Reference Speakers - what does this mean ? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Reference Speakers - what does this mean ?



omikey
03-09-2004, 01:09 PM
I've seen this in many speaker specs, I see it mentioned here often and was wondering just what this really means.


Thanks,
Mikey

Debbi
03-09-2004, 02:29 PM
....used to mean best speakers in a line...Klipsch for example uses it for mid range speakers and have Heritage speaker which cost more....its become a word a lot like "deluxe" which has no meaning in the absence of comparison with something else specific.

Woochifer
03-09-2004, 03:07 PM
It would depend on the context. Audio reviewers typically keep a "reference" system at home, which represents their individual definition of something good enough to compare all other components with. Reference in that case is their point of comparison, sort of like how you have reference color definitions for calibrating video monitors, even though there a lot of areas in audio have no agreed upon standard reference points.

Audio manufacturers produce reference equipment that's supposed to represent their best in class products. With speakers, reference systems often represent the speakers that they use for prototyping and something designed to be as close to accurate as possible without any considerations for cost or decor-friendliness. Infinity used to make reference speakers that they called their IRS models. Those were room-sized modular panel speakers with multiple driver arrays that were initially developed for lab testing, but were so popular in public demos that they made the IRS systems available to consumers. They subsequently came out with an entire series of IRS branded models that were more or less conventional speakers that used some of the features in those mammoth IRS reference systems. That's one example of how the meaning of the reference terminology has gotten diluted over the years. It's similar to how similar terms like "studio" and "monitor" have gotten so overused that they have no consistent meaning anymore.

omikey
03-09-2004, 04:02 PM
Not unlike many of the things that we run into in our lives, but your descriptions help me to better understand it here in the audio world.

Debbi and Whooch - Thanks for the discussion and helping me to frame the term 'Reference Speaker'.
Thanks !

Sealed
03-10-2004, 12:04 AM
Reference, like the term "studio monitor" is overused, and abused.

Reference should mean a system that is comprised of no-compromise components that has an accurate/flat frequency response, uncolored sound and detailed presesntation to use a a point of compare.

"Today we are testing the Axiom M80 speakers and Anthem separates, and we will se how they compare with our $50,000 reference system"

But many speakers get the name "reference" for prestige that really don't deserve it.

Bryan
03-10-2004, 08:12 AM
As defined by me:

With speakers and electronic equipment - A particular companies best/most expensive. Their top of the line products. VMPS RM/X and the SVS PB4-Plus would fit into this category.

With a reviewer - The equipment they use to judge everything else against.

omikey
03-10-2004, 10:44 AM
As defined by me:

With speakers and electronic equipment - A particular companies best/most expensive. Their top of the line products. VMPS RM/X and the SVS PB4-Plus would fit into this category.

With a reviewer - The equipment they use to judge everything else against.

AHHHHHH, OK ...... Thanks !!!

RGA
03-10-2004, 04:47 PM
The funny thing is most speakers used in recording studios don't have the words Studio Monitor or reference in the title.

One of the bigger "IN STUDIO" speaker companies is called the Profesional Monitor Company. When they started making speakers for the home(same speakers) they shifted the name and are now called PMC. B&W's M801 and M805 among others have the M stand for Matrix and the N is Nautilus. The 801(in various forms) is said to be the speaker most classical recording studios choose.

You will find however that many people who can afford this $10K speaker may go with something from Magnepan, Martin Logan, and probably 50 others. Though of course the N801 is probably one of the top sellers if not the top seller of 10k speakers - This is a guess but B&W is not the biggest high end speaker maker for no reason and they sure don't sell the most in the cheap lines.

So what does any ofthis mean for you? Nothing. A Studio chooses speakers like PMC because PMC directly marketed their speakers to studios...they sent their seller to recording studios talked to purchasing agents and deals get done. Many purchasers never actually see or even HEAR what they're purchasing. This is mere assumption because this is my only NICE conclusion for all the less than good recordings out there.

Then there is Reference 3a. They have the word as part of their name...still sounds horrible and their speakers look horrible and even some of the measurements of the sound don't look very good. Lucky for them they make one heckuva a great sounding speaker which in normal rooms sounds fantastic - not just in a measuring chamber.

