Powered Speakers vs mixing board

Just about to buy a new FCP system and so an opportunity to do the right thing with sound.

We've been working with a setup using Roland DM-20s (these are "active," self-powered speakers with volume controls on the speakers themselves. So no mixing board or amps (if I have my terms straight). They run about $250 a pair.

For this new set up, we have a budget to spend more (up to about $500 or so) and I'm wondering if we can/should do better.

And here's my real question: most of the professional edit suites I visit have mixing boards and speakers without volume controls. Seems fine to me, but most editors I know pretty much just use the mixing board for levels only anyway -- so is there really an advantage over speakers with volume control?

Or is it that the better reference speakers assume an amp/mixing board? That is, they aren't made with their own volume control.

Any comments or suggestions on specific products is welcome.

Thanks to anyone who will comment ...
Brad

> most editors I know pretty much just use the mixing board for levels only
> anyway -- so is there really an advantage over speakers with volume
> control?

Absolutely -- it allows you to isolate different sources of sound, without involving the computer. For example, if you have a Betacam SP deck and a DV deck, you can monitor each of their sound without turning on the computer And I love Mute buttons on mixers. Nobody uses EQ on mixers since you don't want to colour the sound. If you use only speakers, they'll probably be hooked up to your computer and you'd have to use some other kind of signal splitter to get sound from your decks, or only monitor deck sound via Log and Capture, which would be a pain.

Have you considered getting a smaller mixer with fewer channels? Most mixers I've used on jobs have about 16 tracks and I do wonder whether you need them all in certain situations. Any less than eight would probably defeat the purpose, though, since your sound sources will almost certainly be paired unless you have mono single-channel sources. And you already have speakers to go with the mixer, right?

i live and die by a mackie 1402 mixer. yes, more channels than needed on a daily basis. but i trust it for its transparent performance. ive also really wanted to look into alesis' zone mix, just for its small rackmount footprint.

Thanks Derek and Wayne for your comments -- sounds like you both vote easily for use of a mixing board.

I noticed that ProMax Systems in my price range seem to be going with M-Audio Studiophile LX4 2.1 System speakers and a Behringer mixer (maybe the MXB1002 -- which is only about $125).

Any comments on that lower-cost board or those speakers? And, no, we don't have speakers for the new system.

Thanks,
Brad

ive never been a big fan of behringer stuff, it sounds ok, i just dont like the way it feels...

dont get a speaker system with a subwoofer. that gives you a fals perception of your lows. this would be ok for a budget speaker

[sweetwater.com]

these are decent as well:
[sweetwater.com]

although in my book you cant beat a good used samson servo power amp and two tannoy 6.5's - you can find that stuff on ebay all the time for really good prices.

i'd vote for a miximg board, too.

dont think it would look too good reaching over my desk to the speaker all the time!

also i need to monitor both my deck/camera output, and at times my computer's output

i also like to have a mic input to i can patch a mic into FCP when needed.

i;ve got a makie 1402... in storage!
it;s too big!

i've since gotten a couple of small behringers:
Euromix 602A
Eurorack UB502

they both work with pots (rotating knobs) rather than sliding faders.
ok for what i need.
the second is the smallest Behringer available.
the first is probably the best option.
i tend to use two mono or stereo chanles for each input.
this way i can mono my signal at the mixer, if i need to .
if i do this on hte smaller one, i only get room for one input.

cheers,
nick

It's probably not a bad idea to have some powered monitors with a very flat response hooked straight to the computer if you want to master sound and have it sound good on consumer sound equipment. If you can make it sound great when it's flat your doing well, M Audio has some great monitors for around $299.00 for 5 1/2" at Guitar center they are really transparent. It's also not a bad idea to be able to switch to using some good consumer equipment to listen to it as well for reference I have a couple of behrenger and Midi Man mixers into a tuner then into Sony and Tascam speakers also I like to use my Sennheiser HD 28 Pro headphones. There is nothing wrong with having a cheap sub woofer hooked up if you think your audience is going to be listening on them just don't mix totally to that set up. Back in the 70's my band would mix so our music would sound good on a AM Radio.

Soundcraft have a nice set of compact mixers specifically for desktops where you don't need a lot of inputs. The prices are pretty good too.

[www.soundcraft.com]

I also like Soundcraft stuff. Behringer mixers can be a little noisy, but are nice and cheap enough. Mackie is great but can be pricey.
As for powered speakers vs. unpowered, I feel that it is generally much better to go with unpowered monitors. It seems that companies who stuff amplifiers into their monitors cut corners to make them affordable, and convenient, but a separate amp (even a good stereo receiver--i have a technics) can make a world of difference without making a huge dent in the wallet. Specialists in speaker design cannot necessarily be trusted as specialists in amplifier design.

You can listen to $4000 speakers, but if your amp is worth $20, the sound will be sub-par. Companies like M-Audio make great audio interfaces, but their powered monitors are, in my opinion, weak.
I personally use a pair of Yorkville YSM-i's with stereo receiver for an amp, and i love them. they were cheaper than a pair of half-decent powered monitors.

"You can listen to $4000 speakers, but if your amp is worth $20, the sound will be sub-par. Companies like M-Audio make great audio interfaces, but their powered monitors are, in my opinion, weak.
I personally use a pair of Yorkville YSM-i's with stereo receiver for an amp, and i love them. they were cheaper than a pair of half-decent powered monitors."

Yes But the M audio M-Audio's new BX5a or BX8a powered monitors have a very Flat response. They are very transparent. without being to harsh or brittle. If you are trying to master your sound you want it flat so you don't take your sound, plug it into consumer sound system and go "Where the hell did my bass go? It sounded good on my machine. That's where using some speakers with a receiver no matter how good is going to color your sound more than listening to it with a flat system. Great for after you have finished. Geez it's all so personal isn't it?

personallyi would never use a home stereo amp to power monitor speakers. though not a rule, home stereos often times add their specific flavor to sound.

its kind of like monitoring video on a broadcast monitor as opposed to a TV

Thanks for all these great replies -- as always, a great board with incredibly helpful and FCP savvy people.

OK, so I agree with everything I'm hearing and have decided to go with "flat" speakers (thinking about the M-Audio BX5a or BX8a models mentioned by Dean).

Probably won't go with a mixing board approach (though we may add this later) as this set-up is pretty much just for DV-doc editing.

Wish I was a little more experienced in this, but I still have a simple question: Those speakers say they have " bi-amplified power," but do I still need an amp or a pre-amp if for no reason other than to give me a levels control (a knob or slider)? If so, what M-Audio product (or other product) might you suggest?

Thanks again ...

Bi-amplified means it has 2 amps. One for the sub or big speaker and one for the tweeter or little speaker. So no, you do not need an amp or pre-amp but a small mixer would be ideal so you have control over the level you send to the speakers.