5 ms·

70% of studios I have been in have Genelec's. Rest seem to be Neumann or Quested. I don't know much about professional audio, why these are good speakers?

sp821543 9y ago
A legendary engineer educated me about NS10s. With a great amp and a sub, they sound fantastic - especially when listening at low volume. As in... lower than the volume of a normal conversation.
- SwellJoe 9y ago
  They don't sound fantastic, they sound accurate, which is a vital distinction to make about monitors in a studio environment. Consumer speakers should sound good, studio monitors should sound exactly like what's on tape or disk. NS10s sound a little harsh in the mid-range and brittle on the high end. But, you can discern all the frequency ranges (except the low end, where they roll off and need to be filled in with subs) with great precision (for the era). The reason for their good reputation among many was their accuracy and pervasiveness. The reason for the poor reputation was their fatiguing harshness, making them less comfortable for long mixing sessions. Both can be true; we can recognize the good and the bad.
  - Applejinx 9y ago
    I'll correct even that. I have NS10s, somewhat modified (drivers are almost totally stock though), and I'm driving them off Channel Islands D100 monoblocs, not to terribly high levels, and I have subs to reinforce the lows. They sound REVEALING. That's not the same as 'good' or 'accurate'. I'm not contradicting you: you can discern all the frequency ranges, and all the tones, and the things you did on other speakers that people complained about in your mix and you went 'but, but, I did a really good mix!' and then you listen on the NS10s and the complaints you got are suddenly right there staring you in the face, so you can't miss 'em. That's largely because of the exceptional time-domain performance as the article correctly reports. These are not the only speakers that can do that, but they're really good at it. That plus the harsh mid-emphasis and brain-fryingly bright tweeters means the things are ruthlessly revealing. Accurate would be more sympathetic to good mixes and let you slide, but NS10s are merciless and you must get things exactly right: in mixes, in getting sounds, in auditioning things like plugins.
    - SwellJoe 9y ago
      That's largely true and was a big part of their appeal, especially in a time before the widespread availability of good analysis tools and predominantly in-the-box production (which removes all manner of subtle audio problems, from mismatched impedance to phase problems, from the conversation). That said, I think there's a temptation to exaggerate. A phrase like "brain-fryingly bright tweeters" means something completely different to someone who isn't an audio engineer than it does to someone who's worked in studios or dealt with pro gear. NS10s, while harsh by studio monitor standards, are likely indistinguishable from other mid-range speakers of the era to the average listener. The difference is small, and only really becomes an issue with extended critical listening...8 hours sitting dead center in front of these speakers does feel brain-frying. But, a casual listen wouldn't reveal that. They'd sound like punchy, bright, tight, speakers. Which is what most studio monitors sound like to untrained listeners. Which is why I'm kinda shaking my head at the comments here saying that NS10s sound "terrible"! It's just not true. They sound like what they set out to make them sound like. And, most importantly, the resulting recordings that came out of more than a decade of market dominance speaks for itself. They aren't terrible speakers. They were a pretty good quality professional tool used by many professionals for many years to excellent results.
DiabloD3 9y ago
A lot of studios also have Adam as well.
baldfat 9y ago
Genelec are amazing speakers. They are the definition of reference. They are clean and they can be loud. They started out about the same time as the NS10 (1978) by the early 1980s they were the definition of the reference speaker. https://www.genelec.com/genelec-story-0 https://www.genelec.com/genelec-story-0 Once you use them you are kind of stuck. Your ear gets use to them and you mix to them. You can go to several different studios and you can mix easily. The idea is that the sound that comes out of the speakers goes directly to your ears and not reflexive sound. I have 1030a and they are small but I can mix in bad acoustic rooms and still have a great reference. You can plug any speaker of theirs into any of their sub woofers and have the same reference sound. So the use of Genelec has been growing and have become the standard. Sadly they aren't cheap but they are worth it. Mine are almost 20 years old and they still are great.
- timc3 9y ago
  Out of all the monitors that I have used, I still don't get why people use Genelecs apart from the build quality. There are ATC, PMC, Amphion, BareFoot, Unity Audio, and many others that all sounds more revealing and better.
  - baldfat 9y ago
    BUT they sound different and will mess up your mix. If your use to the Genelec direct sound you get a full range reference where problems stick out like a sharp stick in your ear. That is why people stick with them and don't use the newer brands.
PascLeRasc 9y ago
Genelec's are the high-end of personal listening for music enjoyment, but they're far from flat. Studios probably have them as a reference for what some critics and fans will be listening on.
timc3 9y ago
70% of studios I have been in haven't had Genelec (europe). Though they seem to be big in broadcast studios and post-production places or those where people haven't auditioned a large number of monitors.

sp821543 9y ago

A legendary engineer educated me about NS10s. With a great amp and a sub, they sound fantastic - especially when listening at low volume. As in... lower than the volume of a normal conversation.

