UNPOPULAR AUDIO OPINIONS: "STUDIO" Monitoring Is The BIGGEST LIE In Audio Engineering

[@PaulThird]

buymeacoffee.com/paulthird (if you get any benefit from what I do on this platform) 🤓 Also here is a video I made 8 month ago discussing why "Learning Your Monitoring" Isn't really enough for achieving translation on headphones. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bam7YWevo7p-qZo I think it adds a lot of good context as many have commented that "learning references on any headphone is enough to achieve optimal translation" when in reality it's not as simple as that due to varying factors of headphone design

[@MuzdokOfficial]

@@PaulThird Well you better have a sub trying to mix modern music with ns10 or good luck 😂😂😂

[@thomastucker5686]

I like the message because it is logical reasoning. I own Yamaha H-80 monitors. I don't know how well they translate yet because I am still learning the basics with newer gear. These monitors are about 12 years old and I used them in a different mixing room that was separate from the studio, however my new room has it all in one room. My old studio space had a better live room sound. I haven't done enough in my new space to get things sorted out. I am hoping 2025 is the year I get things chugging along. Thank you for offering an opinion that matches my reality in application. Marketing and mythology are a thing. I think I can learn to mix on any speakers within reason, but I need a reference mix on those speakers, so I know how the speakers translate music I am familiar and know how it should sound. I just replaced headphones for my home mini studio in my bedroom where I discover, most of my ideas. My previous headphones were so lacking in reproducing the bass, my rough mixes would blow your head off with excessive bass. I can hear bass in my new cans. My greatest fear is, I will get a mix I am super happy with that translates well in a 'real' speaker environment, like the car, but fails miserably on a phone or laptop the way many consume their music.

[@daes5465]

The Sound of the toilet Studio IS very cold sounding even with a good sub

[@MuzdokOfficial]

@@daes5465 😂 i bet

[@saricubra2867]

​@@MuzdokOfficialI have an old pair of 3 way consumer speakers made by Panasonics They have issues with the tweeters. After doing an EQ, they sound extremely similar to the Mackie HR824 MK1 speakers that are the best ones i ever heared for now, the Genelecs are very close to those beasts. I still don't understand, why people still buy NS10s? Why?

[@rman4539]

My mixing mastering teacher used to work with standard, average, 4 pairs of hi-fi speakers, plus 4 average headphones. he made his mixings on that, going from one to another constantly, plus he was checking in his car. His philosophy : if it translates well on crappy speakers and in the car, it'll work anywhere, real people don't listen music in a calibrated studio, mixes are made for listeners, not to impress other engineers. And his mixes were awesome :)

[@lspguitar8024]

I also produce with hi-fi. Well, it's low budget time. So I just use an old Yamaha RX-V861 receiver in pure stereo mode with 3-way oval car speakers fom Kicker and a completly oversized studio subwoofer. This compilation is little bit crazy, but won’t make me lose my faith in making music. Checking the mix on many other (mono)speakers. If I buy studio monitors again, it will probably be the famous Yamaha. I was able to listen to them once and I was overwhelmed by the honesty of these speakers.

[@SunShyne_Culture]

Exactly my opinion. The best mixes are made on crappie speakers ❤

[@PaulThird]

Cool, share some of his mixes so people can hear the results

[@rman4539]

@@PaulThird Sure : Danyel Waro, Batarsité album. It's an absolute classic in my country, Reunion Island. Or Lindigo Lafrikindmada. Both are traditional music called maloya.

[@ryanjay6241]

The older I get and the more I mix, I agree with his philosophy. Obviously, having more monitoring sources is better than 1. I always use the mains, little speakers, and headphones to check how the mix is sounding in each. Listening for details on studio mains is great, but I feel sometimes you can get caught up in the "pretty" sounding low and top end and things still sound "ok" even when the mids are messy. These days, I start and do most of the mix on some crappy Yamaha bookshelf speakers that are not NS10s but similar - I think the point is there's almost no sub bass and the very high end is certainly not there. I feel like sometimes on mains, vocals can sound "ok" even when they're extremely muddy, because the sharp top end makes everything still understandable. Switching to a pair of crappy speakers (which would be similar to a car) it can become muddy and unintelligible. There's also the very well known fact, if you're mixing on large monitors, when you listen back on something without sub bass, the bass may completely disappear if it's a very smooth/sine bass with no distortion - which would mean people on smaller headphones (or laptops!) might end up missing out on a lot of the track. That's not to say you shouldn't have high quality mains. Just that you should have more than one point of reference. For me personally, I also feel like headphones are often the best reference for reverb tails - unless your room is super professionally treated, the room reverb is going to affect how they sound - especially when they're a more buried element. Look for feeling on mains, and tweak in headphones. I almost always switch to headphones at some point for critical listening to verbs.

[@cefk9944]

There's an old musician joke, that still rings true (until you have learned enough to not fall for the industry's traps): Q: As a musician .. what's the quickest way to get to $1 million? A: Well, that's very easy .. you just have to start with $2 million!

[@chrishawkes4348]

i remember the old joke as being: Q: how do you make a small fortune with a recording studio? A: start with a large one.

[@cefk9944]

@@chrishawkes4348 Maybe, because one joke is about musicians and the other is about recording studio owners. If there's no difference between the two, when it comes to money, then at least the wording of the joke has to be different ;)

[@no.7893]

I love this line of joke, my favourite from another hobby is: What's the best way to make money as a photographer? Selling your gear!

[@ScottRadkeMusic]

For anyone wondering….. the “$1m starting with $2m” joke originated with Herb Alpert (cofounder of A&M records).

[@cefk9944]

@@ScottRadkeMusic I didn't know that .. Thanks for the lore :)

[@Justin_the_Analog_IC_architect]

My own definition. If I have a speaker in my studio, it's a studio monitor. If I have a speaker in my living room, it's hi-fi.

this exactly.

[@PaulThird]

Tbh... Pretty much what the reality is these days

Not only these days. NS10s, consumer speakers, were ubiquitous in studios. Really not a studio speaker, really being a studio speaker

[@kromal92]

My brother had amazing deal for Focal Trio 6Be and bought them as home high end speakers. Why? Because they was 6-8x cheaper than similar passive home speakers with berylium tweeter. Yes, he loves them as speakers for TV and Hi-Fi. So now they are hifi speakers - not studio monitors. :D

[@kvmoore1]

What if your studio is your living room? In my case, it really is, literally!

[@BehindthesafetyofLinux]

As someone who builds speakers, the difference is in the design of the box and electronic crossover. When you are mixing, you want as true to input, as output, as possible. This takes a very specific box, driver choice, and crossover design. Most consumer speakers, even HiFi, are tuned to represent a pleasing sound. This means there are often elements of both speaker enclosure and electronic crossovers that amplify or reduce certain aspect of the sound spectrum. Basically, consumer speakers are hardware EQ's made to mimic easy listening environments. A studio monitor cares not for your comfort, as you want to hear ever detail and how it is being represented. This unfortunately, also requires a much more accurate box and crossover design. With more accuracy, comes more expense. For example, most consumer speakers will not have a impedance equalizer circuit on the crossover. This circuit is critical to keep large driver crossover points from wandering. Consumer speakers ignore this because it boosts the volume of mid range drivers and richens the whole sound stage. Think of it like raising the crossover point on your powered subwoofer. Obviously, we don't want this in a studio monitor, so that circuit has to be there. Otherwise the sound is colored.

[@rman4539]

@@BehindthesafetyofLinux every speakers are "colored". Just look at the freq responses of speakers, hi-fi or studio. None of them have the same curve. There's no definition of what should be a studio monitor target range, same for hi-fi. No industry standard specs. So why would my mixes be better on Yamaha hs8 for example, over a mix made on Focal Kanta ? What objectivly make the Yamaha studio "better" than a good Focal hi-fi pair ?

[@BehindthesafetyofLinux]

@@rman4539 Every room is colored as well. It is up to the studio to know what is right for their setup. This is why your setup should be custom built for your location. Room EQ Wizard is a great free tool to help you do this. It will allow you to see the weaknesses in your setup and allow you to make proper hardware/room changes to adjust the room response. There is no best or one speaker that works with every room. it must be custom built to the customer.

