KRK Monitors
KRK Monitors Posted on: 13.12.2011 by Darren Fawber Ok so ive decided to go with KRK monitors for my home dj/production set up. I would like to use them for house parties here and there, but for the most part it will be for personal use in a medium sized room.Which model would you recommend? RP6G2 or RP8G2 and do you believe i would need a sub? | |
| Keli Muennink 18.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by farhanashraf
|
| Adriana Bazzelle 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
There's your straw man along with a few hard facts. I'm not going to argue with someone who is 'being simple'. I responded to this thread to keep the information flowin'. If any one else has experience with monitors specifically KRK's this is where the original thread started. Just don't limit yourself and do some 'REAL' homework. It will pay off in the end. Maybe to the tune of $10,000!!!!! |
| Dorie Scelzo 16.12.2011 | Preamps are different than power amps. And there's a lot more that goes into compressor, EQ, etc. circuitry than goes into a normal power amp. So, thanks for building up a straw man. I'm just going to ignore that and pretend that you're actually arguing with the point I tried to make and not something you made up. Anyway |
| Adriana Bazzelle 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by djproben
Recently (about 8 months ago) I brought a engineer into my studio and had him sit in front of my mixing desk where I performed a blind test on him. I played the exact same 45 second wav at the same volume, playing through the three sources. He also like mostapha thought there would be little to no discernible difference, and he was amazed how much difference there was. What really amazed me was that he correctly identified the three sources correctly! I told him there was a tube amp, an early transistor amp and a modern day amp. He correctly identified all three sources. This tells me he knew what he was hearing and where those sources would be altered depending on the source. One more point to absolutely prove the point. If all amplifiers were created equal, why have so many mic pre choices? You can't tell me there is no difference between a $5000 tube mic pre and a cheap $50 mic pre. Yes there is a difference. Same with Eq's, compressors and so on. People like Rupert Neve have spent their entire lives trying to get the absolute best sound from their gear from mic pre's to mixing desks. To state there is no difference is ridiculous. Drooling over this desk! |
| Danae Dumler 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by deathstarchris
I didn't see this mentioned in the challenge but would it be legit to compare a tube vs a transistor amp? I could see there being little to no difference among amps of the same kind but I would believe you could hear the difference between tube and transistor pretty clearly. At least that was my experience listening to tubes in the Manley showroom at CES last year (and I'll check it out again this year), but of course I knew what I was listening to so it wasn't a blind test, and the Manley amps were paired with certain speakers and sound sources that were different from the other amps I listened to, so the test didn't necessarily measure the differences between amps alone. --> EDIT - I just noticed this part; so apparently comparing tubes to transistors is kosher in the test, but an eq might be involved to level the playing field: "Richard Clark allows the equalizer to be added to whichever amplifier the listener wants. It can be added to the amplifier that the listener perceives as the weaker amplifier . The EQ is most likely to be used when comparing a tube amplifier (which exhibits slight high frequency rolloff) to a solid state amplifier . In that case Richard Clark says he can usually fashion an equalizer out of just a resistor and/or capacitor which for just a few dollars makes the solid state amplifier exhibit the same rolloff as the tube amplifier, and therefore sound the same. If the tube amplifier really sounded better, then modifying the solid state amplifier to sound indistinguishable from it for a few bucks should be a great improvement. " |
| Adriana Bazzelle 17.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
|
| Dorie Scelzo 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by deathstarchris
AFAIK, no one's been paid yet. Not specifically insulting you, but I have yet to see or hear anything that implies that any not-broken amplifier sounds different than any other until you're running them hotter than you should anyway. "Warmth" tends to mean the beginning of power stage saturation. Good for guitars |
| Spring Capoccia 19.12.2011 | KRK make fantastic nearfield monitors and I would say are a company to be trusted. The first time I listened to a pair of KRK monitors was when I was assisting Mark Spike Stent mixing Madonna at Olympic. |
| Keli Muennink 19.12.2011 | There not pa speakers so you arnt meant to really blast them anyways |
| Danae Dumler 19.12.2011 | maybe I'm just old but it seems like you would have to way overpower these (rp6) speakers before you'd have to worry about damaging them. If I had a party big enough to really tax these speakers it just wouldn't fit in my house. |
