Back to the monitor stuff...

You guys will think I'm nuts, but I'm on to something here.

Like I mentioned earlier the funds needed to get the high-end nearfields have been annoyingly redirected to something else. Jonesing for **something better than iMac walkie-talkie speaker audio I decided to take a chance on the original idea, of using hi-fi equipment for mixing/edits.

A local shop here sells old-school stereo equipment that's been reconditioned and warrantied, often the class-A, high-line brands like NAD, Crestron, SAE etc. I just happened across a Denon receiver and a pair of Celestion tower speakers for imossibly low cost, together less than $120 US. I figured what the hell, for next to nothing I'll at least have some decent audio to listen to until I can order the IK MTM's. What's happened since is nothing short of amazing.

As you can see in the pics, I laid the speakers horizontally, something required since I couldn't find a quick and simple way to stand them upright behind the table at the proper height. That actually provides a natural reflection back up to the ear off the table, without creating any unusal imaging issues.

Right away I was blown away by the clean power from the Denon and how accurate the Celestions are across the spectrum. Amazing imaging without coloration, no hiss from internal power supplies and very, very clean, open sound.

Using my selection of "control songs" that I've used for decades to test monitors this rig actually passes all the tests. Highs are clear and not too bright - which is usually an issue for home-stereo speakers, and because the main drivers aren't large (4 or 5" inch) there's no booming low-end. In fact because it's a long cabinet there's actually plenty of LFE that's also clean and defined.

If anything I'm hearing nuances in these test tracks that I didn't hear at all with my Focal EVO 65's! Especially with electronica and orchestral music I'm just floored how accurate the output is - without typical hi-fi coloration.

So instead of investing $3K or more in nearfields I'm going to go further into this hi-fi path. I'll upgrade to a Yamaha 300w power amp and instead of going out the headphone jack on the iMac I'll get an IK Multimeida AXE I/O ONE interface and get the best audio-out to the RCA's into the Denon (soon the Yamaha). Maybe I'll upgrade the speakers to a set of B&W's but right now the Celestions are blowing me away with their response and accuracy.

(I've known of Celestion but never listened to any - ever, so I'm shocked how good these are. Another great example of British audio engineering.)

I don't recommend this path for everyone; I've had years of pro-level experience with every kind of audio setup there is for production purposes, so I've got a set of trained ears to sort out what's not-so-good for mixing audio for film BUT, this proves the theory: Yes, in fact getting natural, organic audio for mixing using high-quality hi-fi equipment is possible. And for a FRACTION of what a "good" nearfield setup would cost!

I'm staying the path and will report back to this thread as the equipment list changes/gets upgraded.

Wish you guys could hear this... maybe I'll setup a controlled recording - once I purchase another field recorder again for production.

Tried to send all pics, wouldn't take...

Now that the hi-fi concept has been confirmed I'm going further down the rabbit hole. Next steps:

This weekend the output from the iMac will be upgraded to USB-out to RCA via a super-simple Behringer UCA222.

In a few weeks I'll be replacing the Denon integrated amp with a Yamaha power amp M-45.

Somewhere in there I'll be upgrading the speaker drivers to high-quality units from this place:

https://www.parts-express.com/

And so the experiment continues...

That Behringer UCA222... total crap!!! Very low output even compared to the analog-out from the iMac 3.5" stereo out and, noticeably less fidelity. Meh... what can you expect for less than $20!!

So it's back to another Audient iD4 MKII for the interface. Soon...

This experiment has been a copmlete eye-opener, and after a test session today with a well respected local audio engineer I've decided to post an entirely different thread about all the tests I've done and the results.

Be prepared to be shocked - because I was and still am.

I was going to post a full report about our testing and the results, but I'm already on page 4 about the whole thing, and it's just too much to put on a forum. It's more of a magazine article at this point and not appropriate for a place where people just want answers - quick. So here's the easy-read version of what we did and learned:

My friend brought over a handful of different speakers, both quality hi-fi and near-field, really good stuff for both. For the near-fields he brought a pair of HEDD, Focal, ADAM and JBL. For hi-fi B&W, Elac, Monitor Audio, Polk. More than enough to further test this theory of hi-fi vs. traditional near-fields for critical mixing.

