The art of mixing is dependent on the skill of the mix engineer and the quality of the monitoring system. Learn the secrets of achieving the perfect mix.Check out the Octave catalog HTTP://www.octaverecords.com
One important thing Paul forgot to mention. If you are mixing only the the far field, it is extremely important one has a properly treated room for the bass frequencies. Otherwise the unintended consequences can leave the bass frequencies uneven in the mix. Of course one could have an uneven mix with nearfield listeng as well if the monitors are up against a wall with no treatment.
I have my own studio so i understand what your talking about but still found it fascinating. If only everything in life was as simple as listening to your hifi!
I believe there is more nearfield listener since more and more kids know how to do protools, premiere, LPX,FCP. I listen to studio monitor all the time with my iMac. You can get relative big soundstage nearfield. Speaker placement.
Good video, and you make a lot of important points. I definitely agree with a number of the other posters regarding near field monitors overcoming acoustic problems in mix rooms. An awful lot of home and project studios were never well designed. People hang up a few inexpensive diffusors and traps and think everything is fine. But, it might not be. If the room isn't really well designed and tested (I'm sure yours is, so not a problem for you), you can't make any mix decisions on far field monitors. A well-designed room is not cheap, and with the music business as it is today, a lot of music producers simply can't afford to do the job right.
Thanks. We're excited to share it with you. Head over to HTTP://www.octaverecords.com and check out the samples so you can see what kind of music you might like. Enjoy and let us know!
I'm still learning all this, but I've also heard the definition of "near" and "far" fields described in terms of room mode pressure vs direct speaker pressure at your listening position. In this view, "near field" would be a listening position where the direct speaker output pressure is greater than the room mode pressure. And "far field" is where the room mode pressure is greater than direct speaker pressure. It's the low frequencies that create room mode resonances. So this kinda matches what he's saying around 6:00. This is also complicated by the fact that manufacturers also tend to classify their monitors as "near," "mid," and "far" field monitors.
Usually the near field monitors will produce LESS bass frequencies then the far field monitors. the near field woofer will be 5" to 8" in most cases, the far field will be 8" and above... a good mixing engineer (and most of us do) usually will mix most of his time on the near filed, and will switch to the far field from time to time for reference. also a good mixing engineer will know how the mix his creating on the near fields will translate to headphones, car system, audiophile system etc.. mixing on a far field monitors only, will produce a lack of bass most of the time as far field are giving bigger bass response, the room usually will enhances it, and the engineer will mix with less bass accordingly.
I think it makes sense to keep things simple... have a flat listening position in the control room of a dampened studio and have a flat listening position in your dampened listening room... challenge solved. Any music enthusiast who gets into the details will be able to measure and correct their main listening position and to treat their room ... If they want the full listening experience but don't want to treat their listening room, they will go for excellent earphones.
There's some misconceptions... Hearing from nearfield avoids acoustics problems in the room. Far monitors are normally used for loud experience to see how the sound balances, but depends on the acoustics of the room itself. Most hi-end users commonly listem to hi-end audio from 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's that was available from remastered audio tapes to hi-end ADAC conversors. The best mix (I think) for hi-end users is to have the best sensation of sound like the band itselves are in the same room... Quite so f*** high definition of sound bares on how was recorded, how was processed... the mixing process is a lie anyway... Drums in real world don't sound like mixed ones... Acoustic guitars not sound louder (in fact it disappears from phisical listening with a band playing together) but they are almost in first plane... The question is... How being a high end user if the perception on how things sounds is a lie? Not talking about blues, jazz, orchestra or pure acoustic instruments ( there's a lot of Al Schmitt recorded/mixed álbuns that's sounds like standing in front the real band). Lot's to thinking about. Good talking Paul.
I tend to prefer near-field as it provides the best of what actually is the real instrument or vocal sound. Getting the sound obfuscated/enhanced with room reflections is bad or good depending on the genre of music.
Good points as always Paul. However I did find it semi funny to listen to the crackles of your mic on your recording this AS you are talking about how octave records does audiophile recordings. Just a bit of irony does not, I hope hurt anyone. Cheers!
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio haha by the way I have been a huge fan of your videos over on the PS Audio channel for a couple years now! keep up the good work...well work seems like a derogatory term in your context, it's more like fun :) thanks and cheers
Depends on the monitors. Some studio monitors sound amazing and others sound like crap. There is no real difference between a monitor and a bookshelf speaker. They're both speakers. Monitors are usually just tuned to be flatter and have the amplification built into the cabinets.
I agree with pandemonium. Studio speakers and how they sound are all over the map. The ATCs we use are very flat and very good, though I would not use them in our listening rooms.
@@octaverecordsanddsdstudios1285 I'm a mastering engineer as well as speaker builder and am also not a fan of ATCs. Can you elaborate on why you wouldn't use them in your listening rooms? What don't you like about them?
@@octilliondollars They are forward sounding, a bit aggressive, and don't disappear. One of the hallmarks of a great speaker properly set up is that they disappear so that if one were to turn off the lights and listen you couldn't point to the source of sound.
I think that because young audiophiles prefer desktop systems (whereas older audiophiles prefer living room systems) near-field listening will become the dominant form of consumer playback in the years to come. This is because young people spend their free time in a chair on the computer (whereas older people tend to prefer sitting on the couch in front of a tv.) The reason why bookshelves, like the Kef LS-50s, have become so popular is because they do well both on a desktop and in a living room so they can be placed wherever the consumer wishes to be that day. They can easily be put on floor-stands or computer-stands. Perhaps in a couple of decades, there will be almost no-one listening in the far-field. Which is probably a good thing because most people's homes are not acoustically treated so they get cleaner sound from the desktop setups than the living room setups.
