australia or something?
..........

Scandinavia - I'm 6 hours ahead of NYC and 9 hours ahead of LA , it's the festival season so lots of concerts at the moment - ad other studio commitments and small kids, so on the nights where I'm not gigging I'm completely fried at nine in the evening.

 

[lqdsnddist]

I think it’s a bit silly to say one can’t enjoy their Axe unless your using very expensive monitors. In some cases less accurate monitors can sound more pleasing. Might not translate well, but it can sound good from a listening standpoint.

Look at Tyler Grund (guitardojo) he was using an old home stereo system for playing his axe and he created amazing tones with it. He certainly seemed happy with his Axe, no?

The “wonders” of the Axe don’t require too much really. Now I wouldn’t suggest doing demanding mix downs for paying clients with lower end gear, but if one just wants to enjoy playing their Axe at home you need not break the bank.

In fact, I’ve played my ax8 through home stereo speakers before and it still sounded just fine. I mean let’s face it, a lot of people only play at home. The need to translate to the House PA system etc isn’t a practical consideration for many, myself included these days.

I just want it to sound good for the audience of one in Madison square basement

 

[Rocket Brother]

I think it’s a bit silly to say one can’t enjoy their Axe unless your using very expensive monitors. In some cases less accurate monitors can sound more pleasing. Might not translate well, but it can sound good from a listening standpoint.

I think it's a bit silly to put words in somebody else's mouth !

I didn't say that you can't enjoy your Axe unless you are using very expensive speakers, I said that if the OP had the means to stretch his budget a bit he could get much better monitors, and later I stated that the monitors are crucial which I believe to be right.
While I agree that less accurate monitors can sound pleasing is correct, IMO that isn't really the case with the HS8 and I do think that HS8s for an Axe III is a Ferrari in 2nd gear.
Notice that I answered the OP from a listening standpoint, my points with regards to mixing have purely been in response to yeky83's questions.
The Dynaudio range of studio monitors start out at a fairly modest price for good monitors, and there are many other good monitors out there at modest prices.

Look at Tyler Grund (guitardojo) he was using an old home stereo system for playing his axe and he created amazing tones with it. He certainly seemed happy with his Axe, no?

Tyler was using an Onkyo system - a well respected brand that I have fond memories about, and hi fi speakers are made to sound pleasant so I'm not surprised he liked it, and I would certainly prefer it to HS8's.
Still not bashing the HS8s just putting things in perspective.

The “wonders” of the Axe don’t require too much really. Now I wouldn’t suggest doing demanding mix downs for paying clients with lower end gear, but if one just wants to enjoy playing their Axe at home you need not break the bank.

In fact, I’ve played my ax8 through home stereo speakers before and it still sounded just fine. I mean let’s face it, a lot of people only play at home. The need to translate to the House PA system etc isn’t a practical consideration for many, myself included these days.

I just want it to sound good for the audience of one in Madison square basement

Again I didn't in anyway suggest the OP that he needed to break the bank, I recommended the HS8s among the monitors he asked about, but said that for a bit extra he could do a lot better (IMO !!).

It's so cool that many only play at home, with the current state of modelers there has newer been a better time to be a home guitarist, and I fully understand why a home guitarist would spring for an Axe III if funds permit - but if you then pair it with a set of HS8's I would argue that you'd probably get better sounds with an Axe II and better monitors. Thats where the Ferrari in 2nd gear come in.

I didn't say that you need very expensive monitors to enjoy the Axe III, nor did I talk about mixing or anything like that other than in response to yeky83s questions - maybe you should check what I said when and in response to what before calling me silly - seems fair, no ??

 

[AlbertA]

Hi guys, i need an advice about monitor for home playing.. I want monitors that give me a full and rich sound when i play at home without headphone. For monitors what is the best amplification class? I see there are class A/B and class D...
For my budget the option are yamaha Hs8, ktk rp8-g3, presonus eris E8 or somewhat in this range.
thanks

I would recommend the active CLR or the Presonus scepter s8.