We both blindfolded each other one at a time and ran test tracks we're both familiar with and rated each monitor from 1 to 10 based on: imaging, element separation (vocals from instrument/background etc), any noticeable distortion (port chuffing, high-frequency shrillness etc) LFE (low-frequency extension) and small-element disappearance (low-energy audible elements such as a background note, vocal or something else that often can't be heard from either a low-quality amplifier or speaker driver).

To further make the test "blind" we didn't tell the other whether or not we were setting up a near-field or a hi-fi speaker, thus making the test completely devoid of any preconceived expectations from the what were hearing.

The results floored both of us. The B&W's took top marks across the board, above everything else including the near-fields! Huh??!! Yep, that's what we both said. So we ran the test again. (Yes, this took all friggin' day!!)

Keep in mind the hi-fi speakers were connected to the Denon AVR-2000 integrated amp. (I haven't picked up the Yamaha M-45 yet.) And of course the near-fields had to rely on their own internal amps for power and delivery, so the test isn't strictly the quality of the speaker drivers and cabinets but their amps too! The near-fields were fed via an Audient ID4 MKII.

Here's the best part, the B&W 706 S3's sell for around $2,200 US new, and can be had on the used market for as little as $500-800 a pair in excellent condition. And a clean, high-current amp like the Denon (NAD, Carver, SAE and others are plentiful on the used market) is also pennies on the dollar compared to when they were new.

So basically you could have a very high-quality, accurate audio-monitoring setup for hundreds if not thousands less than using a traditional near-field setup.

There are other not-so-obvious benefits we learned. In ALL the near-fields we heard the dreaded "hiss" when idle. Of course it's extremely low (the HEDD's had the least amount) but it's still audible. The hi-fi speakers? Zero. And the reason why is obvious when you think about it: Distance.

We all want high-power, clean and precise output from our monitors. But to get all that audio goodness requires a lot of physical power from transformers and capacitors which create RF noise when powered. The more you turn up the volume the more magnetic RF energy they create - along with heat - which has to go somewhere.

Since near-fields have their power supplies built into the cabinets they're literally up-close and personal with the drivers and voice-coils they're powering. And while they're shielded there's only so much RF that shielding can reject, the rest gets picked up by the voice-coils and gets translated - you guess it, into audible hiss.

Hi-fi speakers and passive monitors have quite a bit of distance from the power supplies and drivers, so there's no RF energy for them to pick up thus, no hiss. Not unless the amp itself is noisy, but when you're talking about high-end hi-fi that's nearly non-existent. I can crank up this Denon to 100% without any audible noise going to the speakers. That's a clear sign of a well designed discrete circuit board and clean amplifier section. Nearly all high-current receivers and integrated amps will behave the same way, fantastic imaging, zero idle noise and LOTS of transient and constant RMS power going to the speakers.

(By the way the term "monitor" is just industry snobbery to make a distinction between home-stereo speakers and those specifically designed for audio pros. The truth is they're exactly the same damned thing, it's just glossy marketing to make you feel like you're getting something super-special.)

Now let's be clear: near-fields have their purpose and the ones that cost $1000 a copy and beyond are terrific units and do their job very well. Their primary selling point is that you don't need an external amp to power them and, many have "shaping tools" built into the cabinets to accommodate the various environments they'll get placed, such as distance from a wall, middle of a room, reducing reflections from a desk etc. Hi-fi components don't have any of these adjustments leaving the user to create a proper setup for their individual environment.

So if you're in need of an accurate, high-quality audio monitoring setup but don't have thousands of dollars to invest in specialized near or mid-field monitors, the good news is you don't have to. There's a lot of myth about using hi-fi speakers vs. professional monitors and this testing proved beyond any doubt that in fact you CAN use good quality components and get precisely what's required for mixing/editing and not break the bank.

Do your research, when possible get a listen to the various amps and speakers out there and if need be, hit me up and I'll do my best to steer you in the right direction.

Cheers to all.

I haven't seen any audio reviews like this since I stopped buying Hi-Fi magazines way back. I stopped buying when reviewers got into which direction down the cable the signal should go to achieve the highest fidelity!

At the time I was running a Thorens TD150 deck with SME 3009 II S2 arm and Shure V15III HE cartridge, Sugden A48 amp and a Sugden R21 tuner, the shiny black and silver fronted ones with wooden cabinets, there was a Sony Dolby C cassette deck too, into Monitor Audio MA5 speakers.

I'd never heard of near field speakers before this thread, so I read it with interest. I highly value Allan's opinion too, he was a great help to me in the old Panasonic3CCDuser days.

