Why should I mix on good monitors?

Back in the day, when recording was only done in a professional studio, great care was taken from the source to final medium that the absolute best quality available was used. With the advent of home recording and much less expensive equipment, there has been a great shift to the budget conscious "pro-sumer" that wants to record. What often times is a noble intent, usually ends up as a mediocre product. While equipment and lack of musical or engineering skills are equal factors in this downward spiral, made worse by the dumbing down of most music sources (MP3 still vastly outsells SACD), the often overlooked source of bad quality sound is bad quality speakers in the control "room" (often known as the bedroom).

There is a reason that some will invest $50,000 dollars in a pair of monitors for recording or mastering. The reason has to do with several very technical aspects of sound reproduction but basically boil down to the accuracy and quality of the sound that can be created by a specific speaker. To an untrained ear ( or even half the trained ones) there is noticeably less difference the higher the quality you go, but there still is quite a difference.

If you start with the most accurate monitors, you will be able to hear things that inferior monitors would not have been able to accurately reproduce. This aid to listening allows for a better mix to be created initially. All professional studios will also have a second monitoring source (Usually Yamaha NS-10 speakers, the original not the NS-10M's). These are for the approximation of a normal listening system. Many an engineer will take a track out to their vehicle too, for a comparison before ever turning it over for mastering.

Once someone knows the difference, they cringe when they hear an inferior monitor (other than one designed to simulate a real world listening environment). Hope that helps.

I've always been an advocate of multi monitor mixing.

You have to have great monitors to be as sure as possible that nothing you're doing is just wrong, but obscured by the poor listening medium.

That having been said you also need various levels of medium to plop speakers and headphones to make sure you are still conveying everything you need regardless of the quality of the system producing the sound.

The car is a must listen place too, since so much of people's time is spent in there listening.

Nevertheless really good monitors are required to cover the available frequency range. My hi-fi speakers really do go down to about 25Hz (TDL studio .75M speakers). And if something hasn't been mixed on speakers that go that low it really shows up if there is an issue there! They go really high too, but most monitors manage that area no problem...

Naturally this is all IMHO & IME & so YMMV etc

I see it as 2 different approaches :

1) You are creating a work of art with the highest quality sound and "aural architecture" that you can achieve ...

2) You are making a product to sell to as many people as possible...


Depending on which you see it as, you will use the appropriate equipment!

Good flat monitors are like a magnifying glass, hopefully helping you nail little details. When I mix I mix on fairly high end monitors, then check my mix on lower end monitors, then check my mix on my ipod and in the car.

There is a big arguement for what you stated. Why use high end gear if everyone is just listening to mp3s? My arguement would be if it started out as a quality project and ended up as a terrible sounding mp3, what would happen if you started out with a terrible project?

You do want to mix for your target audience, but at same time want the highest quality you can produce because people with good gear will hear you also. Many time those are people that could make a difference in your life if they like your sound.

I grew up in studios with great monitoring systems, but even those varied in sound do to the studios taste. But every studio I knew of had a couple pairs of speakers to check mix on that repesented car stereo speakers and common home bookshielf speakers. So we could make sure the tunes sounded good to the widest possible audience.

To date myself I remember when the little Auratone's first hit the scene and they became the small speaker of choice for checking mixes on.

conical johnson said:

It seems a little strange, though (and I'm sure I'm not the first to ponder this), because most people listen to records on relatively mediocre equipment. It seems like it would make more sense to mix with an average set of speakers that someone might actually use to listen to your record.

Click to expand...

But not everyone does, and having good monitors isn't the same as having a good home stereo system. There are different sought after qualities in each.

And having good monitors doesn't mean you're only using them. When I mix I use at least four different audio setups in different rooms as well as routinely burning a mixdown and taking it for a ride in the car. But most of the delicate work is done using good monitors becausea it's quicker and easier to work that way and get consistantly good results.

msquared said:

When I mix I use at least four different audio setups in different rooms as well as routinely burning a mixdown and taking it for a ride in the car. But most of the delicate work is done using good monitors becausea it's quicker and easier to work that way and get consistantly good results.

Click to expand...

+100000

And your mixes sound better more consistently to more people for it!

Heres a good example of what you guys are talking about. I had to do a quick mix for a band a couple weeks ago. I just checked them on my good monitors, sounded great. Burned it to a cd and popped it in the car. It was like the club version of the song, super boomy. I find that most consumer stereo's have something of a smiley face eq curve to them.

bluestarbass said:

Heres a good example of what you guys are talking about. I had to do a quick mix for a band a couple weeks ago. I just checked them on my good monitors, sounded great. Burned it to a cd and popped it in the car. It was like the club version of the song, super boomy. I find that most consumer stereo's have something of a smiley face eq curve to them.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, you do't have control over how people EQ their own systems. You don't have to spend a fortune to get decent sounding "flat" monitors. I would master to them first. That way you kno wwhat you are getting. Then listen on some headphones/iPod type systems. If it sounds how you want on the "good" speakers, and is decent on the iPod, you've probably covered your2 main audiences.