Woochifer
03-10-2004, 05:53 PM
The funny thing is most speakers used in recording studios don't have the words Studio Monitor or reference in the title.

Which studios are you referring to? Do you know this for fact or is this just presumption? There are quite a few studios out there that use actual "studio monitors". Mackie is currently one of the top studio monitor manufacturers, and have rated at or near the top of comparison tests I've seen in professional trade journals. Guess what they call their studio monitor lineup?

http://www.mackie.com/products/studiomonitors/index.html

Meyer Sound is a local outfit that makes custom sound systems for live sound and studio applications (including Davies Symphony Hall in SF and the Sydney Opera House). They market exclusively to professional environments, and came up with a rather creative name for the stuff that they sell to recording studios.

http://www.meyersound.com/products/studioseries/index.htm

Oh, and let's not forget one-time market leader JBL. They also sell a line-up of pro audio speakers that are designed for use in mixing studios. What do they call them, I forget...

http://www.jblpro.com/LSR/LSR6300_index.htm


So what does any ofthis mean for you? Nothing. A Studio chooses speakers like PMC because PMC directly marketed their speakers to studios...they sent their seller to recording studios talked to purchasing agents and deals get done. Many purchasers never actually see or even HEAR what they're purchasing. This is mere assumption because this is my only NICE conclusion for all the less than good recordings out there.

How do you know all this about how studio monitors are marketed? Do you go and talk to the recording studio managers and ask about their procurement practices? Most people would not want an actual studio monitor in their living room because speakers marketed for recording studios are typically designed for near-field listening in small control rooms. That is, positioned close to a mixing board and the speakers themselves situated very close to the seating position. That may be a good thing for consumers who do most of their listening at their desk, but will be less than ideal otherwise.

And your point on less-than-good recordings, well consider how most of them will get played back. A lot of hip-hop recordings purposely boost the lower range for mobile subwoofers, and things that sound less than stellar on a high resolution system might actually be more optimal on a mini-system, FM radio, MP3, or computer desktop. Also, most pop recordings use dynamic range compression to cram all those multitracks into two channels. It's not the speakers themselves that produce the sound that you don't like, very often it's a calculated method based on how the target audience listens to their music or how a producer wants something to sound.

RGA
03-11-2004, 11:23 AM
This is precisely the point. PMC is a nearfield speaker and listening in nearfield they are terrific - in even normal sized living rooms the TB2, anyway, is atrocious...the bass depth dissapears and it sounds completely compressed.

Yes recordings studios - the big ones Skywalker, Abbey Road use B&W - and assuming B&W isn't lying they claim to be used in more than 80% of all recording studios of classical music. If this is indeed the case they must be used by NAXOS as Naxos is the largest classical recorder and presumably Sony and London and Deutch Gramaphone . JBL are Pro monitors - my bad for forgetting JBL. Of course listening to JBL speakers often wants me want to forget them.

As for many a recording...at least from the ones I have I found a far greater disparity in them than I used to hear from typical speakers. Some of them I thought we dynamically lousy are actually - in some ways the reverse - some that jumbled everything to center by speakers that possibly force everything to center - because people assume singers are ALWAYS in the center and thus think the speakers has an accurate soundstage - I have found offer a lot more variations.

So I perhaps shouldn't get on the nearfield monitors too much.

Sealed
03-11-2004, 12:13 PM
The funny thing is most speakers used in recording studios don't have the words Studio Monitor or reference in the title.

One of the bigger "IN STUDIO" speaker companies is called the Profesional Monitor Company. When they started making speakers for the home(same speakers) they shifted the name and are now called PMC. B&W's M801 and M805 among others have the M stand for Matrix and the N is Nautilus. The 801(in various forms) is said to be the speaker most classical recording studios choose.
.

That is 100% correct, and I had not thought of it in reverse terms like that. :eek:

PMC, Westlake, Mackie, ATC and B&W are used all over the world. They have no fancified names. In fact, even the home line doesn't have esoteric names. They use alphanumerics.