I'm glad, relieved may be a better word, that you found HI-Fi speakers better for you. I've always believed good sound quality is good sound quality no matter what purpose it is used for and you have just underlined that for me. I hope you enjoy using them.

Glad you got useful info from this.

For me the next step is more of a fun project than further testing since the original question has been answered succinctly.

What I'm going to do now is take the Celestion F2's I picked up and upgrade the drivers to higher-quality components.

The cabinet and porting is fantastic and they already sound great, but especially after hearing what the B&W's and others sound like I know I can get even more definition and clarity from this pair than the drivers shipped from Celestion.

I doubt I'll mess with the cross-overs; they've already been designed/tuned for the cabinet size and rear-firing port so messing with that could potentially mess up an already good sounding rig. So what I'm doing would be similar to taking a Honda Accord and replacing the stock motor with a race-tech BMW inline 6. hahaha... that's the best analogy I could come up with.

More on that when it happens.

I haven't seen any audio reviews like this since I stopped buying Hi-Fi magazines way back. I stopped buying when reviewers got into which direction down the cable the signal should go to achieve the highest fidelity!

At the time I was running a Thorens TD150 deck with SME 3009 II S2 arm and Shure V15III HE cartridge, Sugden A48 amp and a Sugden R21 tuner, the shiny black and silver fronted ones with wooden cabinets, there was a Sony Dolby C cassette deck too, into Monitor Audio MA5 speakers.

I'd never heard of near field speakers before this thread, so I read it with interest. I highly value Allan's opinion too, he was a great help to me in the old Panasonic3CCDuser days.

I'm glad, relieved may be a better word, that you found HI-Fi speakers better for you. I've always believed good sound quality is good sound quality no matter what purpose it is used for and you have just underlined that for me. I hope you enjoy using them.

Dave , I was pleased to read your post since I'm familiar with , and used to sell , every piece of kit you mentioned .

Although I started out in hi-fi with a Saturday job during my schooldays , and eventually became full time , I also developed an interest in audio recording , initially with a Sony TC-377 1/4 track machine and a pair of Sony ECM-280 electret mics which I used to record friends in bands , local amateur opera groups , and just anyone who would let me record them . Monitoring then was only done with a pair of headphones . Basic stuff .

In time , I bought a Revox A77 1/4 track standard speed , then later a B77 1/2 track high speed , and still have both . I also got a mixing desk , first a Seck 62 , then later a 122 , but I was still going out to venues and recording live events , and not just music , sometimes conferences and also ended up doing live sound . I had no studio as such , so no need for monitors - I just got the best sound I could onto tape , then dubbed to cassettes for the end users ; first using my Technics RS 276 cassette deck , then an RS 279 . Later I got , and still have , my two Nakamichi 700 decks .

Nowadays , any sound I record is generally for video and kept as simple as possible ; I have a couple of HDV camcorders with 2ch sound and a pair of PDW-F350s with 4ch sound . I tend to record ambient from one point mics on the cameras , and with the bigger cameras can either add close mic'd speakers , or feed in a stereo mix - either from my little Audio Technica field mixer , or from my Soundcraft UI-16 , and have access to bigger desks if needed .

I was aware of near field and far field monitoring , although back then the only NF monitors I was aware of were the BBC LS3/5 , and only because I'd been in OB caravans and seen them getting used there , and many of the larger BBC monitors when I'd blagged a visit into some of the studios ; also because in the hi-fi shop we sold the likes of Rogers , Chartwell , KEF etc . We also sold Tannoy , and many of their speakers were justifiably described as monitors , also the likes of IMF . At home , I had a pair of B&W DM1 for the bedroom , and when one of the EMI elliptical units eventually failed , I replied them with a pair of DM5s , which I still have ; either of them could have made quite nice NF monitors .

I particularly liked Tannoys with their dual concentric drivers for their excellent stereo imaging , but some of their later models ( the Arden , Berkely , Cheviot , Devon Exeter range ) had quite a coloured sound , until they brought out the 'sixes' series , I think around the 90s or noughties , and the D700s which I thought sounded quite nice . Annoys were always efficient , so didn't need huge amplification .

I became very aware of how much different amplifiers affected the sound of loudspeakers , most particularly with respect to impedance matching and damping factor . This was nothing to do with golden ears or any kind of magic , it was just good engineering .