[@rman4539]

@BehindthesafetyofLinux yes, rooms are colored. But that's not the topic. The topic is about the "studio monitors", which is just a marketing term. In industries, if a specific term is used, it should come with clear specs and standards. What are the standard specs for studio monitors ? What freq curve should be aim by manufacturers ? What decay time for the dynamics ? How many speakers ? 2 ? 3 ? What cross freq ? There's no standard at all. Any manufacturer do what they want, and sell products with absolutely zero external check. "studio monitoring" means nothing IRL.

[@BehindthesafetyofLinux]

@@rman4539 The only speaker deserving of a "studio monitor" title are the speaker you have built specifically for your studio. Look into Deadmau5's (Joel's) setup. You won't find a finer example of this done locally in this area.

[@reginaldbowls7180]

I just use a digital crossover / processor for PA and time align / crossover digitally. In a three way setup I can mute each driver easily with a button.

[@somedude1901]

As long as you know what good music sounds like on your speakers, you can mix on them

[@benirodriguez9516]

Listen to lots of music on your monitors/headphones (and if possible others), and if they are "good enough" and not real crap, they should work good to work with.

[@PaulThird]

Could everyone please share their mixes when making these sorts of comments...

[@donnydarko7624]

Unfortunately you can't share links in the comments sections anymore. KZbin won't even let followers share other KZbin links anymore because of sp@mbots ​@@PaulThird

[@PaulThird]

KZbin does let you share youtube video links. You can even just comment a few of the records you have mixed so people can search 🤷‍♂️

[@donnydarko7624]

@@PaulThird idk, anytime I have tried to post any links in the last year they aren't there within minutes. 🤷

[@samprock]

I don’t need studio phones, I need bedroom and bathroom phones where I make my music 😂

[@ruudheadz7095]

lol

[@Avren1aK]

Jajajja❤

[@al.cavalu]

Also where people listen to music...

[@SimonBlandford]

The purpose of a studio is to produce a recording that sounds good on anything. The purpose of a Hi-Fi system is to make any recording sound good.

[@js78910]

Idk about that. A shit mix will sound awful on hifi set ups. I would say hi fi set ups are capable of allowing people to properly reference hifi music.

[@SimonBlandford]

​@@js78910 OK, maybe instead of "purpose" I should have put "aim".

[@dmitribovski1292]

I think Yamaha worked out the difference between HiFi & studio Monitors with the NS1000/NS1000M The differences are the HiFi ones have a much better finish. The studio monitors are black with a metal grill over the woofer to protect it from flying drumsticks, guitars...

[@astralboy]

NS1000M are in a another level.. Great

[@TrentSolo]

Great video as always. As the owner of a professional studio who has been at this for a few decades, I would agree there are no set standards. If you want to get good mixes that translate, I would just tell anyone/everyone to 1) listen to and mix their tracks against relevant professional mixes on 2) as many different headphones and speakers as possible in 3) as many different relevant environments as possible and then if necessary use 4) plugins like Metric AB to check frequencies where your gear might be lacking. Over time you'll figure out where your mix translations need work and you'll improve. Thanks for the video sir!

[@PaulThird]

👍

[@shadowkyd]

At the end of the day, it’s all about translation. Don’t forget that 90% of people are just listening on their phones/laptops (or earbuds) anyway so having a mix that sounds amazing in the studio (on whatever pair of monitors) is worthless if it sounds like ass on common commercial devices.

[@Swiftopher755]

I struggle with translation to mobile phones, does my head in ha

[@jjohnwords2873]

​​@@Swiftopher755 On your monitor/master. Put an eq on it and roll off below 500hz and above 5khz. Mix with this and keep switching between it active and inactive. will help you fix your mid range levels which is whats on most of those devices . Obviously make sure it's switched off when bouncing 😂

[@Swiftopher755]

@@jjohnwords2873 I'll dedp give that a try! Cheers

[@classicallpvault]

Absolute nonsense. The vast majority of these people own cars and have better sound systems in there than in their laptops and phones. A large portion of them will also own televisions with at the very least a sound bar. Again, a massive step up from laptop speakers or cheap earplugs.

[@shadowkyd]

@ I think you are mistaken. Maybe 90% is a slight overshoot to accentuate my point but the majority of the Tik Tok generation aren’t rolling around in cars at all nor have fancy sound systems. Audiophiles tend to forget this. The average music consumer is not listening on high quality diffusion and engineers need to be conscious of this (for better or worse).

[@Nethanieal]

There was a documentary about CCR ,and I recall John Fogerty talking about them targeting 8 track car stereos when mastering there music " most our listeners are driving down when they play our music so we wanted it to sound best in a car" . I learned that audio drivers on a PC will also make a difference. The music I make goes into youtube videos , internet. Mixing in ASIO then checking playback through windows audio drivers has helped me a lot.

[@TimTheTomato]

A good loudspeaker needs to have a flat on axis anechoic frequency response. That’s probably the first thing. Directivity is very important for the in room response which most of the time will create a sloped but flat frequency response. The drivers should also be time aligned but I think that’s obvious… and that is a requirement for best possible on axis frequency response. I hope I didn’t get this wrong. That’s what I learned from Dr Floyd Tooles book “Sound Reproduction”. I think that whole EQing Speakers to be flat in a room is the answer for why many mastering engineers think that those mixes are dull. You’re basically mixing through an upwards tilted frequency response.

[@Azathoth43]

Imagine thinking you need to spend $5k on headphones to only brick wall limit your track so a prepubescent girl can play it on her iPhone speaker.

[@PaulThird]

Welcome to the audio industry

[@adziak]

Pure stupidity

[@PeterSavad]

I mix on a Panasonic stereo that I bought in 2003. I start the mix on proper monitors, but honestly, I NEED them to really know what's happening and how things will translate. Whatever works! I'm a full time mixer btw.

[@adammassacre4715]

I used to mix using a Sony chc cl5md i got 20 years ago. Maaan i loved that thing.

[@menamestom]

I think I make most mix decisions in the car. There’s something about being removed from the mixing environment and listening in something completely different which is a great guide for where the mix is really at. Also listening on Airpod Pro’s. If it sounds good on those and in the car, it’s not far off….

[@zeljkosto]

Thnx for clarifying things ! However can you suggest 3 "your" "studio"IEMS for low,mid and high range sound?

[@380stroker]

Choose any pair of speakers. Listen to tons of music through said speakers. Get your ears used to that speaker or headphone. Now that your ears are trained to that speaker, you can start mixing music.

[@PaulThird]

Be careful with that advice though. All listening to tons of music/mixing will do is teach you about the limitations of the monitoring which is still very important but remember you can't mix what you can't hear so it's important to take that knowledge and understanding so you can evaluate what you can and can't trust. Basically what is your monitoring NOT telling you. It is very true that you should properly learn every piece of monitoring but if a piece of monitoring doesn't have good phase phase coherence, transient response or has a coloured sound etc then you will only be able to evaluate music to the design capabilities of the speaker/headphone. You'll struggle to mix compression properly if you can't properly hear your transients. You'll struggle with your low end if you can't hear it cleanly. You'll struggle with imaging if your monitoring is too forward and shouty. You can only learn what your monitoring can actually tell you

[@jjose100ify]

Very good info. I feel some people get caught up into this kind of stuff just to overcompensate for not being satisfied with their skill level/creativity. There’s always room for improvement. I’d say most amateur audio professionals can’t even hear/understand some things before implementing them which is very important

[@PaulThird]

Agreed. There is way too much of this "just learn references on any monitoring regardless of price and you can mix professionally" What about the parts of the mix that your monitoring ISN'T telling you? Nobody likes to discuss that which is very important if you want to progress your mixing. You can't mix what you can't hear

[@benirodriguez9516]

I have always had this same thinking about monitor, audiophile, headphones, etc... and also my conclusion has been: "as long it translates" I'm good! And to be also real, no matter what you're using to make your music, the onees listening, might have an entire different myriad of earphones, mobile speakers, computer speakers, headphones, car systems, etc... (and dont let me start on room sizes!!!) it will never be the same regardless of how hard anyone tries. I do own JBL 305 mk I "monitors", and Shure SRH1840 headphones. I've heard my mixes/masters sound good... and that's great to hear, but.. who knows what would anyone else, another day, say!