Yeah they are way over your budget but it would probably be the last pair of speakers you would buy.

 

[Rocket Brother]

I would recommend the active CLR or the Presonus scepter s8.

Yeah they are way over your budget but it would probably be the last pair of speakers you would buy.

I agree and I'd personally go with 1 CLR over 2 budget studio monitors any day of the week if 2 CLRs are out of reach.
One CLR is 300$ more than 2 HS8's and they are worlds apart.
The CLRs are as great for low volume bedroom playing as they are for stage volume IMO.

 

[yeky83]

Hey yeky83,

Hey Rocket Brother! Again, thanks for the thoughtful convo.

Regarding point 2 and your response - I don't have a PhD in audio science and know better than to pick a fight with those who have, but I'm quite sure that most of the characteristics of any given monitor can indeed (at least theoretically) be measured, but maybe "we" don't have all the tools yet. Doing such measurements naturally requires cutting edge scientific knowledge, anechoic rooms/chambers and cutting edge scientific measurement equipment. Maybe some of these optimal conditions for doing said measurements are nearly or practically unobtainable, and maybe some of the current measuring equipment is lacking to "characterize the ebb and flow of dynamics", but that description sound more subjective than objective to me ??

My point was to say that those "tools" and "cutting edge" measurements are available from sources like Resolution Magazine. I've seen those measurements, and there isn't a huge difference between the expensive stuff and less expensive stuff. And at times, some famous brands' expensive stuff fares worse at objective measurements.

The subjective is also preferential. The whole act of listening is subjective, so if you want to say expensive monitors make a subjectively huge difference to you, OK. But it doesn't bear out in objective measurements.

What I do know is that the specs that are publicly available on many if not most of the low to mid level (and possibly even some hi-end) studio monitors are flawed, polished or at least incomplete. I've heard many with a lot of knowledge in this field comment on this and often it's not stated how or under which conditions these measurements were obtained, and as such if you just read specs you are often not comparing the same things even though you think you are.
Some manufactures do state these things correctly and I think there are generally agreed upon guidelines as to how you should report specs for monitors, but many manufactures don't adhere to these and don't tell you how they made the measurements.

Agreed. And that's why I pointed to a more authoritative, independent measurement source like Resolution Magazine and Keith Holland.

Please know that I'm not bashing these speakers, just stating that you get what you pay for and that the playback system is naturally absolute crucial. So if you want to enjoy the wonders of your 2500$ audio processor it deserves better than 350$ monitors IMO.

I get that you're not bashing anything. But I don't think you necessarily "get what you pay for" with monitors.

This $2500 audio processor we love is spankin new tech. Monitors and loudspeakers, the tech basically hasn't changed much in a long time -- the construction of a woofer and tweeter, what a good crossover and power amp is supposed to do, etc. (again with exception of things like Kii, Sceptre/Fulcrum, Genelec coax, etc.) And so the cheap ones can be quite good and comparable to expensive ones of the same old format.

What are you missing spec wise from ATC, Dynaudio and Amphion that you get from Genelec ??

http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/professional/loudspeakers/scm50a-pro/
https://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/8000-series-studio-monitors/8040b-studio-monitor

I want some graphs! I don't see directivity and distortion data on the ATC, which I do from Genelec. Pretty rudimentary measurements really. I dunno why monitors, which are valued for their merit of accuracy, don't come with measurements showing that they're accurate. Neuman is pretty great at showing measurements, with extra stuff like group delay, spectral decay, etc.
https://en-de.neumann.com/kh-120-a-g#technical-data

 

[Rocket Brother]

Hey Rocket Brother! Again, thanks for the thoughtful convo.

My point was to say that those "tools" and "cutting edge" measurements are available from sources like Resolution Magazine. I've seen those measurements, and there isn't a huge difference between the expensive stuff and less expensive stuff. And at times, some famous brands' expensive stuff fares worse at objective measurements.