While I was well aware of JE Sugden and his products , even having a heated debate with the man himself on the phone one time re a faulty A48 , I always leaned more towards Quad personally , and had a 33/303 early on in my hi-fi adventure , driving a pair of KefKit 3s , which I had built up into a pair of transmission line enclosures .

When the Quad 405 came out , I just had to have one of the first ones , and to begin with I was blown away with what seemed like limitless power ; sometime in around there I acquired a pair of IMF TLS80 II loudspeakers , with the optional stands , and I came to the conclusion they were quite boomy . It wasn't until I was getting into AV and swapped the Quad amplifiers for a set of Sony TA-E1000 ESD preamp and the TA-N55ES power amplifiers that I realised the IMFs were actually very neutral and not boomy at all , the problem had been the very poor damping factor afforded by the Quad , and the Sony power amps just kept them so much better under control , I realised later that in may ways the 303 was a better amplifier than the 405 .

incidentally I ran a pair of B&W DM2As on the rear channels and initially a pair of IMF Super Compacts as my centre front channel before constructing my own centre speaker using the Celestial HF1300 , Coles 4001 super tweeters , to match both the TLS 8os and the DM2s , and four KEF B110s to match the TLS80 midrange ; I ran that system for a long time in my home cinema .

Latterly I tired of it and got rid of all the surround kit , reverting back to 2ch stereo , with a Quad 77/707 system , which again made the IMFs sound boomy , but since the lady of the house always thought them too big , I looked at many other speakers and ended up with my Quad ESL63s ; they don't go especially loud , the LF isn't so very extended , but nor do they sound bass light ; the main feature is they just fill a room with music , with the most amazing stereo imagery , especially for orchestral or choral music , but equally for acoustic or intimate vocal performances .

Depending on what you are trying to monitor , and the space you are working in , Quad Electrostatics can actually be the most neutral and accurate loudspeakers in existence ; I've had mine almost 30 years now , and just had them fully rebuilt down in Huntingdon last year , so they are like new again .

For small control rooms , I could be quite happy with the likes of LS3/5s , small Tannoys or similar ; I have used the likes of JBL Control 1s but find them quite tiring to listen to after a while ; similarly with JBL , I used to demonstrate and sell both the L100 'Centurys' and their bigger brothers the L200s , both marketed as 'monitoring' loudspeakers , and could sound hugely impressive to begin with , but actually quite painful to listen to after a while ; the Yamaha NS 1000s were sold in the same segment and actually could be lived with much more easily .

There are so many good loudspeakers , suited to different purposes and environments , but they always , always need to be carefully matched to other equipment , particularly amplifiers .

Hi Robert, in the early days of video camera websites it was the other way around, on the Panasonic3CCDuser.com site, as mods, we used to encourage members to stay on the same topic with news and information on that subject. This was so other people could do a search of the site to find a subject that interested them, but times change.

Here’s something that might interest you and others. For my studio control room I bought and installed a pair of 16” Tannoy Classic speakers. Have you ever heard of ‘speaker rotation’?

In their cabinets, I was advised to rotate the speakers 180 degrees every so often because the heavy speaker coils would drag the robust speaker cones down over time. When they were new I took some fine measurements and sure enough this started to happen. Over the 24yrs I used them, every 18months I carefully unscrewed and rotated the speakers 180d.

This won’t interest everybody, but it’s worth passing on for anyone with big speakers. Cheers.

Absolutely , I used to do that with the KEF B139s in both my Kefkit 3s and in my IMF TLS80s .

You could actually hear the coils rubbing within the gaps on certain recordings , and inverting them cleared it up . I used to carefully press the units in with my fingers and feel for rubbing every so often .

My challenge to that is the majority of video consumers listen on earpods, not even low-grade headphones these days, so this creates a whole new issue.

This is a discussion/fortune telling session I've had with several other pros in the past 2 years: We put so much energy into making our final output as visually and sonically as gorgeous as possible (at least the vast majority of us do), yet the buik of the audience is going to see and hear this work on cell phones. Not even decent computers with external audio anymore.

That being said, what's the point of all the work? 6K, 422/10 or 12-bit video? Hah! There's no cell phone at any price that can actuallly display all that data and individual pixels with any accurracy whatsoever.

