NS10 for example a.k.a. Reference Monitors, are loudspeakers for Mixing and/or Mastering exclusively. However are no good for critical listening. These are fundamentally different in a pro-audio environment like a studio. The analogy is IEM are to PA’s. Furthermore, you can’t plug your guitar through reference monitors either, they don’t translate. Neither do line-level devices, they really do need amplifiers. So loudspeakers aren’t loudspeakers and should be applied in the right situation.[/quote]
Some fair points made there Jon!
Actually mine are NS10M therefore ill be able to leave the tissue paper in the bathroom! Lol
Where NS10’s thrive is in the time domain & also in their ability to really show off mid range issues that are not so apparent on other monitors!
The Newells/Holland paper makes interesting reading. It was based on acoustic measurements of 38 different nearfield monitors, carried out in the UK’s premier research anechoic chamber at Southampton University. The acoustic measurements taken included frequency response, harmonic distortion and time-domain response (how quickly a monitor starts and stops in response to an input). At the end of the exercise it’s no exaggeration to say that one monitor stood out like the proverbial sore cliché: the NS10. While its frequency response wasn’t particularly flat, and its low-frequency bandwidth was restricted in comparison to many others, in terms of time-domain and distortion performance it was outstanding.
Monitoring anything under 100Hz is a joke however so having a separate sub or a spectrum analyser is essential.
The NS10 story is quite fascinating,
[font=.HelveticaNeueUI]Cheers all :-)[/quote]
Hey Wolf, the NS10’s were only picked out as an example, could have been any near/mid field loud speaker. You’re right though, there aren’t many pro-audio studio’s that don’t have a set somewhere.