Hi end speakers, low end speakers, and everything in between all have their uses in the studio. I regularly use: aurotones (usually checked in mono) , NS-10M's, Tannoy NFM-8's (my main go-to's), Urei 809's (to make the clients jump), Genelec S3's (ribbon tweeters are awesome), various car & home setups. It's all about getting the music to sound consistent and good on as many sources as possible. I want to be able to hear all the instruments with the same relative loudness on all the speakers. If you are going to use the NS-10's don't forget the all necessary tissue paper over the tweeters. It matters more that you are used to how the speakers sound and how they translate to other situations than using a particular high end brand.

What would be a good low-end (price-wise) brand of monitors that would be good for home mixing. I'm talking under $500 here.

I'd just get a set of used Yamaha NS-10m's since every studio has a pair. Then get used to how they sound. Play CD's through them and mix constantly. However you need to be aware that spending money on gear for recording and expecting magic results is like buying a new set of rotosounds and expecting that you'll suddenly be able to do 3 octave scales. That's my unasked for 2 pennies.

I recently bough a pair of KRK-RP6 SE's. These are classed as fairly low-mid end i think, but they sound bloody good!

Before i had been mixing on pc speakers, and as soon as i got it sounding nice, id play it on a stereo, and bam, uber bass (must have been over compensating on the pc speakers). not a problem now

They wont make your recordings sound any more amazing without putting the time in, but they do help get a song mixed and get it so it sounds pretty good on any speakers

bkbirge said:

However you need to be aware that spending money on gear for recording and expecting magic results is like buying a new set of rotosounds and expecting that you'll suddenly be able to do 3 octave scales. That's my unasked for 2 pennies.

Click to expand...

That's also my unasked for 2c. Can't emphasize this enough.

If you don't know what $500 monitors to buy then you probably don't need $500 monitors. Save your dough and start investing time instead of money.

Also, the search engine on gearslutz.com is going to help you way more than this thread ever will.

I'd just get a set of used Yamaha NS-10m's since every studio has a pair.

Click to expand...

I would disagree. Ns-10s are lousy monitors, and thats what they are supposed to be. They are book shelf or boom box speakers. Studios use these or auratones to check midrange and lowest common denominator. They do have their place but they arent a good set of first monitors.

I have heard of people getting them as their only monitors, but its really hard to learn to mix on these alone. They are DEFINATELY not flat.

bkbirge said:

Hi end speakers, low end speakers, and everything in between all have their uses in the studio. I regularly use: aurotones (usually checked in mono) , NS-10M's, Tannoy NFM-8's (my main go-to's), Urei 809's (to make the clients jump), Genelec S3's (ribbon tweeters are awesome), various car & home setups. It's all about getting the music to sound consistent and good on as many sources as possible. I want to be able to hear all the instruments with the same relative loudness on all the speakers. If you are going to use the NS-10's don't forget the all necessary tissue paper over the tweeters. It matters more that you are used to how the speakers sound and how they translate to other situations than using a particular high end brand.

Click to expand...

Spot on.

bluestarbass said:

I would disagree. Ns-10s are lousy monitors, and thats what they are supposed to be. They are book shelf or boom box speakers. Studios use these or auratones to check midrange and lowest common denominator. They do have their place but they arent a good set of first monitors.

I have heard of people getting them as their only monitors, but its really hard to learn to mix on these alone. They are DEFINATELY not flat.

Click to expand...

what would you suggest then?

conical johnson said:

I'm not asking this to be smug, I'm really curious to hear some thoughts on this. Most people who take recording seriously (whatever that means) use or aspire to use good monitors. People pay big money for them. It seems a little strange, though (and I'm sure I'm not the first to ponder this), because most people listen to records on relatively mediocre equipment. It seems like it would make more sense to mix with an average set of speakers that someone might actually use to listen to your record.

Am I wrong? I'm sure the ideal situation is to listen to your recordings on as many different setups as possible, but what's the point in getting everything to sound right on super-flat response speakers in a deadened room, when this isn't at all similar to the average person's stereo?

I certainly wouldn't go too far in the other direction, mixing for a drug-store brand boom box, or iPod headphones (even though, realistically, the iPod is probably the most common way people listen to music these days. I don't have one). Also, I understand that mixing with a particular EQ coloration in mind could theoretically make your mix sound even more colored on a different set of speakers, but... I don't know. Am I way off? Does anyone here use average speakers (or headphones) for this reason, rather than (or in addition to) financial reasons?

Click to expand...

You answered your own question. The reason for mixing on a flat response monitors is so that the mix sounds good on different audio equipment. So, if you mix on typical computer speakers it's probably going to sound like poop, or at least not right in a car stero or boom box. Beyond that this is also another reason why you master after the mix, to catch frequency spikes that sound bad or fatique a listeners ear, that might not be caught on certain speaker configurations.

I don't really thinks it's needed to spend a lot of money on monitors. When I put my little home studio together I got a pair of cheapies for like 150 a piece. The mixes that come out of that sound just fine.

Also, the point of mixing in a sound deadened room is so that you are mixing the actual sound of the mix and not mixing for room acoustics, after the sound bounces around the room. If you mix in a bad room you might get things like too much bass in the mix because it is actually building up in the room. You mix it out and then play in a different room that doesn't do that and you'll wonder what happened to the bass.

When you mix on a flat response monitor system, and then put it on stero that isn't flat, it generally sounds better.

P.S. mixing on headphones is very bad. Everything sounds better on headphones.