Dubstepforum.com

Isturite wrote:I've got a kind of low budget, under $600....

You could pretty much do rokit 5's and the sub for that much. Deadly will hook you up with a deal at GC, and you can pick up at a local.

SIDE NOTE: What is that artwork in your avatar?

You could pretty much do rokit 5's and the sub for that much. Deadly will hook you up with a deal at GC, and you can pick up at a local.

SIDE NOTE: What is that artwork in your avatar?

That artwork is actually my own, I drew it my freshman year in high school... I have others if you would like to see them, I'd love to share them... here's that one and another I got up right now...

Ya I might just wait to get something better... I'm just anxious to get my mixes right.... I can always do the burn a cd and play it on every system I can method

Really like that second one. Would title it "Black Ops".

Check this thread out:

http://www.dubstepforum.com/the-artwork ... 22951.html

Post em up.

I work in a small, bright & untreated room and my Yamaha HS50M's only go down to 55hz so I monitor subs on headphones (Beyerdynamics 990 Pro, like you have) and A/B with well-produced tracks that I know work well in larger commercial environments.

If you work in a small, untreated room and use a sub / woofer, I imagine the low-end monitoring experience could become pretty deceptive...

Depending on the room size, would the bass waveforms even have enough space to complete a full iteration to yield an accurate listening / monitoring experience?

If my understanding is correct, that's why bass is called "low frequency": each cycle / iteration of the wave form is longer, thus iterations / cycles / repetitions of the waveform are "less frequent" over time / space than shorter waveforms. Conversely, higher frequency sounds have shorter wave forms and thus can accomplish more iterations / cycles / repetitions within the same amount of time / space.

As such, in relatively small spaces, I imagine space constraints conspire to make it easier to accurately monitor high end than low end.

So that's why I use Headphones to monitor bass rather than a woofer / sub. For additional sanity checks, I also do A/B test comparisons in my car stereo which has excellent bass response.

BTW - If my understanding of the meaning of low freq vs high freq is incorrect, then somebody please set me straight

PS: Many respected producers have made fantastic, well-produced music without woofers / sub monitors (i.e. Breakage, Actress, Burial, etc.) so I suppose it's just a matter of knowing how your tune is SUPPOSED to sound on YOUR rig to get the results you want (militant A/B comparison with the right reference material).

That's my amateur input for ya

I have yamaha hs80's and a hifi subwoofer from jamo. i love it.
the yamaha's can play down to around 60 and not much lower, but
they aren't very effective in that range, sub seems masked when
the whole track plays, and no its not because i didnt take my "pre-
cautions" in the mix.

I have an old JPW sub in my set up. It sounds wicked and really helps me get the sub sounding full and heavy.

trike12 wrote:I have yamaha hs80's and a hifi subwoofer from jamo. i love it.
the yamaha's can play down to around 60 and not much lower, but
they aren't very effective in that range, sub seems masked when
the whole track plays, and no its not because i didnt take my "pre-
cautions" in the mix.

Have thought about going that route too. Can't beleive you don't like the low end on the Yams tho, have you listened to any other monitors? I think they are super clean at the bottom, it is like night and day from my old speakers and anything else even near or slightly over the price range.