| Keli Muennink 18.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by farhanashraf
|
| Ninfa Larranaga 17.12.2011 | i would recommend get the 6s if u wanna do it just for the home studio, get the 8s if u want it for a house party. personally, i would never use my krk's for house parties, they r to nice to have drunk ppl around! |
| Osvaldo Newhall 16.12.2011 | I agree with Chris based on his statements and explanations. |
| Adriana Bazzelle 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
There's your straw man along with a few hard facts. I'm not going to argue with someone who is 'being simple'. I responded to this thread to keep the information flowin'. If any one else has experience with monitors specifically KRK's this is where the original thread started. Just don't limit yourself and do some 'REAL' homework. It will pay off in the end. Maybe to the tune of $10,000!!!!! |
| Dorie Scelzo 16.12.2011 | Preamps are different than power amps. And there's a lot more that goes into compressor, EQ, etc. circuitry than goes into a normal power amp. So, thanks for building up a straw man. I'm just going to ignore that and pretend that you're actually arguing with the point I tried to make and not something you made up. Anyway |
| Adriana Bazzelle 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by djproben
Recently (about 8 months ago) I brought a engineer into my studio and had him sit in front of my mixing desk where I performed a blind test on him. I played the exact same 45 second wav at the same volume, playing through the three sources. He also like mostapha thought there would be little to no discernible difference, and he was amazed how much difference there was. What really amazed me was that he correctly identified the three sources correctly! I told him there was a tube amp, an early transistor amp and a modern day amp. He correctly identified all three sources. This tells me he knew what he was hearing and where those sources would be altered depending on the source. One more point to absolutely prove the point. If all amplifiers were created equal, why have so many mic pre choices? You can't tell me there is no difference between a $5000 tube mic pre and a cheap $50 mic pre. Yes there is a difference. Same with Eq's, compressors and so on. People like Rupert Neve have spent their entire lives trying to get the absolute best sound from their gear from mic pre's to mixing desks. To state there is no difference is ridiculous. Drooling over this desk! |
| Danae Dumler 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by deathstarchris
I didn't see this mentioned in the challenge but would it be legit to compare a tube vs a transistor amp? I could see there being little to no difference among amps of the same kind but I would believe you could hear the difference between tube and transistor pretty clearly. At least that was my experience listening to tubes in the Manley showroom at CES last year (and I'll check it out again this year), but of course I knew what I was listening to so it wasn't a blind test, and the Manley amps were paired with certain speakers and sound sources that were different from the other amps I listened to, so the test didn't necessarily measure the differences between amps alone. --> EDIT - I just noticed this part; so apparently comparing tubes to transistors is kosher in the test, but an eq might be involved to level the playing field: "Richard Clark allows the equalizer to be added to whichever amplifier the listener wants. It can be added to the amplifier that the listener perceives as the weaker amplifier . The EQ is most likely to be used when comparing a tube amplifier (which exhibits slight high frequency rolloff) to a solid state amplifier . In that case Richard Clark says he can usually fashion an equalizer out of just a resistor and/or capacitor which for just a few dollars makes the solid state amplifier exhibit the same rolloff as the tube amplifier, and therefore sound the same. If the tube amplifier really sounded better, then modifying the solid state amplifier to sound indistinguishable from it for a few bucks should be a great improvement. " |
| Adriana Bazzelle 17.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by mostapha
|
| Dorie Scelzo 16.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by deathstarchris
AFAIK, no one's been paid yet. Not specifically insulting you, but I have yet to see or hear anything that implies that any not-broken amplifier sounds different than any other until you're running them hotter than you should anyway. "Warmth" tends to mean the beginning of power stage saturation. Good for guitars |
| Tashia Mcdunn 15.12.2011 | I debated getting KRK's or Thumps for the same purpose as you... I went with a single Mackie Thump 12" for its portability/durability. I agree that the sound is nothing to brag about but it gets the job done for a small house party or casual dj practice at home. If you are not going to be moving your speakers around very often, then I would suggest the 8" KRK's since they will sound better, but if you plan on taking them places then just go with some Thumps or even Behringers since they will transport easier. You are compromising either way really... you could get better sounding PA speakers but the price jumps quite a bit. |
