Recording studio's using M2

[srm51555]

I finally listened to "Sound Reproduction - Art and Science" (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?37434-New-2-way-in-the-synthesis-Blue-bafle-Line&p=381571&viewfull=1#post381571) by Floyd Toole posted my Thomas (pos) a while back ago. One of the last things he spoke about was how behaved the M2 was and how they may make a recording sound not so good when it was mixed on a not so behaved speaker. This got me thinking on finding out what recording studios use the M2 and try to find to purchase a CD or two. So if you know of a studio or label that does please post it here. Also the video is filled with good and logical info on speaker evaluation so it might be worth while if you haven't watched it yet.

Thanks,
Scott

[Ed Zeppeli]

Maybe this Frank Filipetti fellow could provide some clues.

http://www.audiophilenirvana.com/audiophile-equipment-reviews/jbl-m2-master-reference-monitor-review/

[rdgrimes]

One of the last things he spoke about was how behaved the M2 was and how they may make a recording sound not so good when it was mixed on a not so behaved speaker.

This is the sort of thing that some audiophile types like to say that doesn't really have any basis in demonstrable facts. A speaker of the M2's caliber will make everything sound better, even poorer recordings. Might it reveal some objectionable qualities in a bad mastering job? Yes, but it will also reveal all the good stuff in that recording that may be lost in a lesser speaker along with the bad stuff. So statements like that might have more to do with rationalizing the decision not to purchase them.

[Ed Zeppeli]

Well, let's say that an album was mixed on monitors that had a pronounced frequency response at 800 Hz. The producer reduced said response via EQ at the mixing stage to compensate and balance out the mix.

Later, when played back on a flat system wouldn't the mix seem lacking in the 800 Hz region?

[grumpy]

Engineers are supposed to be aware of the lumps and bumps of their tools, so no,
the person should mix with the aggressive 800Hz bump present, knowing that it
will not come off that way on a flat system. Sometimes those lumps and bumps
allow the engineer to hear what they need to (bit of an intentional magnifying glass),
but not what the end listener is intended to.

[rdgrimes]

^^^
This.
A recording engineer is supposed to know his/her tools. In terms of FR curves in the studio, they should already be EQ'd to flat response anyway. That's pretty basic, "recording 101" stuff.

[srm51555]

Maybe this Frank Filipetti fellow could provide some clues
Thanks, I originally performed a search for his recent albums since he is the only person I know of and didn't find anything.


A speaker of the M2's caliber will make everything sound better, even poorer recordings. Might it reveal some objectionable qualities in a bad mastering job?

It does. I have found myself discovering new music with my DIY version. Unfortunately the bad mastering job music is almost unlistenable to me and has been reassigned to the car where it belongs.

[Ed Zeppeli]

This is the sort of thing that some audiophile types like to say that doesn't really have any basis in demonstrable facts. A speaker of the M2's caliber will make everything sound better, even poorer recordings.

While I agree with the concept that the M2s are more revealing I'm not sure about the supposition that most of what was hidden is now considered an improvement by this revelation.


Thanks, I originally performed a search for his recent albums since he is the only person I know of and didn't find anything.



It does. I have found myself discovering new music with my DIY version. Unfortunately the bad mastering job music is almost unlistenable to me and has been reassigned to the car where it belongs.

I feel the same about some mixes too on my paltry system. I can't imagine how the M2s might change up my playlist.

It's interesting how little info there is on studios that have installed the M2.

[srm51555]

^^^
This.
A recording engineer is supposed to know his/her tools. In terms of FR curves in the studio, they should already be EQ'd to flat response anyway. That's pretty basic, "recording 101" stuff.

This is what I always thought, but he explains how Spinorama measurements tell us another story. At 1:04:00 Toole goes into Spinorama data on different loudspeakers and shows price isn't always a good measure of a speaker. We a LHF already knew this but now we have proof to back us up.

Disclaimer: I'll still pretty new at this charts and graph stuff so if you have a 101 of spinorama or impedance curves you'd like to share please post it for me and others who are still learning.

Thanks,
Scott

[hsosdrum]

Before I left Harman I had an opportunity to audition recordings I had made at my home studio on the production version of the M2, and I can tell you from direct experience that they did not make the recordings sound "better" in the euphonically-pleasing way most of us think that "better" is. What they did was uncover and reveal every detail that was inherent in the making of those recordings—all of the good details (drum tuning, mic placement, soundstage presentation) as well as all of the not-so-good details (phase interference between mics, poor EQ choices, over-use of artificial reverb). Although the monitors I use at home told me that I had issues in all of these areas, the M2s showed me the exact nature and extent of these issues without introducing any colorations of its own that would obscure them with any sort of false presentation.

As I have posted elsewhere on LHF, in my experience the M2 does a better job of presenting the input signal in this way (with virtually no speaker-introduced additions or subtractions) than any other speaker, period. And yes, I've heard all of the Everest II models as well as all of the audiophile "flavors-of-the-month" that came and went between the mid-1970s and mid-2000s. Every one of them imposes its own personality on the sound, which I think is the basis for the phenomenon of a speaker making the input sound "better". The M2 simply leaves it alone so it can be heard stripped bare, which may or may not appeal to someone looking for a speaker that will create a pleasing presentation on a wide variety of recordings. But this is exactly what makes the M2 such a valuable tool for people in the recording business.

[Ed Kreamer]

^^^
This.
A recording engineer is supposed to know his/her tools. In terms of FR curves in the studio, they should already be EQ'd to flat response anyway. That's pretty basic, "recording 101" stuff.

Indeed. However, I can't think that any recording engineer who would not want a clear and accurate rendering of what he/she is recording or mixing. We all know that certain speakers color the sound more than others, and it would seem to me that the engineer would want as neutral a reproducer as possible.
I do wonder what those $1800 speakers were that Dr. Toole was talking about.

[srm51555]

I do wonder what those $1800 speakers were that Dr. Toole was talking about.

Me too!

[1audiohack]

That's what the 708i retails for. ?

Barry.

[pos]

There was a discussion about these $1800 speakers somewhere over the diyaudio or avs forum (or?...), can't remember exactly, but I think the conclusion was that it was a pair of infinity speakers.

[srm51555]

Adding one more:

http://www.jblpro.com/www/news/news-detail/2013/12/17/legendary-engineer-and-producer-bruce-botnick-outfits-his-studio-with-three-of-harman-s-jbl-professional-m2-master-reference-monitors

[audiomagnate]

there was a discussion about these $1800 speakers somewhere over the diyaudio or avs forum (or?...), can't remember exactly, but i think the conclusion was that it was a pair of infinity speakers.

lL-60