Vortexjah Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 Does any one here use nearfield active studio monitors in a domestic setup i.e. as their main system in a lounge room etc? Just looking for opinions on how you feel they compare to hifi speakers in this setting, active or passive? Cheers
sfdoddsy Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 I don't but I have. There is no reason not to use active monitors, and many reasons to do so. They are often more accurate, don't need amps, and are generally cheaper than the equivalent 'hifi' speaker.
k-k-k-kenny Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 ... and are generally cheaper than the equivalent 'hifi' speaker. - as long as they aren't PMCs, perhaps. Though I guess a case could still be made that they are cheapER than any domestic equivalent
LogicprObe Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 Depends which ones you are talking about. The $300 ones, or the $15,000 ones!
Guest Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 I use passive studio monitors, for a while in the main setup and now relegated to the B Grade. Does that count?
houdinifangs Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 Yes, I have used active monitors and still do in my office. They can give very good results and more bass than a standmount speaker. They can fill large rooms well but I found them to produce not much of an image. Heard some Tannoy Dual Concentric monitors in a techno shop. They were very impressive - detailed and controlled.
DoggieHowser Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 I used these. Way cheaper than the Electra Bes and they already come biamped internally. http://www.focalprofessional.com/en/sm6-line/solo6-be.php Damn amazing speakers. They image very well and for "bookshelves", show a lot of low end extension as well.
Vortexjah Posted May 10, 2011 Author Posted May 10, 2011 THanks for the responses, i use AVI active speakers at the moment which are suitable for both studio (nearfield) and domestic uses. In the near future i was look at setting up some more active speakers in other rooms, and was not sure about the nearfield aspect for longer distances. For me i feel active is the better choice, because i look for accuracy and neutrality in my speakers, and i don't own any amps, so price wise i think the actives would work out better. What do you guys use for volume control? Preamps, monitor controllers, DACs with a volume control? Is their any advantages/disadvantages to these methods? Cheers
houdinifangs Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 Depends on your source/s. If your only using digital/computer - a pro interface might do the job. Something from the Mbox range perhaps...this will also get you into pro tools as well... I've only dreamed about the Mbox stuff and currently use a very cheap 4 channel mixer.
GryphonGuy Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 If you want volume control, make sure whatever you buy uses a volume control in the analogue domain as a digital volume control dumps the bits of data to control volume. So an analogue pre-amp might be the go even of you have a top-notch sound card on board the computer or use an out-of-box solution.
DoggieHowser Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 I use a Wyred4Sound DAC2 and use that as DAC/preamp.
shogun2 Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 I currently have 5 x Tannoy Elipse Dual Concentric active monitors in the HT room. 2 x 10" active as LR, and 3x 8" as C, LR and RR. Am just waiting on the appropriate time to install the Seaton Submersive ... (When the wife's not looking)
LogicprObe Posted May 11, 2011 Posted May 11, 2011 Damned wives! And they complain about their hormones! ........uh.......maybe it's us complaining about their hormones because of our hormones.........? Now I'm really confused!
Recommended Posts