[@Weechoo]

I've got a pair of passive ATC SCM11's. Many people don't even consider these as studio speakers because they're advertised as HIFI speakers. Well, ATC makes it's studio version the SCM12, which has the same components, is less pretty (IMO) but costs more because they are "studio speakers". There's a studio gear store in my country (in Hungary) and they've been talking about it for years. They've got all kind of speakers what you could imagine but what they keep saying is: "Don't buy Focal, Genelec, Adam, Dyanudio or any of these, buy a passive hifi ATC and a cheap amp for about the same price if you want your mixes to translate." Reading hungarian forums many people who has heard the ATC's say that after hearing them all of these popular brands sound weird. The only complaint about the smaller closed models that they don't have a ton of low end, it's there it's just doesn't kick you in the stomach. My solution was to add some low end in sonarworks, now I've got low end. And I can hear where the kick and the bass are. I've got a B&W sub but I'm not using it since I discovered that boosting the lows in sonarworks on the ATC sound way cleaner, with faster transients, and I hear even deeper sub on them than on my subwoofer. I bought the ATC's and the amp seond hand, and paid about a grand for them. If you check out the popular brands they're not gonna be a lot cheaper than that, or if they are than they're pretty bad. And sometimes I see passive PMC's on the used market as well, they might be worth having a look also. By the way I don't know why the hype around those yamaha's, every professional who has ever heard a decent speaker says that these are rubbish, yet the internet still shills them like they're made by god from the magic eather.

[@kromal92]

+100 for used passive PMC's - they will be my next monitors (now I have 6-2's). For 20-25% of price of new actives, you can make your own with Hypex Amps and MiniDSP Crossovers + Dirac Calibration. Add or build your own 2 subs with calibration as "room modes treatment" and you are set like "the king from big studio" for relatively "small" amount of money. :D

[@domancayoutube]

I love ATCs

[@testowykana1763]

I have used Yamaha HS80s and MSP5s. I loved the MSP5, I hated the HS series. MSP series were the more pro monitors, unfortunately they didn't look at cool in the studio as the HS with white woofers and MSP series was discontinued... 😢

[@malaclypse1409]

Yeah, that AP Mastering guy is high on his own farts. Learn monitors/cans you like, and use them.

[@_mickmccarthy]

Such a bizarre character. "X is a scam, Y is a scam, Z is a scam! Btw, buy my course where I'll show you how to build speakers better that all these companies that have teams working on the design & production with decades of experience" He does make some half-decent points every now and then, but his delivery is woeful. Sounds like a conspiracy theorist half the time.

[@CreativeMindsAudio]

@@_mickmccarthyyeah exactly! Also the fact that all of it is always a call to action to buy his course or a plugin or whatever. Even if it’s ‘free’ he’s still collecting your data somehow. The speaker one was just absurd imo. If you know the content you are working on, the room, and the speakers, then you will be more than fine mixing a record. At the end of the day the success of a record is more about marketing than anything we do in the studio or the quality of the song.

[@LiquidEyes100]

"my homemade speaker is better than every ported speaker. P.S. there's no point attempting to quantify this claim, because all affordable testing methods are flawed. But it's *definitely* better" 🤩

[@peoplelikefrank]

That guy has obviously psychological issues. And 90% of the time he just talks rubbish.

[@markovchainy]

​@@LiquidEyes100 because he is an unparalleled genius (who was an obscure small time 'mastering engineer' until he started making rage bait and shilling courses)

[@ButternoteBackingTracks]

At an amateur level, without a properly treated room, you're mostly shooting in the dark. One thing I've found is a big help, regardless of whether you use 'studio' monitors or hifi speakers, is to sit them on decent, solid stands - and off of boomy shelves, or feeble, wobbly stands! Audiophiles have known for decades how huge the benefits are to speaker performance when they can function properly - especially bass and low-mid frequencies, which are most troublesome. Also, mix further back from your speaker positions. I hear so many 'professional' mixes that are too bass-heavy due to over reliance on near-field only monitoring.

[@chikindonkee]

Mix at the proper point given dimensions and volume needs* Further back doesn't always mean better response. Too far, and now you aren't "in" the mix and are simply hearing the speakers. Make sure to sit at a proper distance from your speakers. Not further back, not closer.

[@ButternoteBackingTracks]

@chikindonkee proper distance depends very much on your equipment, set-up, room size and acoustic treatments, etc. What I'm saying, really, is experiment a bit. Don't be afraid to break conventional 'rules' in the pursuit of better results. It's all subjective anyway. No such thing as a correct mix!

[@nevermind4328]

I sort of agree with you. I don't work as an engineer but I did study music production and recording. For what I do, I don't even consider "studio" monitors anymore. I didn't work too much with expensive ones or in treated rooms except for the studios I used when I was studying, but since where I live the pricings of even cheap "studio" monitors are quite high one or two of my teachers said the following, regarding this issue: ALWAYS have a reference mix, meaning that if you are, for example, recording and mixing metal, compare your mix to a finished one from Metallica, for example, on whatever monitors you are using. I find this coherent, specially if your monitors, whatever they are, and your room, whichever treatment it has or doesn't, are also where you listen to music. You know the response of those monitors in that room. You probably also know how your headphones of choice for listening to music sound and with these elements you can make a decent mix. I'm not gonna say "up to the standard" because of what you already said: What is the standard? What was the standard when Dr. Dre made his own monitoring system for what he needed to hear in his mixes? You work with what you have and, while I was one of those guys who NEEDED flat response once, now I just think that if whatever you compose, arrange, record, mix or master gets to the people who are listening to it, that's a job well done. They don't care about response curves or how did you do it, they are listening to music. And they're gonna oversaturate the low end and high end anyway with their multimedia headphones, so you might as well mix on those as long as you know that you are having exaggerated parts of the frequency and are able to compensate for it, which gets me back to the reference mix... How does Metallica sound on this cheap multimedia headphones? Can I make my mix sound the same? Of course I have different speakers and headphones to try things on and my monitors are Edifier I believe 1000R or maybe 1500R, I don't know anymore since I bought them like 16 years ago and right now it's hard to reach the back of them to see the exact model, but nothing fancy, nor flat response either; they do have a treble knob and a bass knob so I can clean them up or mess them up a bit if I need to listen to a different range... But ultimately I stick to what I said.

[@PaulThird]

The problem arises when you don't understand what your speaker is NOT telling you. You cant mix what you can't hear. The whole "learn a reference on the speaker and you'll be golden" idea lacks a lot of context. You must learn the limitations of your monitorings translation, then you know what to trust and then what to look for in other monitoring. Or alternatively you invest in more expensive monitoring that "tells you more of the truth" Try mixing the same multitrack to sound exact as you can to the final master on 3 different sets of monitoring, then you'll learn just how different speakers sound and how differing their translation is

[@jerrywemhoff]

I've used NS-10's, I've used an early 2000's Sony 2.1 consumer stereo, I've used old BOSS headphones.... I currently use DT990's because they were on sale, same with the JBL monitors. Use what you can afford and get used to it.

[@TheRealNewBlackMusic]

I have Said this once and I will say it a million times the only way to know if your mixes and your music is right is that you have to have a review of your tracks by other artist musicians and engineers who know what they are doing. You have to have more ears on the track than just yours, after you do this enough times you will know what you are doing right and wrong no matter what gear you are using. the biggest lie in audio engineering is not studio monitors it is plugins and their so called modeling. Thanks for the great video really enjoyed it.