SwellJoe 9y ago
They don't sound fantastic, they sound accurate, which is a vital distinction to make about monitors in a studio environment. Consumer speakers should sound good, studio monitors should sound exactly like what's on tape or disk. NS10s sound a little harsh in the mid-range and brittle on the high end. But, you can discern all the frequency ranges (except the low end, where they roll off and need to be filled in with subs) with great precision (for the era). The reason for their good reputation among many was their accuracy and pervasiveness. The reason for the poor reputation was their fatiguing harshness, making them less comfortable for long mixing sessions. Both can be true; we can recognize the good and the bad.
- Applejinx 9y ago
  I'll correct even that. I have NS10s, somewhat modified (drivers are almost totally stock though), and I'm driving them off Channel Islands D100 monoblocs, not to terribly high levels, and I have subs to reinforce the lows. They sound REVEALING. That's not the same as 'good' or 'accurate'. I'm not contradicting you: you can discern all the frequency ranges, and all the tones, and the things you did on other speakers that people complained about in your mix and you went 'but, but, I did a really good mix!' and then you listen on the NS10s and the complaints you got are suddenly right there staring you in the face, so you can't miss 'em. That's largely because of the exceptional time-domain performance as the article correctly reports. These are not the only speakers that can do that, but they're really good at it. That plus the harsh mid-emphasis and brain-fryingly bright tweeters means the things are ruthlessly revealing. Accurate would be more sympathetic to good mixes and let you slide, but NS10s are merciless and you must get things exactly right: in mixes, in getting sounds, in auditioning things like plugins.
  - SwellJoe 9y ago
    That's largely true and was a big part of their appeal, especially in a time before the widespread availability of good analysis tools and predominantly in-the-box production (which removes all manner of subtle audio problems, from mismatched impedance to phase problems, from the conversation). That said, I think there's a temptation to exaggerate. A phrase like "brain-fryingly bright tweeters" means something completely different to someone who isn't an audio engineer than it does to someone who's worked in studios or dealt with pro gear. NS10s, while harsh by studio monitor standards, are likely indistinguishable from other mid-range speakers of the era to the average listener. The difference is small, and only really becomes an issue with extended critical listening...8 hours sitting dead center in front of these speakers does feel brain-frying. But, a casual listen wouldn't reveal that. They'd sound like punchy, bright, tight, speakers. Which is what most studio monitors sound like to untrained listeners. Which is why I'm kinda shaking my head at the comments here saying that NS10s sound "terrible"! It's just not true. They sound like what they set out to make them sound like. And, most importantly, the resulting recordings that came out of more than a decade of market dominance speaks for itself. They aren't terrible speakers. They were a pretty good quality professional tool used by many professionals for many years to excellent results.

DiabloD3 9y ago

A lot of studios also have Adam as well.

baldfat 9y ago

Genelec are amazing speakers. They are the definition of reference. They are clean and they can be loud. They started out about the same time as the NS10 (1978) by the early 1980s they were the definition of the reference speaker. https://www.genelec.com/genelec-story-0 https://www.genelec.com/genelec-story-0 Once you use them you are kind of stuck. Your ear gets use to them and you mix to them. You can go to several different studios and you can mix easily. The idea is that the sound that comes out of the speakers goes directly to your ears and not reflexive sound. I have 1030a and they are small but I can mix in bad acoustic rooms and still have a great reference. You can plug any speaker of theirs into any of their sub woofers and have the same reference sound. So the use of Genelec has been growing and have become the standard. Sadly they aren't cheap but they are worth it. Mine are almost 20 years old and they still are great.

timc3 9y ago
Out of all the monitors that I have used, I still don't get why people use Genelecs apart from the build quality. There are ATC, PMC, Amphion, BareFoot, Unity Audio, and many others that all sounds more revealing and better.
- baldfat 9y ago
  BUT they sound different and will mess up your mix. If your use to the Genelec direct sound you get a full range reference where problems stick out like a sharp stick in your ear. That is why people stick with them and don't use the newer brands.

PascLeRasc 9y ago

Genelec's are the high-end of personal listening for music enjoyment, but they're far from flat. Studios probably have them as a reference for what some critics and fans will be listening on.

timc3 9y ago

70% of studios I have been in haven't had Genelec (europe). Though they seem to be big in broadcast studios and post-production places or those where people haven't auditioned a large number of monitors.