Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: NS-10 or NS-10m?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    NS-10 or NS-10m?

    Sign in to disable this ad
    I've been looking for a pair of Yamaha NS-10s for my studio, but I keep comming up with NS-10m's. I know NS-10's have been discontinued... well, what are the difference's in quality Between the NS-10 and the NS-10m's? or the NS-10mm's? are they much different at all? are they the Same thing? help?
    knowledge is not the essence of music.

    http://www.soundclick.com/bands/4/stemmusic.htm

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Japan, Tokyo
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm wondering the same.
    Its all about the words: If you wanna write something down and keep it, write a song.

    Music is an investment.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK, Leeds Area
    Posts
    1,191
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I think they are the same(i think every ns10 is an ns10m) or at least wery similar and (both?) have been discontinued.
    'savvy'

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    n.carolina
    Posts
    78
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    i beleive all the ns-10 line has been cut sometihng to do with the wood for the woofer but have been replaced with the msp line
    You want to sound like who????

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    32
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The difference between the NS-10 and NS10-m's are in the response of the woofers. Apart from that,they are both are the same.
    E-man

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,738
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I have a pair of NS-10m's... Seems to me somwhere they call them NS-10 and somewhere else they call them NS-10m. But they're in their box (marked with the "m") in the closet. Where they belong.

    I've heard people say that the difference between NS-10's and NS-10m's is that NS-10m's don't have a grill screen -- but mine came with a grill screen. Most folks who want to look 'cool' taket he screen off -- but that makes the hyped and brittle high mid range just that much more hyped and brittle. Some people therefore tape a square of toilet paper so that it hangs down over the tweeter just to remove a tad of that high-mid bite.

    But, as far as I'm concerned, an even bigger problem than the nasty high-presence boost is the gutless lack of bass endemic to the things.

    I found it virtually impossible to get consistent mixes with my NS-10m's because under 85-90 Hz the bass drops away like walking off a cliff. Anything but old school rock or maybe country proves problematic. ANYthing with electronic bass or organ pedal tones is going to be subject to underreporting. The damn things have no usable bass to speak of.

    I ended up buying a pair of Event 20/20bas which have easily and octave an a half more bass (near flat to around 37 Hz. And Event has less powerful speakers that still have good bass -- the 20/20s are biamped at 200 watts per speaker probalby well over twice what most of us ever need.)

    Now, you could add a subwoofer to a pair of NS-10m's and be a little less clueless about what was going on in the basement -- but if you're starting from scratch -- why not just get decent sounding speakers in the first place.

    [And finally, yes, I'm aware that there are a number of highly paid producers who swear by NS10m's. Which puzzles the hell out of me. But you have to remember two things: these guys work in studios that typically have $20-$40K worth of folded horns or other high end, wide range, high power speakers as part of their basic control room gear and these guys have a follow-on crew of mastering engineers who will go in after the fact and remove all the subsonic garbage that mixing on NS-10m'z won't otherwise reveal.]
    Last edited by theblue1; 04-21-2004 at 03:56 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK, Leeds Area
    Posts
    1,191
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Originally posted by theblue1
    The damn things have no usable bass to speak of.
    That is very true (although i had no idea the roll off was as high as 90!!)

    I got them as first monitors and struggle(no can't) hear the guts of a kick drum or bass fundamental on them generally. They are very revealing higher than that. after using them i understand their role as support monitors now though.

    Originally posted by theblue1
    I'm aware that there are a number of highly paid producers who swear by NS10m's. Which puzzles the hell out of me. [/B]
    i doubt many of them use them for mixing the bass end though, just for reference (and vocals in some interviews i've read). Especially when they've got that set of genelecs main monitors sitting flush mounted a few feet away!
    'savvy'

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,738
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Right. And probably a big old set of wall-shakers wtih 15" woofers at the front of the control room.

    The NS-10m's are very revealing of problems in the upper mid-range (which is after all a very important part of the spectrum, where voices and most melodic instruments find most of their defnition and much of their color) -- as long as you get the hang of them.