[@PaulThird]

True, me and Ed have learned a lot about our mixes having others critique them on our podcast. It's difficult at first but it forces you to strive for better translation over time. We are both in much better places now having our mixes publicly analysed over the years

[@JamesJones-th3ml]

I think it depends on what you come from. Like me. I started with a Roland VS 1880 digital recorder LOL I also had these big home speakers Cerwin vega and Pioneer LOL I loved how it sounded on the huge speakers, but the mix sounded horrible LOL. I learned that smaller monitors were more mid range type speakers so I bought some KRK Rokits a long time ago man. Back in 1998 I think it was. I mixed on that with a PC and wound up so surprised at how everything I mixed seem to sound like it did when I listened through the monitors. I have KRK 8 Version 4 now. I don't think the Bass ports are designed the same way as the older ones. BUT like I said in another post does it make the checklist? YES they do. I raise up the speakers a bit higher than recommended to hear the bass better. Plus, I am just mixing my own music so it doesn't have to be to any standards. I just know that my mix sounds as big as Metallica! I play metal so that was important to me! Now I can mix pretty much anything through these monitors man. So I'm one who actually loves KRK... The Rokits I had back then worked well BUT these I have now are way better.

[@ddsolr80]

Good advise. Halfway thru the video and can’t wait to add this tip. REFERENCING tracks you know translate for the genre you’re working on. That’s a good starting point to inform your ear holes before starting a mix.

[@PaulThird]

👍

[@reginaldbowls7180]

This is good advice. I’m a live sound engineer and always do this while tuning a room.

[@ToXball]

I will briefly tell you about my experience. I have owned a pair of Yamaha HS80, an Avantone MixCube, RME UCX II, Beyerdynamic DT770pro for many years. I treated my room on average but it wasn't enough! SOLUTION? Since I bought the Ikmultimedia ARC Studio system and performed the monitors calibration, my life has changed. I allowed myself a very short period to learn to listen with calibrated audio and today my mixes are faster and easier in decisions and translate well everywhere. I calibrated my listening to -80db VU on a K-20 scale metering monitoring. I use the DT770 only for temporary analytical listening of details that can escape the monitors, while the Avantone helps me a lot in important decisions in the medium frequency spectrum. Today I have come to the conclusion that a well-treated and quiet room is not enough because it will always have its problems, a good calibration is essential, it becomes easier to choose the compressor, the equalizer, the reverb and the image depth. Advice: don't postpone the acoustic treatment and monitor calibration ;)

[@zaa-flips-it]

Im not a professional at mixing or mastering. Ive been at it for about 8 months now and my mixes are finally becoming decent, last month i found pair of Caliphone headphones with the mono/stereo switch and volume switches on both ears at goodwill....they're meant to test childrens hearing at schools... $2.00 and i created my best mix yet with them the other day. I was blown away😂

[@DeejayRach0]

Wow

[@PaulThird]

Care to share the mix?

[@PhoenixSkullStudios]

the whole point of studio monitoring is to hear an accurate representation of the audio that has been recorded. that way while mixing, if you hear an instrument that sounds too muddy or too thin, it will be because they actually do sound that way (not just sounding that way because of accentuated frequencies on the monitoring system). but with all that said, I agree with the fact that there are many different "studio monitors" that are not flat on purpose (more top end = clarity, or more low end = power). people fall for those gimmicks, and I think an accurate audio monitoring setup for audio mixers/engineers is important. but, the frequency response doesn't need to be perfectly flat, just close enough. there doesn't need to be absolutely zero distortion, just little enough. to conclude, I think that the difference between consumer audio monitoring and studio audio monitoring is that studio audio monitors are 'more' accurate than consumer grade, but still not perfectly accurate. I personally mix and produce on a pair of Sennheiser HD 280 pros. they are fairly flat frequency response and low distortion, but not perfectly accurate. the 280s have slightly boosted upper mids, and reduced sonic-high frequencies. even with a few little inaccuracies, the Sennheiser HD 280 pros are an industry standard, and have been since their release in 2003. to long to read: as long as studio monitors don't sound like absolute dog sh!t, they will do fine for mixing/audio production.

[@PaulThird]

HD280 are industry standard for mixing??

[@Sashik]

I've just recently discovered your channel, and after watching this video and scrolling down, I noticed that the number of subscribers doesn't correlate with the quality and experience you share. Wishing you all the best!

[@PaulThird]

The accent and not being from the US holds you back. Shouldn't make any difference but sadly it does

[@Sashik]

it's a weird comparison, but remember PewDiePie? Do you think his audience was bothered by his accent? I think not. If you mean in terms of the algorithm, I believe there's more to it than that, possibly something entirely different that you may not be aware of or of what you have been suspicious about. You create great, informative content, and I hope you stay true to your interests and keep going. All the best

[@PaulThird]

I've just had A LOT of comments about how people can't understand my accent. Like thousands over the years. Add that to my content style which is very geeky and dense. It's not as accessible as others. Pewdie Pie for example made very wide spread content in one of the most popular genres in KZbin existence I make in depth geeky content about audio with a very thick Scottish accent. Always gonna be a challenge haha The US thing is an algorithm bonus for many creators. For UK guys, there is definitely a cap for whatever reason. We don't know why but it's just way slower for us to build big audiences. Look at Worral. Took him like 5+ years to get past 100k subs. Michael from in the mix is the exception to the rule but it's mainly because he has been around for so long and is so calmly spoken and slow in his delivery. That and his content being very focused on beginners which opened him up early doors. There are multiple reasons as to why I don't have more subs but the views per video are more in line with a much higher subscriber count if you look at average views for audio channels around 100k

[@Sashik]

@@PaulThird I've made a reply to this, but it seems it got filtered. If you find time, I guess you will be able to find it in a kind of filtered category

[@henrydebruijn2259]

99% of the consumers does not listen to good speakers or phones and mostly the speakers are not left and right before them. They place them where there is place in their room.

[@TeslaOsiris]

I have no problems mixing on beyerdynamic headphones. Once you get familiar with them versus known goods, it’s no issue. And they are by far and away the most comfortable design for my head that I can wear them for long periods.

[@JocelynBrisebois-gk1uc]

Hello everyone what about the Sennheiser HD-600 controlled by Sonarworks reference ID for Studio, or could you please recommend something in headphones domain because the room treatment is a nightmare and costly. Thank You

[@PaulThird]

Hifiman Ananda nano tuned to harman. No sonarworks, manual eq. Thank me later

[@JocelynBrisebois-gk1uc]

​@@PaulThirdI ordered it so I will thank you soon. And about Sonarworks, they don't have a profile already done for this model. Oh and what do you mean by tuned to Harman?

[@JocelynBrisebois-gk1uc]

Ok i just find your video about the Harman curve so i will study your video to make my technology transfer from sonar to Harman. See you.

[@adziak]

@ Perception of certain freq area changes at different volume levels so harman curve does to. With this applied mixing can be tricky.

[@PaulThird]

It's not tricky. Eq to harman, set your headphone levels to between 80-85db SPL-C and mix. Ensure you always have consistent level when mixing. Mixing on headphones is only as complicated as you allow it to be

[@agirotto1]

I'll just leave my 2 cents here: my mixing speakers are the ones I use to listen to music. I think familiarity and translation are key here. I just know how music is supposed to sound through my speakers. As good or bad yours might be, get used to them. Then to check translation, use whatever you have. When I'm doing this, I start by listening to a couple reference songs then listen to my own mix, to check if anything pops out. My "mix-checking system" include a few headphone monitoring plugins (Waves Abbey Road and Hornet I dunno its name), then 3 different cheap earbuds (I upload the mixed track to soundcloud), one boomier, one super thin and one quite mid-heavy, then I listen on my phone's own speaker, then a JBL Go, and finally in my car. A couple years ago I came to realize that my car's system is actually not wired to stereo, and that caused my hard-panned distorted guitar to sound tiny. If anything pops out, I take notes and try the balance the impressions. Again, when you're familiar with how music should sound on those equipments, things open up. Checking in mono is also very important.

[@gadget348]

One of the early fifties rock stars, unfortunately I've forgotten which, used to mix his record and then use a small AM transmitter to broadcast it to his car radio outside the studio too listen to it 'as his audience would hear it'... Whoever mixed your absolutely favourite track was the last person to hear it as it was intended to be heared, even if you own the same 50K speakers and amplifier and have borrowed the master tape and player, unless you are listening in the booth it was mixed in, the room you are now in will add it's own flavour to the soundscape. The point of good music is it should 'transcend' the playback method and inspire listeners everywhere.

