Who says studio monitors are "cold and analytical"?

It’s a shame people cannot see music in the different realms they are created and envisioned in. Pop music is completely different from something like Lenny Kravitz or Tom Petty or John Williams or James Newton Howard. If audiophiles throw everyone into the same basket that’s sad and not at all what the artists have in mind. Imagine looking at modern art and saying a Picasso is the same as Dali -they are “paintings”.

brad

@m-db --

Much appreciated, and the same to the both of you.

The contention that since studio monitors are used in a studio, they must be super accurate is not correct.

Engineers use them as tools, and each individual engineer has specific things they want to hear. In fact, they will often switch between monitors, since some say, have a forward sounding midrange, and that is what they are trying to get ’right’ on the recording.

The other thing about studio monitors, is that they tend to be designed so they sum frequencies fairly close to the speaker, since they are usually hung on a wall or on the back of the mixing console, which are not the ideal listening position. While home speakers are usually designed to sum their frequencies at a normal listening position.

Imaging and soundstage is hardly ever taken into consideration on studio monitors.

An audiophile speaker is designed for pleasure only. If mix engineers wanted to use audiophile speakers they would. But they dont want a good sounding speaker they want a bad sounding one. Hence the emergence of the studio monitor market.

I can’t even begin to address this insanity, so I won’t.  Peace out.