PMC: GB-1 (killer new floorstander) OB-x
ATC: SCM-12, SCM-35 etc (used to master DSOTM SACD)
B&W 802

These are all exceptional home speakers as well, and they all look rather plain, except for the B&W.

None of them say "reference" or "studio monitor"

I noticed JBL speakers are used to monitor pop and rock for the most part.

RGA
03-12-2004, 11:29 AM
I should not have made a generalization but it can't be helped. Sure woochifer points to a few exceptions but Look at Klipsh and Paradigm. The latter has a Monitor series a Studio series AND a Reference series. None are used in studios - or at least big known ones. Klipsch has a Studio and Reference. Not that it maters because most of the speakers people tout in studios are not necessarily any better than those that are not.

People love Magnepan and ML neither would be in studio - not perhaps due to sound but maybe size - or they aren't acurate enough for the type of sound needed for rock/pop.

I'm not attacking them for naming speakers like this - it is another nail in the advertising push to make it look more impressive on paper and it is a business. Heck I had a set of Hitachi speakers that were digital monitors LOL.

The term is all advertising. And a lot of people often have a tool to use for recording but would rather listen to music through something else.

Woochifer
03-12-2004, 11:46 AM
Yes recordings studios - the big ones Skywalker, Abbey Road use B&W - and assuming B&W isn't lying they claim to be used in more than 80% of all recording studios of classical music. If this is indeed the case they must be used by NAXOS as Naxos is the largest classical recorder and presumably Sony and London and Deutch Gramaphone . JBL are Pro monitors - my bad for forgetting JBL. Of course listening to JBL speakers often wants me want to forget them.

Well, just because B&W is used in those recording studios does not mean that they are the ONLY ones that are used. People who've been to Skywalker Sound have noted that while B&W is indeed used there, they are only used in one of the control rooms there. From the late-80s through the 90s, my understanding is that the most popular near-field monitor was the Yamaha NS10. Supposedly, its popularity was due in large part to how well recordings mixed through those monitors translated with car audio, mini systems, and other mass market products -- basically, how those recordings would actually get played back in the real world, not just on high resolution component-based audio systems.

JBL's professional and consumer lines are separate divisions, with different missions. One does not drive the other, except in name recognition and marketing.

Sealed
03-12-2004, 11:51 AM
[QUOTE=RGA
I'm not attacking them for naming speakers like this - it is another nail in the advertising push to make it look more impressive on paper and it is a business. Heck I had a set of Hitachi speakers that were digital monitors LOL.

The term is all advertising. And a lot of people often have a tool to use for recording but would rather listen to music through something else.[/QUOTE]


The use of "reference" and "monitor" is an implied quality, and yeah...quite abused.

The only naming conventions that bother me are recievers:

instead of being names something like "Andromeda" or "model 2" they are often something like:

Sony THX-1120-4v(ht)l-101mkII
Kenwood VHX-T-10001-4HTL2.2

Oh come on! How in the hell am I supposed to remember wacky long names like that? Why not call it something easy to remember!

RGA
03-12-2004, 07:19 PM
Well, just because B&W is used in those recording studios does not mean that they are the ONLY ones that are used. People who've been to Skywalker Sound have noted that while B&W is indeed used there, they are only used in one of the control rooms there. From the late-80s through the 90s, my understanding is that the most popular near-field monitor was the Yamaha NS10. Supposedly, its popularity was due in large part to how well recordings mixed through those monitors translated with car audio, mini systems, and other mass market products -- basically, how those recordings would actually get played back in the real world, not just on high resolution component-based audio systems.

JBL's professional and consumer lines are separate divisions, with different missions. One does not drive the other, except in name recognition and marketing.

I'm not sure if you're trying to read an argument from me or not, but you are simply confirming what I've already been attempting to say. If a studio like Skywalker sound uses entirely different speakers throughout the recording/mastering process then the word reference is silly. Theoretically there is one reference - perfect reproduction of sound. That does not exists so reference is the best available. hich isn't 12 different sounding speaker designs used in the recording process with 11 different RE.s doing different parts.

