Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Does anyone own Adams speakers ?. Are they any good ?.

lauantai 22. heinäkuuta 2017 19.29.12 UTC+3 Andrew kirjoitti:


Does anyone own Adams speakers ?. Are they any good ?.

Yes I know Adams, or rather I know one of their products, the S2V two-way active "nearfield monitor" I have mixed a couple of titles with them. Adams also make a three way. I was tempted to try them.

Iain

Andrew wrote:

---------------------------

Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.


** There is a Wiki on nearly everything now.

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

This one is quite extensive.



...... Phil

sunnuntai 23. heinäkuuta 2017 4.56.33 UTC+3 Phil Allison kirjoitti:
Andrew wrote:

---------------------------

Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.


** There is a Wiki on nearly everything now.

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

This one is quite extensive.

I have just looked at the Thomann website. They seem to have the whole range. Yes they are expensive.

https://www.thomann.de/gb/search_dir.html?bf=&sw=adam

Iain

Iain Churches wrote:

------------------------

Phil Allison


Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.


** There is a Wiki on nearly everything now.

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

This one is quite extensive.

I have just looked at the Thomann website. They seem to have the whole range. Yes they are expensive.

https://www.thomann.de/gb/search_dir.html?bf=&sw=adam


** Seems most models use their "ART ribbon tweeter" which turns out to be a resurrection of Oskar Heil's famous "Air Motion Transformer".

https://www.adam-audio.com/en/

See section headed "German Audio Engineering".

I had the opportunity to do some tests on one of Oskar's gadgets in the late 1980s. I used 4 cycle tone bursts and picked up the output with an AKG CK2 omni condenser mic and viewed it on a scope. Of course, I simply listened to sine waves at various frequencies too.

The strange contraption produced obvious, spurious outputs that were not part of the input. Harmonic and non harmonics of the input sine frequency as well as extra cycles and even whole bursts at frequencies above 10kHz.

IME most dome tweeters perform as well or better, good ones much better.

The tweeter part of a Quad ESL57 eats it for breakfast - I owned a pair at the time.

In a word "harsh".

Very.


..... Phil

I always thought that the generic term of monitor speaker was one that
sounded like it was the real sounds. It certainly seems to have meant that
in studios. However speakers that on paper are flat can often sound awful
and speakers with lumpy responses can sound nice.
As for no fronts. Many speakers were made like this. A stupid idea as in
normal household use they can easily get damaged. Celestion JBL and many
others have made them like this in the past.
Most rock engineers like a forward mid to treble as they are deaf. Then
they get the balance right for the rest of us.

As for the Addams family of speakers, do you need to feed those with Monster
cables perhaps?
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Andrew" wrote in message
news
Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Does anyone own Adams speakers ?. Are they any good ?.

Talking of motional feedback speakers, I did listen to some of the Philips
ones once. My main issue with them was they sounded bland. its all very well
trying to use the sound from a cone to stop it from going badly wrong, but
if you took this to extremes it would in the end be completely silent. its a
kind of servo.

No did not like the sound.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...
lauantai 22. heinäkuuta 2017 19.29.12 UTC+3 Andrew kirjoitti:


Does anyone own Adams speakers ?. Are they any good ?.

Yes I know Adams, or rather I know one of their products, the S2V two-way
active "nearfield monitor" I have mixed a couple of titles with them. Adams
also make a three way. I was tempted to try them.

Iain

Yes, I tend to feel listening to modern speakers that my tannoys tweeters
have some excitable upper harmonics, probably due to the horn bit.
However cheap speakers do not have to sound crappy, and neither do
expensive ones. There were a few months ago at least some with the strange
name of Beng, which sound pretty good at normal domestic levels to me. OK
they are not going to be used in a studio but for 70 quid, I mean they are
better than most bundled middi stereo ones.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...
Iain Churches wrote:

------------------------

Phil Allison


Somewhere, I read an article about a musician (maybe) and
he was asked what his favourite gadgets were.

One on his replies was his Adams monitor speakers.

This seems to be a German company and the only thing I
can see is that they don't have grilles at the front
(so how do you keep the dust out ?). They seem to have
an unusual tweeter, not the usual cone arrangement.

Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.


** There is a Wiki on nearly everything now.

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

This one is quite extensive.

I have just looked at the Thomann website. They seem to have the whole
range. Yes they are expensive.

https://www.thomann.de/gb/search_dir.html?bf=&sw=adam


** Seems most models use their "ART ribbon tweeter" which turns out to be a
resurrection of Oskar Heil's famous "Air Motion Transformer".

https://www.adam-audio.com/en/

See section headed "German Audio Engineering".

I had the opportunity to do some tests on one of Oskar's gadgets in the late
1980s. I used 4 cycle tone bursts and picked up the output with an AKG CK2
omni condenser mic and viewed it on a scope. Of course, I simply listened to
sine waves at various frequencies too.

The strange contraption produced obvious, spurious outputs that were not
part of the input. Harmonic and non harmonics of the input sine frequency as
well as extra cycles and even whole bursts at frequencies above 10kHz.

IME most dome tweeters perform as well or better, good ones much better.

The tweeter part of a Quad ESL57 eats it for breakfast - I owned a pair at
the time.

In a word "harsh".

Very.


..... Phil

Brian Gaff wrote:

------------------------

I always thought that the generic term of monitor speaker was one that
sounded like it was the real sounds.



** No, it refers to *monitoring" real sounds - ie live mic signals.

It defines a purpose and the speaker must be suitable for that job.


It certainly seems to have meant that
in studios.


** Favourite studio monitors are mostly highly inaccurate.

JBL being among the worst, thick and coloured like tomato soup.


As for the Addams family of speakers, do you need to feed those with Monster
cables perhaps?


** Shakes head, emits long, low groan...



...... Phil

On 2017-07-23 07:53:31 +0000, "Brian Gaff" said:

I always thought that the generic term of monitor speaker was one that
sounded like it was the real sounds. It certainly seems to have meant that
in studios. However speakers that on paper are flat can often sound awful
and speakers with lumpy responses can sound nice.

That's the point though. Nipping in from my music writing side (i don't
have the audio experience people on this group have), the purpose of a
monitor speaker is exactly that - to monitor the sound levels and mix.
It's not to sound nice, it's to get the flattest and most neutral
response.

I've no doubt it's developed into marketing speak and there are plenty
of 'monitor' speakers about that are just ordinary speakers, but the
idea is to get the truest reflection of what you're actually doing so
that you're not fooled that you've e.g. put plenty of bass in the mix
just because your speaker overemphasises bass.


Cheers,
Ian