[@Burbah]

I've found out that what makes my mixes translate best is to use as many kinds of systems as I can. I have two old Peerless speakers in my living room that can sound good playing professionally mixed releases, but often they are the ones that most prominently distinguish between the quality of my mixes and the professional ones, and I don't know why but I work hard to make it sound as close as it can be to them. If you can use many systems, even lofi headphones or old laptop speakers, all of that will be great as it would reveal different things you didn't hear before about your mix. If on each of these systems you'll be referencing with a professional and appropriate track, you'll get closer to where you want. Also remember that regarding dynamics processing, a low volume is better for hearing the envelope.

[@akagerhard]

Look at that! There'll always be stuff to debunk, no matter what you focus on/what stage of the journey you're on. Insane how it performed! Love to see it.

[@MaxRayMusic]

Which headphones do you recommend I use for the most accurate mixing and mastering experience?

[@PaulThird]

Hifiman. Arya organic is really good middle ground of everything

[@VIGGENMUSIC]

All i want is something that sounds natural, and comfortable for my ears. I have Sennheiser Hd600 headphones, and i didnt like them until i EQ'd them to my liking, now i have no problems mixing with them :) I bought Adam Audio T8V's now aswell, even though i read forums of people saying "not good for mixing bla bla" .. i liked how it sounded, and it didnt put me off, it felt like i had known these speakers for years, thats the feeling im going for. Natural for my ears :)

[@projectnemesi5950]

Any speaker or headphone that makes an EFFORT to accurately and acoustically reproduce the frequency spectrum of a signal should be considered a professional monitoring device. Any speaker or headphone that is designed to enhance the production, mixing, and mastering of music should be considered a studio monitoring device. The reason to make this distinction is that certain headphones that simulate environments for studio monitoring are intentionally not trying to be flat to enhance productivity, like the VSX.

[@bcj842]

This isn't calling me out for having DT990s and HS5s. All you need is something decent that can tell you where it Hertz. Knowing your equipment is more important than how much you paid for it.

[@dolittle6781]

Agreed! There’s a lot of jargon-based doublespeak in this industry. Glad you are calling it out. Seems there are a few basic standards out there just enough to keep things from getting too crazy.

[@19501960]

I go by Joe Meek, the first studio DIY’re. And the first to have A UK number one hit in the USA “ If it sounds good, it is good “ Ears baby ears.

[@firewerk66]

as ive told my clients over and over for 35+ years, "Its not the gear, its the people in the studio."

[@PaulThird]

👍

[@kromal92]

+10

[@gtrdrumsplayerduarte]

Tell that to the marketing people and tell that to the marketed public. Marketing is good now people don't want the truth.

[@myfriendharrison4348]

1 a : the working place of a painter, sculptor, or photographer b : a place for the study of an art (such as dancing, singing, or acting) 2 a : a place where movies are made b : a company that produces movies 3 : a place maintained and equipped for the transmission of radio or television programs 4 : a place where audio recordings are made

[@Hermetiqs]

what i do is to adjust with parametric EQ my studio speakers with pink noise and sinewave sweep, until i feel a very sweet pink noise very full, the max volume that my speaker can do after that without distortion is much less but my mixes translates much more stable now.

[@WessNyleProduction]

This is all so extra. Most of what you’re saying I don’t disagree with, but you didn’t mention the most important factor. The best monitors are the ones that the engineer has been working on long enough to be familiar with. I’d take a guy mixing in HS8’s or KRKs that he’s worked on for 5+ years over a guy working on some Barefoots he just got yesterday 10/10 times. You don’t need 4 sets of speakers either.lol get a pair of whatever you can afford, set them up properly, treat your room as good as you can, and get used to them. You can reference your mix on headphones, home stereos, car tests, etc.

[@PaulThird]

The whole purpose of the video is let the results make your decision. If you need 1 monitor, you need 1. You need 2, you need 2, you need 3... etc etc as long as the results are what you are after and your clients are happy then it doesn't matter what so and so say on the Internet You can work on a certain pair of monitors for 5 years+ and then all of a sudden realise that it's not translating for you any more and you try or move to something else. Happened tons of times. Clearmountain was on NS10 for decades. Now they sit in a cupboard. Pretty sure Dynaudio is his main monitor of choice now. Pensado was NS10, then KRK and now Amphion. As Dave said himself, that he was told by Jaycen Joshua, To mix modern records you have to mix modern tools. It's not a fact or anything but it goes to show how important it is to keep an eye on your results as technology adapts. Spike was KRK for the longest time. Tried PMC for a bit, then barefoot and has now settled on Neumann KH120 I believe with a sub. Still references on his vintage KRK but mainly sticks to his Neumanns. The best engineers I know base everything on their results and are adaptable enough to know when THEY need something else. So I would argue you have to be careful with the whole familiar thing as sounds can change over time. Even look at Schepps, I read he's moved from Sony to Audeze now.

[@DavidRavenMoon]

This is the answer. It’s also what I posted.

[@crysstoll1191]

Agreed, i would trust an engineer using crap speakers that she has been using for years. It's odd watching some people upgrade their monitors every year or two. Admittedly, if someone gave me a set of $10k monitors, i would take them, but, i would trust my not too fancy old loudspeakers that i've been using for a decade and a half to get better results until i really knew the sound of the newer set.

[@homo192]

And what about someone working on some Barefoots they used for 5+ years, knowing them in and out? This whole "crap you know" over "professional monitors you're new to" thing is an odd comparison and therefore no argument at all. You should now your monitors, regardless if they have been cheap or expensive.

[@neoillogic]

i'm not an audio-engineer but have recently started studying so I can mix my own music, and there's a thing mentioned in "Recording Studio Design" by Philip Newell. With a standard stereo speaker, if you're relatively close to your set, the mono part of your signal will reach your left and right ears at a different time (different distances) creating cancellations. And that's around 1.5khz (adjust with distance, 1/2wavelength being ~12cm). I did a quick calculation with speakers at 2m of distance and you sitting at ~1.5m of the plane of the speakers, with 20cm between your ears, you get a nice cancellation at 1.5kHz. This doesn't happen on headphones (because they're not stereo...) and the cancellation is pushed way higher frequency-wise when you're far from your speakers, even more when you get closer and past the critical distance for your setup. This might be the reason why these 1k5hz boosts popped up.

[@PaulThird]

No it's a tuning thing. What you are talking about is room interference. Cancellation is destructive interface where direct and reflected sounds which have reversed polarity meet eachother. That causes a null ie dip in the frequency response Boosts are called constructive interface which is where direct and reflected sound meet in phase. You need reflections to cause interference. Speaker measurements are normally in an anachoic chamber which removes any room interference from the equation. The timing differences in regards to cancellation or interference needs to be reflection based as the interference can only occur when the same signal meets itself. So low end being mono up to say 80-100hz will have to no causal affect on any upper frequency in regards to build up or cancellation Timing differences is what we call phase coherence. Good phase coherence is when all frequencies meet our ear at the same time. That's why I said that making a 4 driver speaker would be incredibly difficult to nail due to having 4 drivers producing different frequencies and all needing to reach the ear at the same time

[@thewaldfe9763]

It's quite interesting how little definition for reference monitoring exist! Nothing from SMPTE, ITU, EBU either? For imaging/video there are of course issues like metamerism, colours that look differently on different display technologies, even though they measure the same for example - but generally, standards do exist. And even if people say, consumers will watch it on terrible, uncalibrated screens - yes they do, but you never know how / in which direction these are wrong, so mastering on a calibrated display will keep the error as small as possible, so it still makes sense. Would be good to have some standard set for audio as well.

[@PaulThird]

🤓

[@TimTheTomato]

A good loudspeaker needs to have a flat on axis anechoic frequency response. That’s probably the first thing. Directivity is very important for the in room response which most of the time will create a sloped but flat frequency response. The drivers should also be time aligned but I think that’s obvious… and that is a requirement for best possible on axis frequency response. I hope I didn’t get this wrong. That’s what I learned from Dr Floyd Tooles book “Sound Reproduction”.