The subjective is also preferential. The whole act of listening is subjective, so if you want to say expensive monitors make a subjectively huge difference to you, OK. But it doesn't bear out in objective measurements.

Agreed. And that's why I pointed to a more authoritative, independent measurement source like Resolution Magazine and Keith Holland.

I get that you're not bashing anything. But I don't think you necessarily "get what you pay for" with monitors.

This $2500 audio processor we love is spankin new tech. Monitors and loudspeakers, the tech basically hasn't changed much in a long time -- the construction of a woofer and tweeter, what a good crossover and power amp is supposed to do, etc. (again with exception of things like Kii, Sceptre/Fulcrum, Genelec coax, etc.) And so the cheap ones can be quite good and comparable to expensive ones of the same old format.

I want some graphs! I don't see directivity and distortion data on the ATC, which I do from Genelec. Pretty rudimentary measurements really. I dunno why monitors, which are valued for their merit of accuracy, don't come with measurements showing that they're accurate. Neuman is pretty great at showing measurements, with extra stuff like group delay, spectral decay, etc.
https://en-de.neumann.com/kh-120-a-g#technical-data

Hey yeky83,

I got and appreciate your point on Resolution Magazine and Keith Holland, you opened the door to whether some stuff was not measurable, where I think that at -least theoretically- every characteristic of a monitor is or should be measurable.

Regarding graphs, I see that the link to the technical data sheet for the ASM50SL pro is dead, but I'm sure ATC would mail the graphs to you if you contact them.

With regards to whether or not you get what you pay for, well naturally that is a rule with many exceptions, so I get your point.
There are great very competitively priced monitors and some that are overpriced.
There are always refinements and improvements happening in a tech field like this, but as you say, the basic principles of monitor construction are well established so what you pay for is among other things knowhow, quality of materials, quality of assembly, tight tolerances and quality control.
Naturally the rule of diminishing returns applys as ever, but I'll maintain that if you go in with your eyes wide open, you will get what you pay for, as even with Yamahas mighty economy of scale it's impossible to produce a monitor to re-sale at 350$ to be of the same quality as the top monitors from Genelec, ATC, Adams and other serious monitor manufactures.
I'm still not bashing the HS8's, for the price point they are really good as a mixing tool.

 

[gigawatt]

I would recommend the active CLR or the Presonus scepter s8.

Yeah they are way over your budget but it would probably be the last pair of speakers you would buy.

+1 for the S8's!

[QUOTE="Rocket Brother, post: 1657606, member: 9391"]I agree and I'd personally go with 1 CLR over 2 budget studio monitors any day of the week if 2 CLRs are out of reach.
One CLR is 300$ more than 2 HS8's and they are worlds apart.
The CLRs are as great for low volume bedroom playing as they are for stage volume IMO.[/QUOTE]

You really think stage monitors would do a good job as studio monitors? My vote goes to the Sceptre S8's . But if he gigs, I suppose the CLR's would be a logical choice, and plenty loud...

 

[AlbertA]

You really think stage monitors would do a good job as studio monitors? My vote goes to the Sceptre S8's . But if he gigs, I suppose the CLR's would be a logical choice, and plenty loud...

I don’t gig and use the CLRs as monitors

 

[Rocket Brother]

+1 for the S8's!

You really think stage monitors would do a good job as studio monitors? My vote goes to the Sceptre S8's . But if he gigs, I suppose the CLR's would be a logical choice, and plenty loud...

I don't think - I know
And I think they are better, I've used the CLRs a lot at home and they are perfect at low volume and their dispersion characteristics are great at home

 

[gigawatt]

@Rocket Brother - Don't know what happened to the quote^^^ .

Ope! I see I'm late to the party .