At no time have I said a speaker used in a recording studio is a superior speaker - Some are chosen from necessity or advertising that helps regular consumers lean a certain way. Abbey Road uses B&W and if you loved an album from there maybe you want the same speaker brand...this may sound like a dumb reason but it is possible. Price dealer mark-downs or FREE for the right to advertise. For all wa know B&W GAVE Skywalker those 5 or 6 802's for permission to advertise on their website. The cost to B&W is a drop in the bucket if this were the case.

It simply doesn't mean anything anymore. It's just another buzz-word today. Discussion of it actually draws my eye on it because I don't really pay attention to the speaker's name. I have a rather suspicious nature and now that it's been called to my attention I have the attitude of "Figures they need to push the buzz-words because the sound - probably --- can't sell the product." Note this is just knee jerk gut feel to companies using these terms and there are big exceptions and I realize they need to sell their speakers - it just seems like every company has a reference series or Signature series or Elite line or studio master line or digital monitor...or for the more subtly elitist naming VANGUARD etc.

I suppose it's more interesting than E, J, or K. And something tells me it's going t be hard to sell a speaker called the Absolute Zero. AN has a bit of a snyde sense of humour with their Zero line. They consider it to be the worst line you would want to buy...They have a zero amplifier and cd player. They also have a minus 1 --- which is their solid state amplifer - which they don't or ever have made. Well I thought it was sardonic anyway.

Sealed
03-13-2004, 12:30 AM
The KEF dealer called 105/4 a "Dalek"

Is it? you be the judge:

http://dalek.ncc.com/dalek.jpg
Dalek


http://www.kef.com/technology/pod/images/slide0068_image006.jpg
KEF 105/4

hehehe... :D

RGA
03-13-2004, 12:26 PM
Hahaha.

I would not be surprised - maybe the Kef is a baby Dalek. You'll have to look inside to see if the gooey creature lives there.

The B&W 801 Matrix series also kinda looks like a Dalek. Wharfedale had one too. I think those British designers watched too much Dr. Who growing up.

junkeroos
03-14-2004, 11:24 PM
Which studios are you referring to? Do you know this for fact or is this just presumption? There are quite a few studios out there that use actual "studio monitors". Mackie is currently one of the top studio monitor manufacturers, and have rated at or near the top of comparison tests I've seen in professional trade journals. Guess what they call their studio monitor lineup?

http://www.mackie.com/products/studiomonitors/index.html

Meyer Sound is a local outfit that makes custom sound systems for live sound and studio applications (including Davies Symphony Hall in SF and the Sydney Opera House). They market exclusively to professional environments, and came up with a rather creative name for the stuff that they sell to recording studios.

http://www.meyersound.com/products/studioseries/index.htm

Oh, and let's not forget one-time market leader JBL. They also sell a line-up of pro audio speakers that are designed for use in mixing studios. What do they call them, I forget...

http://www.jblpro.com/LSR/LSR6300_index.htm
...

You forgot to include a particular line from Superior Line Source loudspeakers which they call the Studio Reference series!

http://www.slsloudspeakers.com/studio%20reference%20series.htm

omikey
03-15-2004, 06:42 AM
Thanks for all the input, it's MUCH more than I expected :-)

What I gather from all this is: Different mfg use the term to assit in the sales of their speakers. To me (just a lowly consumer) it has no significance. Since I do not have the 'reference' to compare against, I don't know how well they do, or don't, match to some unspecified reference.

Thanks for all the input !
Mike

RGA
03-15-2004, 07:06 PM
Thanks for all the input, it's MUCH more than I expected :-)

What I gather from all this is: Different mfg use the term to assit in the sales of their speakers. To me (just a lowly consumer) it has no significance. Since I do not have the 'reference' to compare against, I don't know how well they do, or don't, match to some unspecified reference.

Thanks for all the input !
Mike

If you're looking to identify something of a reference Audio Note's philosophy is one of the better written ones around. Even if you don't have access to their gear it is certainly a good way to judge gear...better than the typical ones. You are correct, it is very difficult to pin down the reference...and that is part of the reason so many upgrade speakers and equipment so much...they call it the road to audio hell where you're never satisfied. It is a way to listen to products of any price range you're in.