And being listened to from the same device? Nobody's going to be able to appreciate a solid mix if all they've got are earbuds that can barely reproduce half of the audible frequencies humans can hear, the rest is either sub-sonic or just get turned into digital background noise from all the network compression. Video too suffers from big-time compression, no matter who it comes from. There's just no practical way to distribute even just standard HD at bitrates high enough to really showcase anything close to what we're seeing on our edit screens.

So why all the fuss, then?

Times have and are changing, fast. My hunch tells me the hundreds of millions dollars spent on making our content as close to original as possible is soon just going to go away. If all the world does is watch on mobile devices, not even port over to computers with fibre-download speeds... I think this is all just going to be overkill in less than 5 years.

We'll see...

A lot of kids watch videos with sound muted and rely on subtitles , sometimes subtitles cannot be turned off , and at that point I generally turn off , because I HATE that .

More myth dispelled...

"Speaker Cable", the concept that you have to use purpose-built wire for audio purposes. Total nonsense.

The snooty audio industry has everybody convinced that the high-priced "quality" cable is what you need to get the best signal to your speakers. It's just more glossy marketing, the truth is speaker cable is just like ANY other copper wire out there - it moves electrical current from one place to another. That's it. "Oxygen free", "polarized" and other nose-high terms make it seem you'd better get that stuff or else. But it's just a sales pitch.

Instead, go to your local hardware store and get the largest gauge wire your system can handle, 12-gauge is a good place to start, and spend a fraction of what "speaker cable" costs. I just picked up a 25-foot roll of 12-gauge 3-wire (so you don't use the third wire, so what?) for less than $30 US. Had I picked up Mogami, Monster or any other audio-specific cable, and only 18-gauge at best, would have been over $120!!! C'mon...

This stuff is wrapped with insulation, a smooth soft exterior cover which looks awesome (and professional) and yeah, my speakers are rocking with the high-amp audio come from my receiver. (Now different from the Denon I started with.)

Along with the speaker wire I've finally settled on my new audio setup for the renewed edit suite:

A pair of DCM 26 towers, which sound fantastic but I'm going to upgrade the tweeters soon and, a Nakamichi Receiver 2. Very musical and punchy, maybe a tad better than an NAD.

Although the 'michi can be used as a preamp to the Yamaha M45 or other power-amp, it's totally not needed in this setup. I need accurate audio, not window-cracking power. haha

So the test was a success and proved quite definitively:

- You CAN get high-quality, accurate audio monitoring from hi-fi components - that have zero floor-noise or hiss compared to the near-field cousins

- You DON'T have to spend thousands of dollars on a usable setup. This rig in total with the 12-gauge wire was less than $300!! Yes, you have to do your research, shop around but clearly the equipment is readily available.

The caveats:

- High-end near-fields (starting at over $5,000/pair) have their place. They do offer built-in electronic tuning to match the listening environment and the drivers are going to be utterly top-notch without question. Even with the unavoidable small amounts of floor-noise (hiss) they're going to sound amazing.

- Because the equipment used in this test is considered "vintage" you're going to run across equipment that might need a tuneup or have failed components. So keep in mind that while you may find an amazing deal on good stuff you might have the hassle of bringing it back to spec to be usable. But hell, we're still talking a fraction of the cost of even mid-level near-fields!

- Do your research on brands, especially receivers/integrated amps on the ones that actually deliver clean, high-current output. There's a lot of equipment that has tons of features, beautiful faces but don't really provide the quality of output we need for mixing. The best brands are: Carver, Adcom, NAD, Nakamichi, Denon (some models) - anything considered "discrete" or "Class-A" amplifier will do.

Regardless how successful my renewed business becomes I'm never going back to the classic self-powered speaker setup. I'm getting far too gorgeous sound from this "cheap" rig, far cleaner and more powerful than the Focal's I've had.

Cheers and happy holidays to all!!

I just picked up a 25-foot roll of 12-gauge 3-wire (so you don't use the third wire, so what?)


What, you don't ground your wooden speaker cabinets? That's just asking for more hum in the system. (J/K)

Don't forget to buy some speaker wire stands, to keep the wire up off the floor, where LF vibrations will induce stray current in the wires. (NOT kidding ... they actually sell this s**t at the high-end hi-fi shows.)

Reminds me of flight school at 16yrs old: Instructor told me, "Go get me some propwash...". Took me two hours to figure out the joke was on me.

Many years ago, my high school band director (I played baritone horn) said, "Tell your parents you want a new embouchure for Christmas."