You mean CLR 2000? I don't understand why you'd want a pair of these for the studio/stage. I used to have one in my surround sound system. Funny I paid the same price for a brand new one in 2009 from Magnolia.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/273272618326?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&fromMakeTrack=true

I hope the link works, having Safari issues…

Edit: It works.

 

[Rocket Brother]

@Rocket Brother - Don't know what happened to the quote^^^ .

Ope! I see I'm late to the party .

You mean CLR 2000? I don't understand why you'd want a pair of these for the studio/stage. I used to have one in my surround sound system. Funny I paid the same price for a brand new one in 2009 from Magnolia.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/273272618326?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&fromMakeTrack=true

I hope the link works, having Safari issues…

Edit: It works.

Hey Gigawatt,

No I'm talking about the Atomic Amps CLR active monitor
http://atomicamps.com/clr-reference-frfr-monitors/

 

[cobbler]

I don’t gig and use the CLRs as monitors

I don't think - I know
And I think they are better, I've used the CLRs a lot at home and they are perfect at low volume and their dispersion characteristics are great at home

Could not agree more.

 

[Giordydiver]

So this is the point, i had a red sound lg12 that in my opinion i better than clr but i have sold it because is to loud for play in my room, so i think that monitors are the best choise for me... i dont need much volume but only good quality... i have seen also eve sc204, they have a really good flat response...

 

[yeky83]

So this is the point, i had a red sound lg12 that in my opinion i better than clr but i have sold it because is to loud for play in my room, so i think that monitors are the best choise for me... i dont need much volume but only good quality... i have seen also eve sc204, they have a really good flat response...

I agree, as great as the CLR is, for home enjoyment use only it's probably overkill for most folks. Get a decent pair of studio monitors, any one of the ones you've already listed sounds fine, and you'll be set.
No need to overspend or sacrifice stereo, which seems not a wise advice IMHO. I'd go for E8 or JBL 308P cus cheaper price. HS8, you pay more cus it's so popular, but if you like the pretty white woofer, go for it. SC204, you're probably not going to have as much fun playing through it, and since full rich sound is the goal, go for 8" monitors.

 

[gigawatt]

I agree, as great as the CLR is, for home enjoyment use only it's probably overkill for most folks. Get a decent pair of studio monitors, any one of the ones you've already listed sounds fine, and you'll be set.
No need to overspend or sacrifice stereo, which seems not a wise advice IMHO. I'd go for E8 or JBL 308P cus cheaper price. HS8, you pay more cus it's so popular, but if you like the pretty white woofer, go for it. SC204, you're probably not going to have as much fun playing through it, and since full rich sound is the goal, go for 8" monitors.

I couldn't agree more ... Surprised?

So this is the point, i had a red sound lg12 that in my opinion i better than clr but i have sold it because is to loud for play in my room, so i think that monitors are the best choise for me... i dont need much volume but only good quality... i have seen also eve sc204, they have a really good flat response...

I used to have a pair of QSC K12's, they sounded great too, but I'd hate to see them oppressed in an apartment. They need a stage to let loose their mayhem. I use my monitors, but lately been using headphones and they sound excellent too with the III (sorry that's another topic). I suggest the JBL's if your trying to keep costs down cuz I've read a lot good things about them, and for the price, well... I was comparing them to what I bought in favor, The Presonus Sceptre S8's and the JBL's were my second choice, HS8 third. After reading all the posts here on your thread, I'm glad I didn't go with the HS8! In the end it's all up too you and what you like. Read as many reviews you can find, comparison reviews too. I found I learned more from other forums with regular guys like you and me as opposed to "magazine reviews." Go give them a listen too if there's a store in your area that sells them, I didn't have that privilege when I bought mine, I took a chance and it paid off nicely.

Also gave some serious consideration to these, Equator D8;
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Equator-Au...605962&hash=item41e4621d12:g:fO4AAOSwEMxa9JAP

Tannoy has some nice monitors too.

@Rocket Brother Sorry I was joking . I know the CLR is Atomic Amps. In fact, I know them a little too well.