[@DarioServenti]

One thing: reference track. If you use reference, your headphones or monitors will give you the same "color" both to your mix and your reference track. This tip to me is a game changer... I know it's not THE solution, but it helps.

[@PaulThird]

It does help but your monitors can still lie to you when referencing. That's why I did the whole "mix the same record on various speakers" test. Proved to me just how important getting the right speakers for your room is

[@zblip22]

My best mixes were done on first generation KRK passive speakers from the 90s which were powered by a 150$ consumer amp. These KRK 7000 speakers used Focal parts which were hi-fi parts. It just sounded good. After a couple of years the foam started to rot away on the speakers so I swithched to another passive speaker Athena. These were good quality bookshelf speakers which sounded perfect to my ears.. you are right, at the end of the day, we just need dependable, well balanced and good sounding monitors, and if hi-fi gear does the job, then why not use them.

[@PaulThird]

Think that's the speakers Spike has... Maybe the 9000 and not 7000

[@zblip22]

@PaulThird Yes the 9000 were great speakers also👍

[@SkeadFerdinandMusic]

I've gone for KRK classic 7 and getting great mixes from them after not wanting them since they say it is not pro studio but many huge successful dance music producers using them. I do not like flat sounding monitoring. Nobody out there is listening music through flat sounding speakers or headphones. Flat monitors just make it more balanced when mixing but not needed. I'm not sure about older KRK's but got the newer 7'' classics. Love it. I could not mix on the Behringer Truths. Getting much better mixes on my Krk's vs my munro Sonics.

[@barwixmusic]

There's some good stuff in this video, but it feels a little negative. To me the video sounds like "I struggle mixing on KRKs, Yamaha HS and so do these mastering guys, by the way you can mix on £5,000 headphones which are considered Hi-fi". I feel like the alternatives in what different speakers and setups aren't really discussed well, at least in similar price bracket! I agree about the KRKs being very bass heavy to mix on, and struggle with that, I prefer my HS5s for that reason. I'm happy for you to state reasons for audio changing being room, speaker position and seating position. But this video doesn't really mention cost of Equipment, which is a really big thing to think about with smaller "studios". Generally like your content though, enjoyed the thoughts anyway!

[@PaulThird]

Because it's too subjective and I haven't tried every speaker. That's why the result of the video is to experiment and use your results as the reason to buy or keep. Every speaker has its limitations in some way or other and add a room into that.. Just too variable. I can't account for every variable. That's up to the user to figure out People need to learn to be less told what to do and start focusing on their end result as apposed to being fixed on what others do with their own skillset, perception & room variables. The £5000 headphone comparison was intentionally used to showcase how irrational the whole studio and hifi thing is. It's proof that it's all just labels slapped on by manufacturers and distributors to force a certain to a certain target demographic The notion that a cheaply built dynamic headphone with a hifi tuning can be classed as studio more than a well designed £5000 planar with a studio tuning.. It's just completely irrational

[@lee1210mk2]

Only two things I worry about is transient and frequency response. Anything else can be corrected further by software. Everything after that is getting to know your monitoring equipment.

[@perberglund-bass6819]

When I listen to loudspeakers/headphones with ”flat” frequency response I usually find them boring. That makes me prefer loudspeakers/headphones I really like listening to, despite the fact that they don’t have a flat response. This mean that when I mix with a flat response loudspeaker/headphone I will most probably tweak the sound to be similar to how it sounds using my not flat loudspeakers/headphones. So, the consequense will be that the mix may get e.g. a high frequency boost, and this will not happen if I mix with my preferred not flat loudspeakers/headphones. I think the strive for flat response assume that we have absolutely no hearing loss, which is very often not the case. Therefore, loudspeakers/headphones that compensate for your hearing loss probably will be your preferred choise, and there is nothing wrong about that. I would be interested to hear your comments! 😊

[@PaulThird]

Flat in speakers is normally too bright for most. Me included. Even with a relatively flat speaker response I still tune them with a slight low shelf bump and a broad high shelf dip. I sometimes shelve 2-3db all the way down to 2k so I have more of a far field response.

[@riklionheart23]

I’m coming up to 20 years using my Mackie Mk-1 HR824’s. My ears/brain are tuned to them and I know from experience what will translate to the real world.

[@Featherlightstudio]

The best defense against mixes that dont translate well is a good commercial reference in the genera. From Genlecs and Barefoot's to Krk's and Yamaha, the person who knows their speakers in the room they know well with a good commercial reference will always trounce the newbie with a brand new Sweetwater credit card.

[@smartwerker]

😂😂😂 not true there are tons of musicians making millions outside this lane 😂

[@vinylmastersgr1036]

Thank you my friend for the video!I am from Greece, I am not a musician, I know people that have this job (sound engineers etc)!They say that is basic studio monitoring and they want to make masters (for big companies) with templates of international commercial music so bassy with barely higs and extremely loud with True Peak over +2 or +3 and -7LUFS integrated, because they say that companies like most the songs to be bassy and extremely loud with hard drums, to be more audible in mobile phones, tablets, little earphones etc.

[@MaximusNYC]

You've just got to understand the characteristics and limitations of whatever monitoring system(s) you're using. When I finally got around to researching the frequency response curve of the monitoring headphones I've used for years (Sony MDR-7506s), it was a great revelation. I suddenly understood the problems I kept running into with my mixes, and was able to correct for them in a more systematic and consistent way.

[@PaulThird]

Correct

[@peterheinen6110]

My KRK rokit were alright for a bit of mixing. But my room is really small, and trying to master was very frustrating. My AKG k702 came to the rescue, together with Reaper. As an advanced (semi pro) mixer, i now am happy. Thx for the excellent video. For relaxed listening, i have wharfedales that date back to 1972 (great stuff) and hifiman 400 se - i can even fall asleep with those❤😂

[@shevyjohn9308]

Krk are worst imo better off with yamaha or focal or others

[@jimamsden]

Maybe "studio" simply means often used in studios - with the output of typically, consistently producing mixes that translate well on the systems the end up getting played on in the marketplace? I have the Yamaha HS8 and HS10W. It's nice to know that these are overly bright and could result in dull mixes on translation. But my ears are so bad that this extra brightness might actually help me make mixes that translate OK. Very informative video. Really helped me understand the compromises, and perhaps the importance of referencing.

[@mrteafiend3851]

I literally hammered like and subscribe when I heard "All you need to do is get the speakers in the fucking room..." probably the best advice for monitoring in your own space, especially if it's a bedroom setup like mine.

[@spocktheripper]

What kind of edifiers are you using?

[@PaulThird]

S3000 mk2

[@ardierr.2525]

What do you think about audiosciencereview? I like it to have informations but..what they define good or bad is absolute not useful for me

[@PaulThird]

Take it for what it is. Extra context behind what you hear. A lot of the distortion measurements may be a bit OTT as he likes to stress test a lot by using 94db SPL and above but it's pretty good for checking if something has a specifc design flaw. ASR is a really good resource for headphone amps in my opinion.

[@MuzdokOfficial]

Agree​@@PaulThird

[@MuzdokOfficial]

Apmastering told me heaphones amp makes no difference i told him that its proven facts

[@PaulThird]

Doesn't surprise me

[@MuzdokOfficial]

@@PaulThird 😂. I told him maybe you have an expensive interface because most interfaces have shit headphones amp in them. how can he claim to build better speakers if he doesn't know or care about impedance and all that👀

[@jaydy71]

I'd say that having a hyped top-end definitely means that it sounds "more detailed". High frequencies *are* the details in the frequency spectrum by pure definition. But "more detailed" doesn't mean that it's better, it just means having more details. The result could lead to the proverbial "not seeing the forest for the trees", which is obviously not a good thing. Anyway, when it comes to "studio versus HiFi", it's just different products for different uses. Some design decisions will generally make more sense in a studio, other design design decisions make more sense in the living room. But personally I mix that stuff up all the time. For example I have a pair of Adam A7X in my living room, which was obviously not its design target. But they're very enjoyable to listen to there. Another example is that I have a number of headphones, but for my mixing tasks I keep coming back to an old pair of consumer grade Sony headphones that were marketed for having an extended bass. They're not designed with mixing tasks in mind (obviously), but they just work for me the best for mixing on headphones. Super comfy to wear and to listen to, and my mixes happen to translate the best when using those (but your mileage may vary).