    One of the old saws has been that, if you can get your mix to sound good on NS-10m's, it'll sound good anywhere. I'm not sure that's so true. Well, I know it wasn't true in my case. I never got them right. In fact, I was getting better mixes overall on a pair of $50 apiece Yamaha consumer bookshelf speakers (they overall had a muddy sound... maybe that's why the switch to the fairly bright and present NS10's threw me off. And then there's the bass thing. Synth bass and NS10's don't work in my experience. Maybe with a subwoofer. I know there are a fair number of people who use them with subs.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK, Leeds Area
    Posts
    1,191
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Originally posted by theblue1
    Right. And probably a big old set of wall-shakers wtih 15" woofers at the front of the control room.
    Damn straight!


    Originally posted by theblue1
    The NS-10m's are very revealing of problems in the upper mid-range (which is after all a very important part of the spectrum, where voices and most melodic instruments find most of their defnition and much of their color) -- as long as you get the hang of them.[/B]
    Thats all i use them for now. in my humble circumstances i'm still reduced to using a 2.1 system to check on the bass frequencies.


    Originally posted by theblue1
    One of the old saws has been that, if you can get your mix to sound good on NS-10m's, it'll sound good anywhere. I'm not sure that's so true. Well, I know it wasn't true in my case. I never got them right.[/B]
    That was the idea of them. At the time they were deemed the monitor that gave the best impression of what a mix would sound like on a 80'S(underline) hifi system, which may be why people have problems with them nowadays imo. Another part of their popularity became that an engineer could walk into any studio this side of timbuktoo and have a set of monitors his/her ears were tuned to and reference from there.
    'savvy'

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,738
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    savvy

    Well, for sure that's how it more or less worked out.

    There is an interesting story kicking around about the NS10m that we may find on one of those urban legend websites. (And, you know, I'm compulsive about checking most stuff before I pass it along [at least unless noted, which I guess I'm doing here] but I'm pointedly not doing that here in order to get one more trip out of the story.)

    According to the story, the product design guys had misjudged the market in the early 80's and produced a big initial run of small, higher quality bookshelf speakers. They had a somewhat tighter freq spec than a lot of consumer speakers and didn't boom at the bottom end at resonance bumps. But that was part of the problem. They didn't boom. The trend was to bigger speakers at the time (column speakers made a brief splash).

    So they ended up with a big warehouse in Torrance or Compton, CA, with all these speakers. Some marketing manager for Yamaha was looking at this big sea of boxes, with a few opened up. He was playing with it and realized the front panel (with the grille screen) snapped off, revealing that now-signature stark, white cone.

    Supposedly, he looked at it. Stepped back. Looked at it again and then walked about 20 feet back and looked at it again. (The story does not include him holding his thumb up like a Montparnasse street painter, it's tempting to imagine it.)

    Anyhow, he liked what he saw. He airballed different ideas with the people there, talking about see-through or translucent screens, but nobody thought that was good, it would just diminish the drama of the white cone -- and besides it was expensive. They just wanted to find a way to unload these things.

    Finally, someone said, don't they use bare speakers in TV and recording studios? TV stereo was pretty new then so there was an upgrade and retrofit boom. The marketing guys didn't think they'd have much luck in regular recording studios because they weren't very full range, but it was easy for them to picture them in a TV remote truck, especially since they were relatively small.

    At the time, the home studio scene was just beginning. JBL's dominated the small studio scene but were expensive and notoriously uneven -- boomy, but with gaps, and hyped. Talk about a monitor learning curve. But they sounded "impressive" in the C.R. And you do have to impress the client. If you couldn't afford a pair of Urei's [who could?] you could at least kick 'em in the gut with some boomy bass and twist their ears a bit with some tweaky highs. It was into that scene that the NS-10m came in. It tamed and smoothed the high end a bit and really tightened up the bottom in comparison to the unruly 4311.

    Where the 4311 could sound impressive, in a way, with its 'smile curve' response, its gappy uneveness tended to make mixers under-compensate in some areas and over-compensate in others.

    The NS10m, OTOH, was a fair amount smoother, with a moderately even bass response. It's lack of sub-bass didn't usually get country and rock mixers into trouble, back before synth and 5-string basses (not to mention subbass synthesis) became more commonplace.
    Last edited by theblue1; 04-24-2004 at 04:38 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •