" TonyLummox "

I sometimes read a magazine called Computer Music, aimed at wanabee and
real music "producers" to use the current vernacular. In this mag I keep
seeing references to monitor speakers being preferable to hi-fi speakers.
The line they take is that hi-fi speakers are designed to "enhance the
sound" while studio monitor speakers are designed so that you hear "what is
really there".

But there is more..they say "..even modestly priced monitors will give you
a more accurate picture of what you are hearing,"

I'm puzzled, I thought the whole idea of hi-fi was to reproduce accurately
what was recorded. Why should "modestly priced monitors" be better ?
Comments please ?


** Sure - you are a 100% damn troll.


For anyone curious, wiki has a pretty good explanation of the topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_monitor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_...Hi-Fi_speakers

BTW:

One of the best 3-way box speakers ever made was the Yamaha NS1000M -
it was popular as both a professional studio monitor and domestic hi-fi
speaker.

http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/olde...hans1000m.html

Interestingly, it has the uncanny ability to sound very much like a Quad
ESL57.



...... Phil