It's fairly long but a worthy read. http://www.audionote.co.uk/anp1.htm

johndonline
04-06-2004, 12:05 PM
It's about time that someone steps up from the industry and explain to you guys to narrow down your researches. Reference speakers are speakers with a very flat response for mixing and mastering purposes. Sure you can get a set of cheap and effective Logitech speakers for your tv or computer, but the result mixes will lack in more than one range of frequency.

Now i'm going to let you search about "flat response" and see what you can come up with.

Enjoy the sound,

gonefishin
04-06-2004, 12:27 PM
johnD, would you care to give me four examples of reference speakers that are in four differing price ranges? It's just tought to know exactly where your coming from without giving examples. While what you've said does sound nice...some examples may give credence to what you say. It's just too easy to say "that I want a reference speaker with no flaws". When you could be talking about Bose AM15's...we just don't know.




price range one - under $1,500
price range two - between $1,501 - $8,000
price range three - between $8,001 - $18,000
price range four - between $18,001 - up


thank ya :)

gonefishin
04-06-2004, 12:40 PM
If you're looking to identify something of a reference Audio Note's philosophy is one of the better written ones around. Even if you don't have access to their gear it is certainly a good way to judge gear...better than the typical ones. You are correct, it is very difficult to pin down the reference...and that is part of the reason so many upgrade speakers and equipment so much...they call it the road to audio hell where you're never satisfied. It is a way to listen to products of any price range you're in.

It's fairly long but a worthy read. http://www.audionote.co.uk/anp1.htm
Hi RGA,

While I do think AudioNote speakers sound good...and their lower priced models are a real good buy. their descriptions and ads are just awful. (To me) It reads as 100% marketing and looks like a bad cable ad. I keep looking for the pixie dust to sprinkle on these speakers.

One of the nice things about the AudioNote speakers I've heard is that they tend to get a couple things right, that many audiophile speakers today do not. Namely low(ish) distortion and some dynamic range. These AN speakers can sell themselves...without all the gobbally goop in their ads. Yuk! ;)

RGA
04-06-2004, 01:21 PM
Hi RGA,

While I do think AudioNote speakers sound good...and their lower priced models are a real good buy. their descriptions and ads are just awful. (To me) It reads as 100% marketing and looks like a bad cable ad. I keep looking for the pixie dust to sprinkle on these speakers.

One of the nice things about the AudioNote speakers I've heard is that they tend to get a couple things right, that many audiophile speakers today do not. Namely low(ish) distortion and some dynamic range. These AN speakers can sell themselves...without all the gobbally goop in their ads. Yuk! ;)

What sort of gobbally goop? Granted they are confusing and their web-site is a cheesy mess constructed by anyone who opened their Front Page instruction manual...but hey it's better than paying a staff 100k a year to make your web-site...where would that salary have gone that would have helped the buyer? The actual speakers etc? N''ah

And every company does this. B&W etc goes on about their technology(a Lot of companies spend a lot of time discussing the technology -- why? what are they selling a good sounding speaker or a bunch of neat drivers?) Or they supply an endless list of reviews that say their stuff is good...buy the same mags that say everything is good.

AN is a bit more arrogant in their verbiage - I suggest people listen before they read the site...If you like the sound then you may very well buy into their philosophies and essays...if you don't like their sound then well then you should stop there and look elsewhere.

gonefishin
04-06-2004, 02:00 PM
Rga, read http://http://www.audionote.co.uk/anp1.htm this to see one of the instances I was talking about when I said AN's site looked like marketing gobbally goop. Hey, I think it's effective...I just think the speakers sound good enough they don't need to use this type of marketing.

Do you blah blah...
Do you blah blah...

if you answered yes to either or both of these blah blah, then do not pass go.

come on...it's kinda cheesy. lol ;) But I guess they have to get peoples attention somehow.


back to the sound...yes, they do sound pretty good.


take care>>>>>>>>>>>>

gonefishin
04-06-2004, 04:42 PM
I've seen this in many speaker specs, I see it mentioned here often and was wondering just what this really means.


