Recommendation for Narrow-Field Monitors

[Alois Huber]

Has anyone recommendations for a small, low-priced monitor.

I will use it in my lab to verify audio DSP solutions. Therefore
output power does not matter (>= 10 Watt) but they should be impulse
overload resistant. I have a power amp, so they do not need to be
active.

Thanks in advance,
Alois

[James Boyk]

Alois Huber wrote:
> Has anyone recommendations for a small, low-priced monitor.

Perhaps you mean "near-field"?


> I will use it in my lab to verify audio DSP solutions. Therefore
> output power does not matter (>= 10 Watt) but they should be impulse
> overload resistant. I have a power amp, so they do not need to be
> active.

*Output* power of a speaker is the acoustic power it makes in the air;
and ten watts would be enormous! Perhaps you are specifying the
*amplifier* power you want the speaker to work with? But that's the
wrong thing to specify, because how much sound you get depends on the
efficiency of the speaker. It's true that people often speak of the
"power rating" of their speakers as though a higher number somehow meant
a more powerful speaker; but this is wrong.

An excellent inexpensive speaker is the NHT 1.1; it's no longer made,
but maybe you can find a pair used. It's better than the model which
replaced it (the SuperOne).

It's remarkable how many decent speakers exist for under say $500/pair;
yet I haven't been found a good amplifier in the same price range (by
"good" I mean as good as say the old NAD 3020). "Received wisdom" says
that good amps are easier to make than good speakers; but this is not
borne out by my experience, at least in this price range.

James Boyk

[John]

I use a pair of Alesis M1 Active MK2's.

$400/pair, and the sound VERY nice for the price. Not loud but accurate.
SHould be fine for your app.

John

"Alois Huber" > wrote in message
m...
> Has anyone recommendations for a small, low-priced monitor.
>
> I will use it in my lab to verify audio DSP solutions. Therefore
> output power does not matter (>= 10 Watt) but they should be impulse
> overload resistant. I have a power amp, so they do not need to be
> active.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Alois

[Alois Huber]

> Perhaps you mean "near-field"?

Yes.

> *Output* power of a speaker is the acoustic power it makes in the air;
> and ten watts would be enormous! Perhaps you are specifying the
> *amplifier* power you want the speaker to work with? But that's the
> wrong thing to specify, because how much sound you get depends on the
> efficiency of the speaker. It's true that people often speak of the
> "power rating" of their speakers as though a higher number somehow meant
> a more powerful speaker; but this is wrong.

Electrical power: I have got an amplifier rated at 60 Watt RMS per
channel. Therefore a passive monitor would be nice.

Acoustic power: Extreme power level is not needed, usual home
recording level would be fine.

Accuracy: To verify correct signal processing it is mandatory that the
monitors produce an accurate audio signal that is good enough for
professional audio.

One important thing is: The speakers shall be able to withstand
extreme input levels or signals, respective. Digital algorithms (DSP)
in the design phase may produce them (e.g. oscillating filters, click
souds or artefacts of wrong block processing) and the developer
sometimes forgets to put the fader to -oo in time.

/Alois

[W. Williams]

I suppose that depends on one's definition of loud. I thought they were
pretty loud - the spec says they are capable of 105dB SPL, but I've never
needed to take them past "7" on the volume knob.

W

"John" wrote:

> I use a pair of Alesis M1 Active MK2's.
>
> $400/pair, and the sound VERY nice for the price. Not loud but accurate.
> SHould be fine for your app.
>
> John
>

[James Boyk]

Alois Huber wrote:
> I have got an amplifier rated at 60 Watt RMS per channel. Therefore a passive monitor would be nice.

60W can be enormous or inadequate, depending on your speaker. In
addition, as you may know, power specs are almost meaningless, for a
variety of reasons. (One 20W amp was measured as producing more sound
into a given speaker than a 100W amp.)


> Acoustic power: Extreme power level is not needed, usual home recording level would be fine.

No two people's ideas of "usual" are the same. If by chance you want
your playback to duplicate the level of the live music you're recording,
forget it, unless you're recording acoustic guitar or clavichord.


> it is mandatory that the monitors produce an accurate audio signal that is good enough for professional audio.

"Professional audio" ranges from truly lousy to superlative; but for the
sake of discussion, have you considered using high-quality headphones?


> The speakers shall be able to withstand extreme input levels or signals, respective. Digital algorithms (DSP)
> in the design phase may produce them (e.g. oscillating filters, click
> souds or artefacts of wrong block processing) and the developer
> sometimes forgets to put the fader to -oo in time.

*Don't* "forget." (But do forget headphones, because they'd subject your
EARS to these artifacts.)

Thus, you want a speaker "accurate audio signal good enough for
professional audio," efficient enough to produce monitor level from a
60W amp, sturdy enough not to break when you mistreat it
electrically---and you want all this for cheap? When you find it, let us
all know about it!

But meanwhile, if you don't use headphones, I suggest trying the NHT 1.1
or one of the other inexpensive speakers suggested by others here. They
don't meet any of your criteria; but they'll get you started.

James Boyk
http://www.performancerecordings.com

[Alois Huber]

> No two people's ideas of "usual" are the same. If by chance you want
> your playback to duplicate the level of the live music you're recording,
> forget it, unless you're recording acoustic guitar or clavichord.

I prefer an acoustic monitor level of about 85 dB.

> "Professional audio" ranges from truly lousy to superlative; but for the
> sake of discussion, have you considered using high-quality headphones?

Yes, there is no definition of "Professional audio", I know. But my
products have to qualify for companies producing so-called 'Pro Audio'
equipment. That's the point.

> *Don't* "forget." (But do forget headphones, because they'd subject your
> EARS to these artifacts.)

That's why I prefer speakers.

> Thus, you want a speaker "accurate audio signal good enough for
> professional audio," efficient enough to produce monitor level from a
> 60W amp, sturdy enough not to break when you mistreat it
> electrically---and you want all this for cheap? When you find it, let us
> all know about it!

Thank you for your ideas!

I finally tend to do following steps:
- I insert a limiter (with peak measurement) in the signal chain to
always avoid extreme electrical signal levels
- development phase: I use my 'lousy and old' keyboard speakers
(broad-band). If they are smoked, buying a new chassis is not
expensive
- qualifying phase: I use the 'good' monitors to verify accuracy

Thank you and all other posters,
Alois