Tom, Richard, David,
Thank you so much for your thoughtful responses.
David, I agree, we do need to deal with our room acoustics but must
confess we can't right now---complicated to explain---but we do recognize
we're "backing" into this to some extent.
Tom, Yes, it's primarily a university archives/music library transfer
program. We want to do as well as we can in undertaking routine transfers
but will continue to send out high-end work for expert attention.
And yes, we currently do use headphones, AKG-K701s.
Richard and Tom, I agree too about the 824s. In fact we'd discussed this
very same point today that, for the money, we'd probably do better with
the 824s. They're so honkin' big and heavy though---just my
opinion---we'd have to figure out how to place 'em. Even so though, we
suspected what you've confirmed---they're maybe the best choice.
One question: the Genelecs are supposed to be shielded and the Mackies
don't seem to be. We weren't sure---could this be a significant factor or
is it just something that sounds good but in fact not worth all that much
more in practical terms?
Again, thanks for your responses. I love how this list's always an
On 6/6/12 7:00 PM, "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I agree with Richard about the 824's. I don't believe that a woofer
>smaller than 8" can put out
>sufficient bass to pick up things like rumble and boominess during
>professional audio work. I've
>tried speakers with smaller woofers and, because I generally don't like
>using a satellite/sub system
>for mission-critical work, I've never used them for long. The 824 MKII's
>rounded out all the cabinet
>edges and I think also did a few mods in front of the drivers in order to
>kill off whatever cabinet
>reflections there were. I think the main net result is that the tweeters
>fire wider, giving a more
>solid center when the speakers are spaced across a console.
>I'm also a big fan of the Recoil Stabilizer base for near-field speakers,
>but I got cut a new one
>for saying so on the Ampex list so I'm not about to get into a technical
>argument about it. All I'm
>saying is that I hear a difference in my studio.
>My opinion of Mackie vs. Genelec is that Mackie seemed more "honest" in
>that it was very detailed at
>reasonable to low SPLs. Both speakers, based on my listening to them in
>other facilities and on
>trade-show floors, present an "un-sweetened" sound, which is what studio
>monitors are supposed to
>do. If something is recorded badly, it sounds bad on these speakers. If
>it's recorded well, it
>sounds good in that it sound "natural" or "well-mixed," not "warm" or
>"organic" like some hi-fi
>speakers of that size claim. In a studio, you need the truth, not a nice
>listening experince all the
>time. I would say that the amplified Genelecs have better amplifiers,
>they get louder and stay clear
>at really high SPL. But, for non-damaging listening, the Mackies get
>plenty loud. My bet would be
>that the Genelecs have a more solid build and more expensive components
>inside, based on their
>price. If not, they are a bad value.
>Someone mentioned room treatments. My experience is, you don't need to go
>to a whole lot of expense
>on that if you're using something like the Mackie close-in, but you will
>probably find you want
>either diffusing tiles above your workstation or a heavy carpet on the
>floor. I have fabric-covered
>fiberglass panels from office partitions nailed to my wall behind the
>speakers, which kills off
>anything that doesn't properly front-fire. I don't recomment rear-ported
>monitors at all, it
>complicates placement and other room issues.
>One man's opinions. Keep in mind I'm not talking about a pro-grade
>mastering room here, I think
>we're talking about a university archive's transfer room.
>The other main point I'd make is, get yourself a good pair of headphones,
>too. I highly recommend
>the Audio Technica ATH-M50s
>these headphones are very honest and have a heavy bass, which allows
>reality-checking what might not
>come through 8" woofers, especially rumble and other low-frequency stuff.
>They are also very good
>about telling you the effects of high-passing with DSP (which often
>produces problems in other
>-- Tom Fine
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 7:14 PM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Seeking studio monitor comments
>>I have five of the original Mackie HR-824s with an Energy subwoofer. I
>>really like the system.
>> I don't know how Mackie changed the HR-824s when they became MK IIs.
>> If you're not using a sub, I think you really should go for the 824s,
>>not the 624s.
>> I know many people love the Genelecs, too. My impression (and I have
>>not listened to Genelecs much
>> recently) was that the Mackies sounded smoother...but that is always
>> On 2012-06-06 2:57 PM, Grant, Tyra wrote:
>>> We're evaluating studio monitors for our small (14'x14') audio
>>>room---with workstation close-to
>>> being against a wall. We prefer to spend $1,500, more or less.
>>> We're focusing on 1) Mackie HR624 MkIIs and 2) Genelec 8030As
>>> Unfortunately, we have no way to test-run either of these---or any
>>>others for that matter.
>> Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX
>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.