Thanks,
Mikey

Reference speakers are different from person to person. Not only because of what they may have been exposed to and what their preferences are...but also how the system in question was set up at the time they heard them.

This reference speaker is what the person compares all other speakers he/she listens to to.

As for "reference" being in the name of the speaker or model name...well, that's just marketing hype.

I suppose there can also be a number of "reference" standards within one industry (recording or playback) that are adopted for a group of people. It seems things like that have been tried or adopted in the past...but companies always seem to end up skewing the numbers and falsely representing their speaker "also" as reference.

Further, many things can make up a "reference" speaker. Not one characteristic of this reference speaker will make another speaker of reference quality. Having the same frequency response as one speaker which may be of "reference" quality does not alone make it ALSO reference quality. There are obviously other factors.

Tho I can find enjoyment from almost any system or from any speaker. The speaker that I compare others I listen to are the EdgarHorn TiTan System. Like I've said, along the way I've heard many good speakers...but the TiTans seem to get many things right, to me ;)


enjoy your reference!

johndonline
04-06-2004, 05:57 PM
Allright, let me give you a couple of examples, and as far as prices go, we're not all the same area so prices could vary.

Let me then give you 4 different sets of speakers with flat response that are considered reference speakers:

*M-Audio Studiophile BX8

http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=products.main&ID=acad3753c070f5babbab268ac27abac8

*Yamaha MSP10

http://www.yamaha.ca/show_model.asp?modelId=1258&modelCode=MSP10+STUDIO

*Mackie PM3

http://www.mackie.com/products/hr824/index.html

*Yorkville YSM1p

http://www.yorkville.com/products_main.asp?cat=20&id=118&type=33&show=


Like I said for prices, because of currencies and different regions, I won't risk it. And again, these are not to use with your tv, these are active profesionnal speakers used in non smoke environnment for mixing and mastering purposes.

I hope my examples can help some of you guys

Just trying to drop my two cents !

Enjoy

johndonline
04-06-2004, 06:09 PM
I wanted to add this but I clicked too fast..

True reference speakers won't sound very good to your "regular joe" because the wave length of the frequency response is not going to extremes to reproduce sound. It's ideal for mixing as there is no "color" to the sound. What you mix is going to sound good everywhere ( car, home, walkman, 2.1, 4.1, 5.1, etc.. ) and then you rely on the listener to ajust the EQ to personal preferences.

Johnd :)

RGA
04-06-2004, 09:35 PM
Rga, read http://http://www.audionote.co.uk/anp1.htm this to see one of the instances I was talking about when I said AN's site looked like marketing gobbally goop. Hey, I think it's effective...I just think the speakers sound good enough they don't need to use this type of marketing.

Do you blah blah...
Do you blah blah...

if you answered yes to either or both of these blah blah, then do not pass go.

come on...it's kinda cheesy. lol ;) But I guess they have to get peoples attention somehow.


back to the sound...yes, they do sound pretty good.


take care>>>>>>>>>>>>

I could not open that link but if it is the Article on "Are You on the Road to Audio Hell" it was not marketing...it was an essay written over several issues in Positive Feedback Magazine and nowehre in the article does it advertise Audio Note speakers or products - other than to let you know who wrote it. There is quite a lot in that article that makes more sense to me than anything else. For a start the way people should be conducting their listening via compare by contrast, the false notion of detail versus resolution etc. That article is referenced by many people...even those who don't own Audio Note speakers. At least they take the time to write a passionate article about musical reproduction and their beliefs. It's long - but highly useful for auditioning - and best of all ANYONE can do it and have success doing it. Audiophiles may not like it because they can't feel superior like they have a better ear...but tough.

gonefishin
04-07-2004, 07:42 PM
Allright, let me give you a couple of examples, and as far as prices go, we're not all the same area so prices could vary.