[@Fograys]

I was glad to see some reference to Audio Science Review and particularly your impression of the Dan Clark Stealth headphones. That demonstrated to me that you follow the current science in speaker measurements so you are not just another subjective audio reviewer. In my mind the best you can do is get a speaker with the flattest anechoic response (in addition to off axis) and then proceed to finding the best room location. Then install acoustic treatment as much as you can afford and finally do some room eq measurements, mostly below 500hz, and go from there. Measuring and eqing above 500 or so hz is frustrating as you'll notice the smallest change in microphone placement will radically change your measurements. After that spend lots of time listening to your setup with the usual reference recordings to give you a baseline for "normal". Listening on other playback systems is ok but can also be confusing. How can you predict what a potential listener has for a room, speakers, etc? You can easily be chasing your tail at that point.

[@sideast]

I've known of engineers winning mix competitions using Dt770 headphones 😂

[@PaulThird]

It's a subjective world. If you can make them work, you can make them work

[@blaise1111]

Are you able to provide links to their mixes for reference? That would be incredibly helpful.

[@sideast]

@ yea it's over on Dave Pensado's site

[@FeelingPoyChina]

amazing video I use a thing called PRAT Pace, Rhythm and Timing basically what it means is if it has a pleasant decay speed without being too muddy or too analytical to my ears Imma use it in studio and in living room

[@JAHWH00]

I use Rokit 5's. People love my mixes. The end. Infinite love and gratitude from Colorado!

[@PaulThird]

Cool. Post a link or name some specific tracks so people can check them out!

[@mariolex4525]

Thank you for your truly interesting video! I hope you’ll make one about those awful new modern plugins as well. I believe you’d have a lot to say about those plugins! Launchers for every plugin, advertising bazaars, CPUs clogged with nonsense, and terrible sound quality. You raise very interesting questions and make it clear how thought-provoking the topic is. After all, good common sense is all it takes to create a great mix and, above all, to develop your own personalized sound. Please, make a video about the new generation of plugins. Given your critical perspective, this topic definitely deserves your attention! Thanks again, and keep up the great work!

[@coolwatersmusic]

Paul….God bless you man…from a 56 year old songwriter/producer/audio tech that has been working in the music industry in one aspect or another, the information and the principles behind what you conveyed in this video (in my opinion & based on my experience) is some of the best advice IVE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE !!!

[@PaulThird]

👍

[@ici.a]

As long as you understand what your speakers are doing to your audio before it hits your ears you can make good mixes. It doesn’t matter how much they cost although more expensive monitors help. Acoustically treat your room and you will be able to pinpoint differences between speakers, then make the decision from there. I mix on a cheaper pair of semi-open back Samson 850r headphones then reference my mixes on some acoustic research bookshelf’s. As long as you can trust what’s coming out your speakers you’re good. I like my mixes, clients are happy with them. Don’t go down the gear rabbit hole. Save money for your future.

[@McSlobo]

I have a feeling that Beyerdynamics are popular in studio work because they work and they're sturdy and affordable, don't sound special but won't sound bad too. And you can have them closed so your drummer can use them too and actually hear something.

[@PaulThird]

Wouldn't say that. My Dt770's died on me after 2-3 years. First the left headphone started crackling and then both went completely.

[@musicplaylists59]

so what speakers in that price range do you recommend?

[@PaulThird]

What price range 🤷‍♂️

[@musicplaylists59]

@@PaulThird well you opened the video by saying you specifically dont recommend yamaha hs range or krk rokits, so i meant ones equivalent to those obviously. Although those speakers do vary by a few hundred quid depending on the model; so that general price range

[@musicplaylists59]

@@PaulThird btw i dont want to seem like i was being demanding and also ignoring the point of your video lol, i appreciated the interesting info about all the variables that make a speaker good or bad for mixing and how "studio monitors" is basically a marketing term, but i was just curious if you did have any recommendation for more affordable level speakers for mixing, off the top of your head 😊

[@zionjaymes4415]

I find all the criticism of the Yamaha HS series really interesting... I mix on a pair of HS7's myself. They're definitely brighter than my car, or the sound bar in my living room. But they don't seem overly bright to me. So far everything I've made on them translate quite well. It could be that I'm used to mixing a bit bright, since I've struggled with dark and dull mixes in the past. Or that I switched over to them from KRK RP5s, which seemed much brighter in comparison. This video is making me consider switching though...

[@anythingsimple1125]

I agree. But another point would be that we hear and perceive things differently. The biggest thing that makes me question KZbinrs is when they claim to be professionals and then turn around and say you “need this” or you can’t use “this” for professional songs. They use gear as a crouch. They come off as someone who thinks that gear today is the same as two or three decades ago. But imo. It might be because they get better gear and more experience and level up as professionals but they attribute that to the gear and not their hard work and skill. I just don’t trust them that much as I like to think for myself.

[@PaulThird]

I did say that in the video tbf that we have different ear canals and varying cognitive perceptions Sound is too subjective to pin a standard on

[@SamHocking]

@@PaulThird The entire music industry seems largely unaware that hearing perception is not flat; it changes dynamically over time. The brain is constantly adjusting to create a stable auditory experience regardless of what speaker or headphone you are using and the manufactures known that. I'd bet 99% of studio monitors and headphone purchases are made seeking a solution to simply human hearing isn't static at all, your speakers and headphones are though so stick with them, stop buying, stop changing models, stop seeking perfection because hearing is one big random perception continually changing perceived frequencies - an unwinnable game basically.

[@PaulThird]

I agree on chasing perfection being pointless but the monitoring journey taught me a lot about how I listen and what I like and don't like

[@kromal92]

Better gear really helps getting better results faster and level up as professionals. Really, this is very simple. You can get good results and "level up" on "cheap" gear, but still - on better gear you will get it A LOT faster. ;)

[@niccster1061]

For a speaker to be accurate, it MUST have linear directivity index ON TOP of a flat on axis anechoic response. It is the DIRECTIVITY INDEX. It is the EARLY REFLECTIONS. Its all of the OTHER measurements on a spinorama that dictate how a speaker will sound IN YOUR ROOM.....

[@HkaNBeats]

Yes thank you translation is king, I personnaly got my work to translate better when I switched to Logic Pro (worled on FL before) and I placed myself far from my speakers, recent testing I did made me think that a slight hyped bass response increase the masking potentiality of elements on each others and some of my favorite engineers & beatmakers work on monitorings that have a hyped bass response. I also made a Pro MB preset that expands lows & compress mediums/highs, I use it sometime as verification step, helps unmask elements more and find the limit of the arrangement. I use Audio Reference 86DC speakers

[@bobbyjarsulic862]

Paul! Speaking so much truth. Love it. For checking soundstage, lows, and transients - Ananda Nano, Dan Clark Aeon RT Open, or something else?? Trying to balance out Kalis in a subpar room.

[@PaulThird]

Ananda nano

[@bobbyjarsulic862]

@PaulThird great, they're on the way along with a SMSL MDA1! Excited to reference on something other than Shure 940s... Btw, if you want a backup set... HiFiMAN has an extra $50 off their certified open box cans right now. $350+tax out the door.

[@danemusic5242]

been using hs5 pair for at least 15 years there not for listening with highs and lows, you boost the mids and turn down the highs and lows they become like auratones in the sense you can see the center with little fluff they will sound bad but it makes the mid range a more delicate place were problems stick out like soar thumbs. i never used a sub some how you ears wont let add too much sub being it will lower the volume of your mids in the mix and anything too high cant pass thru the mids without being noticed.

[@richardmerriam7044]

If you're accustomed to "Hi Fi", listening to studio monitors is like drinking warm flat beer. They are made to be flat so imperfections in the mix will be noticeable. "Hi Fi" emphasizes the bass and treble to artificially color the sound. I've owned true 'studio grade' headphones and liked them a lot, but other people hated them.

