HELP needed understandin MONITORS

"Terry" wrote ...
>I just discovered monitors but I'm not sure I understand their
> purpose.

The complete name is "monitor speakers". "Monitor speakers"
are speakers that are used for monitoring (listening).

> I'm pretty sure they are for someone who wants to play music thru
> their computer.

No. "Monitor speakers" were around for many decades before
computers were invented.

> I have a nice set of standard Altec Lansing speakers, but I think
> MONITOR speakers are a different animal, aren't they?

No. "Monitor speakers" are speakers used for monitoring.

> Aren't they for musicians who play their guitars, keybds, etc. thru
> their computer and play the sound back.

That is one use. There are hundreds (thousands?) of uses.

> I do play my electric Gretsch guitar thru my computer and speakers
> now, but I'm thinking of buying a pair of Yamaha MSP5's.

OK. Thanks for sharing.

On Jun 16, 12:10 pm, "Richard Crowley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Terry"  wrote ...
>
> >I just discovered monitors but I'm not sure I understand their
> > purpose.
>
> The complete name is "monitor speakers".  "Monitor speakers"
> are speakers that are used for monitoring (listening).
>
> > I'm pretty sure they are for someone who wants to play music thru
> > their computer.
>
> No. "Monitor speakers" were around for many decades before
> computers were invented.
>
> > I have a nice set of standard Altec Lansing speakers, but I think
> > MONITOR speakers are a different animal, aren't they?
>
> No.  "Monitor speakers" are speakers used for monitoring.
>
> > Aren't they for musicians who play their guitars, keybds, etc. thru
> > their computer and play the sound back.
>
> That is one use. There are hundreds (thousands?) of uses.
>
> > I do play my electric Gretsch guitar thru my computer and speakers
> > now, but I'm thinking of buying a pair of Yamaha MSP5's.
>
> OK. Thanks for sharing.

Well, I'm not sure if that helped.
I'm still confused.
I have a set of speakers already on my PC so why would I want to buy a
pair that are called MONITOR SPEAKERS?
What's the advantage?

Terry in Texas

Terry <[email protected]> wrote:
>Well, I'm not sure if that helped.
>I'm still confused.
>I have a set of speakers already on my PC so why would I want to buy a
>pair that are called MONITOR SPEAKERS?
>What's the advantage?

Because the multimedia speakers that come with PC systems generally sound
like crap. They have a lot of boom but no real low end, and they have
screechy dome tweeters. They are generally painful to listen to, and
impossible to use for making any tonal decisions when mixing or even just
editing.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Terry" wrote ...
> I'm still confused.
> I have a set of speakers already on my PC so why would I want
> to buy a pair that are called MONITOR SPEAKERS?

You seem to be hung up on the word "monitor".
The only reason for buying ANY speakers (or headphones)
is to hear the audio signal through your ears. "Monitor" is a
way of using speakers, it is NOT a type of speaker.

> What's the advantage?

There are NO "computer speakers" that are worth a steaming
pile of fresh garbage. They are all significantly innacurate, each
in their own different way. And most of them *sound* horrible
as well. None of them are suitable for serious work with audio.

This is that rare topic where you can make those kinds of absolute
pronouncements without significant fear of counter-examples.

Good speakers are good speakers regardless of whether
the source of the audio is a computer or something else.
And good speakers are good speakers regardless of
whether they include the adjective "monitor".

I would never buy "computer speakers" on the basis that
none of them are even halfway decent.The label "computer
speaker" is usually an excellent indicator that the speakers
sound terrible.

I also would be wary of buying "monitor speakers" on the
basis that some schyster marketing flack is trying to use
fancy words to convince me that the speakers sound good.
The label "monitor speaker" is not a good indicator of any
measure of goodness (or otherwise).

> There are NO "computer speakers" that are worth a steaming
> pile of fresh garbage.

The Monsoons -- which are planar speakers -- are quite good. I haven't heard
the Eminent Technology speakers, but they (also planars) should be pretty
good, too.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote ...
>> There are NO "computer speakers" that are worth a steaming
>> pile of fresh garbage.
>
> The Monsoons -- which are planar speakers -- are quite good. I haven't
> heard
> the Eminent Technology speakers, but they (also planars) should be
> pretty
> good, too.

Speakers that cost more than most people's computers,
and are a cult object that are long out of print and few
people have heard hardly qualify as "computer speakers".

I'd bet that there are more than a few pairs of Genelecs
connected to computers. That hardly makes them
"computer speakers". Get a grip.

"Richard Crowley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1eWdnRxvGIanwMrVnZ2dnUVZ_h7inZ2d@posted.pcez...
> "William Sommerwerck" wrote ...

>>> There are NO "computer speakers" that are worth a steaming
>>> pile of fresh garbage.

>> The Monsoons -- which are planar speakers -- are quite good.
>> I haven't heard the Eminent Technology speakers, but they
>> (also planars) should be pretty good, too.

> Speakers that cost more than most people's computers,
> and are a cult object that are long out of print [sic] and few
> people have heard hardly qualify as "computer speakers".

You should check your facts before you comment.

Eminent Technology _used_ to make computer speakers (the LFT-10). They no
longer do. However, one of their drivers was licensed to the people who make
the Monsoon system -- which sold for $200 - $250. It, too, appears to be out
of production.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoon_(speakers)

The Wikipedia article is hyperbolic, but the Monsoons were several cuts
above the average computer speaker. They're quite good.

William Sommerwerck <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>The Wikipedia article is hyperbolic, but the Monsoons were several cuts
>above the average computer speaker. They're quite good.

Have you heard any of the flat panel computer speakers using the NXT
distributed mode technology? I have never had a chance to listen to
them under decent conditions.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Scott Dorsey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:g38i39$sge$1@panix2.panix.com

> William Sommerwerck <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The Wikipedia article is hyperbolic, but the Monsoons
>> were several cuts above the average computer speaker.
>> They're quite good.

> Have you heard any of the flat panel computer speakers
> using the NXT distributed mode technology? I have never
> had a chance to listen to them under decent conditions.

The NXT computer speakers I've seen are incredibly low in cost, and
therefore no doubt highly compromised.

NXT's technology has a number of practical advantages for applications like
cars. The speakers can be incorporated into locations like dash panels and
other body panels. This allows implementation in locations that may be more
sonically advantageous, but are impractical for conventional drivers.

I've heard some fairly elaborate and more costly NXT speakers of about the
same size as computer speakers that were designed for automotive uses and
therefore were far less compromised.

NXT speakers have a highly unusual sound because they create an extremely
diffuse randomized sound field. Sound does not localize to the speakers to
the usual extent.

Consumers seem to usually expect a more precise soundstage and are therefore
often turned off by NXT's diffuse sound. I've auditioned a number of
highly-developed prototypes that had IMO good timbre and reasonable dynamic
range, AFAIK none ever made it into volume production. I'm under the
impression that consumer response in marketing tests was the reason why.