Let me then give you 4 different sets of speakers with flat response that are considered reference speakers:

*M-Audio Studiophile BX8

http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=products.main&ID=acad3753c070f5babbab268ac27abac8

*Yamaha MSP10

http://www.yamaha.ca/show_model.asp?modelId=1258&modelCode=MSP10+STUDIO

*Mackie PM3

http://www.mackie.com/products/hr824/index.html

*Yorkville YSM1p

http://www.yorkville.com/products_main.asp?cat=20&id=118&type=33&show=


Like I said for prices, because of currencies and different regions, I won't risk it. And again, these are not to use with your tv, these are active profesionnal speakers used in non smoke environnment for mixing and mastering purposes.

I hope my examples can help some of you guys

Just trying to drop my two cents !

Enjoy


Flat response speakers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wanted to add this but I clicked too fast..

True reference speakers won't sound very good to your "regular joe" because the wave length of the frequency response is not going to extremes to reproduce sound. It's ideal for mixing as there is no "color" to the sound. What you mix is going to sound good everywhere ( car, home, walkman, 2.1, 4.1, 5.1, etc.. ) and then you rely on the listener to ajust the EQ to personal preferences.



Hey, thanks for the response. I do have a better idea where your coming from now.

You know, even tho my speakers do use some pro drivers...and I've heard a number of other speakers that use pro drivers in their design...I really haven't given studio monitors a fair shake. I'll try to keep this in mind in the future and have a listen when I'm given the opportunity.

Not talking about any of the monitors you've mentioned, because I haven't heard them. But speakers (commercial and DIY) are certainly effected by more than just a flat response. You can certainly have speakers which have a similar frequency response, yet sound very different from one another. To me...one of the areas that set some speakers apart are preserving good tone while maintaining low distortion and a wide dynamic range at both low and high volumes. I'm not saying that maintaining a somewhat flat (ish) in room frequency response is not important...but that this alone is far from making a reference speaker...at least what I view a reference speaker as. Of course, ask me my subjective opinion tomorrow, and I may give you a different answer ;)


thanks..take care>>>>>>>>>

elances
05-30-2004, 03:10 AM
Sorry to resurrect an older thread, but I wanted to mention one company's use of the term "reference." KEF has a Reference line. This is what they mean when they use the term:

The continuing evolution of KEF's legendary Reference Series has always been based on the concept of benchmark precision.

Every time a new generation of models is developed to incorporate more sophisticated technologies, we build prototypes that are as close to perfection as possible. These then become the ‘Reference’ to which every single production version must conform, each set assembled by a skilled craftsman who matches their performance to a tolerance of just 0.5dB.

When you buy a set of KEF's Reference speakers, they are guaranteeing that they are matched to the prototypes within 0.5dB across the frequency range, which also guarantees that the pair you buy match each other. I would say that this is a little better than mere marketing hype using a word like "monitor" or "reference." They also maintain records on every set of Reference speakers they sell, so if one of your speakers gets damaged, you can get a replacement that will sound virtually identical.

Regards,
Erick
(No, I do not work for KEF, otherwise I would own KEF Maidstones or Raymond Cooke Signature Edition Reference 107's, instead of my little KEF Q's! :D )

RGA
05-30-2004, 12:37 PM
elances

While what Kef is saying is all very nice it is only useful to the customer of the speakers - and not that Kef can be considered any sort of reference against other brands.

Audio Note matches their speakers, by hand, to within .2db and to .1db on their best models. All this really does is mean that all their speakers are consistant so if one is damaged you can order another and know that they will match each other - and that they are careful with regards to quality control. Audio Note does that with all their speakers though not just their best models.

Every company must have their own reference sound I suppose. Audio Note uses the Snell Type AII as their base speaker to build their other speakers from. So that Snell is probably their reference(as are the other original Snell models).

There is no such thing as "The" reference speaker - and if the reference changes what good is it?

For instance amplifier and cd player makers who don't sell speakers must use a speaker to hear their amp and cd player creations. Some Audio Magazines use reference speakers but different people have different references to judge others against. So if you don't love that magazine's reference then you may or even should view their evaluations of other speakers differently. UHF magazine uses Reference 3a speakers to judge other speakers - and they may view some speaker as bright - but if you perceive Reference 3a as laid back rather than being neutral then that bright spekaer may sound quite natural to you.

One mastering studio may use B&W another may use Audio Note another Kef another PMC - none of which sound much alike.