[@Olyrous]

How is that supposed to help? Both music listeners and music producers would benefit from establishing a standard both can calibrate to. The flat frequency/uncoloured tonality seems to be the obvious choice for what should be the standard. Obviously speakers will interact with the room, and their design and materials play a part in these interactions, but it's always easier to calibrate to flat a speaker that is already tuned to be flat than a speaker that has peaks and valleys independent of the room. For studio work, sometimes you might want to use speakers that accentuate or focus on particular frequency ranges, but when it comes to the overall picture, what the music listener will hear, you should revert to a flat, transparent speaker/room combo as much as possible. It worries me that so many people producing music appear to be confused about what constitutes a good monitor speaker or even a good sounding album, but it explains why a lot of records sound so bad. I wish more of them would accept the flat frequency speaker/room as the gold standard and optimise for good hi-fi systems capable of lots of dynamics, rather than portable devices that are going to sound shit anyway - by optimising for them you just make them sound a little less shitty, while you rob people of a proper Hi-Fi experience on a capable system. See Carlifornication by Red Hot Chilli Peppers as an example of an album robbed of its dynamics.

[@AaronAlso]

As a 20 year veteran of audio engineering, mixing and mastering, I'm finally glad to hear I can throw my Presonus S6 monitors out and just use the crappy bookshelf speakers that came with my first computer in 1995. What a relief...... In all seriousness, an experienced audiophile knows that the industry is littered with marketing wank. For real, who thinks a $5000 power cable is going to be worth a barely perceptible increase in clarity? Just go get a studio transformer. I use an a,b,c comparison method. Big loud studio monitors w/sub, a small pair of bookshelf/desktop coaxials, and a quality pair of headphones. When the recording gives a pleasant listening experience in all 3 sources, you are pretty much there.

[@PaulThird]

Yeah audiophile cables are proper snake oil.

[@AaronAlso]

@PaulThird I'm gonna add to your little survey.... I was never really impressed with the HS range either. I know they get a lot of hype but they just didn't have the sonic presence I expected. My first ever "studio monitors" where the Behringer Truth series, I tried them all. They left me very disappointed, and sent me on a decade long quest for the "best" monitors; within a reasonable price range (Genelec, is 110% BS). When I heard the Presonus Sceptre series I was surprised. Not a paid add, but my S6's have served me very well for many many years, would very strongly recommend for most users: buy once, cry once.

[@cassio_zambotto]

I agree with everything, I even agree that Yamaha's HS series are hard to work with, specially the bigger ones, it shouldn't be hard, but it is. 15 Years ago I started studying acoustics, treat my room seriously and really learned my hs50m to a laser focus degree (you have to dim the high trim to -2db, it is too bright). I think this whole process trained my ears to a level of perception that I didn't even knew I could reach, because nowadays I rarely have any translation problems, recalls or anything like that, I really learned how to deal with it (and I also use headphones to check subs). When I work in good rooms with more expensive monitors I don't feel much of a difference from my setup, which is weird, may be just my case. But when I listen to amazingly expensive near field monitors in bad rooms it always sounds terrible, I feel like the room is way more important than the speakers for myself.

[@PaulThird]

Getting the room right is half the battle

[@jyryhalonen4990]

Which affordable headphones would you recommend for mixing instead of the beyerdynamic 990/770?

[@PaulThird]

Hifiman sundara

[@CamariMusic]

We are all fighting the marketing machines. We need to to try gear as you said. I would not have tried the Topping E4x4 without hearing your opinion. I’ve used VSX for years and heard the translation to other systems and I am good to go

[@PaulThird]

👍

[@anatol1204]

For me the most important is the tracking session there is where mix starts.What closed headphone you use for tracking apart of Sundara?

[@PaulThird]

Ollo S5X. Probably buy a few sony's just for spares

[@anatol1204]

@PaulThird these are open 👀 you track with open heads ????There are also the new Focal Lensys have you heard them they are closed for studio work

[@PaulThird]

They are open back but have very good isolation. Better than some closed backs for whatever reason. I was using them on the podcast for a long time

[@anatol1204]

@@PaulThird thanks I knew them but not as a tracking headphone..noone mentioned that .Thanks for the answer keep up the good work.Your videos are very interesting they differ from the most others 👍

[@williamshaneblyth]

How people who listen to music listen is very important. Most people now days don’t listen on speakers they listen on EarPods of some sort and various headphones while in the car or walking about. Those options are extremely important to mix on so it’s easy to miss how the vast majority listen to your songs

[@pedroleal3543]

I have a m50xstreamercast ( i was thinking abt enjoying the microphone too) but i was disappointed with the audio quality. Im a guitarrist, do you guys have any recomendations especificaly? Thanks yall Edit: i think the headphone have a very low volume too wich i can make it higher no matter what…

[@BernardShreveJr]

The missing details and explanation to tracking, mixing, and mastering on headphones, speakers, and "the room": All "side stepped" by AP Mastering. Although, I have to say- I really want to "hear" a song on a set of $65,000 headphones with matching amp. 🤪 P.S. I believe I am the first in the U.S. to own and consider reviewing the Topping E8x8 Pre Audio Interface. It is an awesome value with a 10-20% improvement over my MOTU M4 running Cubase 14 Pro.

[@PaulThird]

👍👍

[@jaredhouseman2094]

Please do make a review. I'm on the edge about buying one right now. I'll probably go for the e2x2. I'm hoping they'll make a pro+ next year with even better converters, headphone amps, and more io like adat

[@PaulThird]

I've already reviewed E8X8 & E4X4

[@HR2635]

I just wanna hear a mix That AP wannabe did. Not succeeded in finding anything from that stupid f.

[@PaulThird]

Emrah found something that said he had 17 credits. music.apple.com/gb/album/strangers-and-you/1647463140?i=1647463141&ls Think he mastered that

[@MisterStone-bb8bn]

Great vid. Straight forward and no filters. A vid for thoughts.

[@PaulThird]

👍👍

[@cotydavismusic]

My very first studio 'monitors' was a set of computer surround sound speakers. Cheap ones. It worked just as well as you think it would

[@JohnVITW]

A Studio Monitor is simply what you use in your studio to monitor recordings. As simple as that. Reference? The original sound of the performance at the recording venue, if a live event, or what your final mix sounds like through the speakers you use. There will always be techno speak, but our ears are the best judge. To me the matter is this simple.

[@ffsireallydontcare]

There was a standard for studio monitors, it was designed by the BBC and licensed out to a number of manufacturers, the LS3/5A. Even though a number of different companies were licensed to make the speakers, they all used the same KEF drivers, same materials and same crossover network, so they all were similar (if not identical) in their sonic characteristics. They weren't flat but, excluding room acoustics, you could be confident of having a very similar sound signature from studio to studio leading to predictability from facility to facility.

[@richardmerriam7044]

The most annoying trend in audio has been the lack of tolerance stated in the frequency response. The benchmark use to be 20-20K +/- 3dB. Very hard to achieve at the consumer level, so manufacturers have mostly dropped the tolerance figure.

[@PaulThird]

Yeah very true

[@1972hermanoben]

I loved this reality check: nobody’s right and nobody’s necessarily wrong, but there’s a lot of lazy half-qualified opinions out there masquerading as gospel as to what exactly constitutes ‘proper’ studio gear. You can’t dodge having to do the research and the learning, putting in the time to develop bona fide mixing, listening and calibration skills that are relevant to your own studio space. You can spend all the money you like and argue until you’re blue in the face, but you’re wasting your cash and your time if you’re not prepared to get stuck in and get to the bottom of really knowing your room’s characteristics and instead just assume that throwing enough cash into the fire will magically earn you great sound.

[@deeomayall]

The sad reality is that the equipment we mix on is cumulatively worth the fee for between one and two *days* of studio hire. The room you mix in is *this* important - otherwise all studios in the world would've shut down circa 2003.

[@marxman00]

When recording the biggest problem ... is the content .

[@midlander4]

Exactly