So, if near-field listening provides a "flatter" bass response, does that mean the bass response on near-field is better, and that it might produce lower frequencies? I am using a pair of Canton GLE 417.2 speakers in a near-field setup. The Cantons are rated from 43 to 30k in frequency response. I am driving them with a very good S.M.S.L. DA-9 amp and an S.M.S.L. M500 DAC. It all sounds great. However, I am thinking about adding a Yamaha subwoofer that plays down to 28 hz. Do subs play well in near-field setups? Do you think the benefit of adding a sub merits the cost? Please share your thoughts. Thank you.
For me I would absolutely add a sub. The closer you can get to duplicating full range what's being reproduced the closer you are to being in full control of the sound you wish to capture.
@Douglas Blake . . . Thanks for the suggestion. Do I need a mic to measure sound level? Or am I just gauging it with my ears? I am not familiar with these apps. Would you be so kind as to recommend one? I use Windows and an iPad and Samsung phone.
@Douglas Blake . . . Very good advice. I do listen to some 60s rock, but mostly orchestral music. I should probably look at the Yamaha 300, which goes down to 20 hz.
This is only an issue if the room isn't shot out. Most decent studios have subs which aren't placed in the nearfield. AND they are set up in a triangle set up. I think you're confusing bedroom producers with actual studios. (And most studios will have several monitor options)
@4:10 "...where we have to go back and tell the mix engineer 'No. Please. Push the speakers back. At least give a listen to the far field. Make your adjustments for levels on the bass, to get things right". Paul, the way that you described getting it right "adjustments for the level on the bass" sound correct. But I want to make sure that what you said it what I understand that you said are the sames. Too many mixing engineers will not "adjust the levels on the bass instruments". Instead, they will use an equalizer, that kills the natural sound of the bass instruments, and any other instruments or voices that share that stem. @4:48 "...and we don't produce music that is played in the car, on ear buds..." Paul, when you get it right, it sounds great everywhere that you play it. You can test this: Take the "near field" version from the mixing engineer, where he got the bass wrong. Also take the "far field" version from the mixing engineer, where he got the bass right. I will lay 100 to 1 odds that the latter will sound better no matter where it is played. If I am mistaken, please let me know, because I cannot test this. I believe that when a song sounds right, it sounds right no matter where you play it. @5:48 "...very wide image" For anyone that is interested, track #3, from the following album, has the widest image of any digital song that I have heard. us.7digital.com/artist/madonna/release/celebration-single-disc-version-589241 Artist: Madonna Song: Vogue Track: 3 The song is available elsewhere, and will not be as good. That song, along with several other songs on her "Immaculate Collection" album, were made with a contrived soundstage via "QSound": en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QSound It is not natural, but it is amazing! On a very good stereo (not a car stereo, due to speaker placement), there are parts of the song that sound like they are coming directly from the left and right sides of your room. It will still sound great in the car, but you will not get the full imaging. Cheers!
I was amused by your reference to NS-10's as monitors. It is true that some professional studios use those, or an equivalent, but never as primary monitors. NS-10's are used because they are mediocre, like the speakers that the average consumer might be using and engineers want to compare that sound to the studio reference monitors (usually near field). It is always advised that a mix be previewed on a full range of audio systems, e.g., home hi-fi, car audio, earbuds, etc., when the product is intended for general consumer release. A good pair (or 2.1 system) of near field monitors and headphones allow hearing aspects of the sound that cannot be heard with any other type of speaker setup. I would be surprised if a professional mixing engineer would agree to only mix with stereo far field "audiophile" speakers and no other reference setup. Back to NS-10's. The Avantone Pro CLA10 is a NS-10 clone, here is the description, "There's nothing flat about this studio monitor's frequency response. Like its predecessor, the CLA10 delivers a fatiguing, mid-heavy sound. And like most sealed-box speakers, it has limited bass extension. In other words, this isn't the best-sounding speaker in the world. In fact, it sounds downright dreadful in some circumstances - cold and clinical. That said, it's this quality that exposes the flaws in your mix. And that's where this monitor's magic lies - perfect your mix on a set of CLA10s, and it's sure to sound great everywhere."
I used NS-10m monitors for years as near fields, and also had Auratone speakers for gauging how mixes would come across on inexpensive TV/Radio speakers (the "m" version was a "pro" version of the speaker, with some improvements like better binding posts, and a re-designed tweeter that eliminated the need to put Kleenex in front of it, as engineers did with the normal consumer NS-10 version). I stopped using them a number of years ago, and upgraded to Adams for near fields (I've got soffit mounted Westlakes for far fields). My feeling was that back in the late seventies, eighties and a ways into the nineties, the NS-10m DID kind of approximate what consumer speakers sounded like, and they were a great reference to how end users would hear a mix. But, I think things moved along, and they no longer are a good approximation of modern consumer audio gear. YMMV.
these and the aura tone, reftone or avantone 5c are primarily so you can mix the mid range more effectively. Most studio monitors that people are using are two way with a woofer and a tweeter. Having dedicated midrange from a seperate set of speakers gives you a much fuller picture of how the music will translate to all other systems, compared to the typical stereo two way monitors allot of people are using. More music and content is being produced independently than is produced “professionally” in the old sense. Technology has reached a point where a single person can do everything in a complex media project themselves. That is historically unprecedented.
Have you ever listened to your own recordings, I mean your own audio on your videos ? You're hitting the limiters and clipping and distorting your audio all over the place. Then you're telling us about 'high end recordings.' Just saying !