| Adriana Bazzelle 15.12.2011 | Yes, mostapha, the flatter the response the better, but there is one more point I can make here. Most of you are familiar with 'active' monitors. But before there were active monitors, there were passive. The NS-10M's are passive. This is huge. Why? With active you are expecting the manufacturer to do a certain amount of work for you and have them choose your amplifier for you. You are hoping they make the right decision with matching the amplifier to the speakers. I have spent many hours studying the difference between amplifiers. I use 3 different amplifiers with my NS-10M's. I have 2 niles switches that allow me to switch inputs and outputs to 3 different amplifiers. The first amp is a custom built tube amp with balanced EL34A's. The second is a early transistor amp from the 60's that also was a custom built kit from Dynaco, and the last is a modern day transistor amp, that I routinely switch out to compare against newer designs. The three different amps really allow me to analyze how the NS-10M's are being influenced by different harmonic distortions at different frequencies. Here is a shot of my mixing desk. These NS-10M's are the bookshelf version that came with covers. This helps minimize the shrill high's of the top frequencies. (Shown with one cover off) Once you really take your audio seriously, you find yourself exploring and answering more questions than anything else. This has been a maddening pursuit and I would advise against it unless you really must know why something sounds the way it does. |
| Dorie Scelzo 15.12.2011 | Those ns-10s also have a ridiculous history. Every studio since they came out has had a set because they kinda sound like generically good but not amazing hi-fi speakers that don't specifically mess up sound with "processing", whatever that means to Sony and Pioneer. |
| Adriana Bazzelle 15.12.2011 | Monitors are a personal choice. Everyone likes a certain brand for this reason, or that reason. If you like KRK's then great. I would only add to believe long term. I choose NS-10m's 12+ years ago and I have moved them a total of 6 times. Different acoustics and set ups, but I know them backwards and forwards and now I have the new Yamaha's and even some M-audio BX8As, but for my final mixdowns, I need my NS-10's. I read recently about a DJ who had no budget when he first started DJ'ing and had some crappy Kinyo computer speakers, but after a few years he really got to learn those speakers and still swears by them. Think of it as a marriage and pick the best girl for you!!!! |
| Dorie Scelzo 14.12.2011 |
Originally Posted by jessevdriel
|
| Ashli Gatien 14.12.2011 | Rockits are great speakers for DJing at home. In a medium sized untreated room I would recommend the 8s, no sub. Having owned Rockit 8s and the sub I now have a pair of V8 IIs, they have served me well for years. |
| Inez Marcinik 13.12.2011 | They are fine for small parties and dj use. |
| Darren Fawber 13.12.2011 | so your suggesting that I dont use them for DJing? To be honest, most of the time im gonna be using them to DJ for personal use in my room. It will be very rare that I use them for parties |
| Annis Osbourn 13.12.2011 | Don't use monitors for partys, use speakers, that definately is something else. Buy mackie thumps for partys, the krks are really just for production. About the size: choose what fits you best, the main difference is power, not quality or character. |
| Dorie Scelzo 13.12.2011 | They're powered bookshelf speakers that function okay as nearfield monitors. Once you've heard real nearfield monitors, the difference is obvious. They're kind of the new Yamaha 8" speakers that every studio has 'cuz they're pretty close to every home HiFi system speaker ever |
| Osvaldo Newhall 13.12.2011 | Bigger is always better if you're after loudness. For home DJ/studio production, theRP8G2 is perfect with an 8" or 10" sub. But you must understand that KRK are nearfield monitor speakers and they are NOT made for long throw loudness. |
| Danae Dumler 13.12.2011 | depends how big you consider a "house party." I have the 6's and they are more than loud enough for a party in my apartment even if I have 20-30 people over (and I don't believe I would let any more than that into my place). They will annoy the neighbors long before they reach their maximum power. And I have no sub but I really want one because they are missing some of the low low end (in fact I would have bought the sub by now if it didn't cost four times what I paid for each speaker). But I certainly don't need one for most DJ use or for a party. The 8s are much more powerful and have more of the low end, as you can imagine, so you might not need the sub if you go with those, which I would do if I wanted them for a party with 150 people or so. |
<< Back to Reviews of DJ equipment Reply