# EQ Active Studio Monitors



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Hi am looking at some Active Studio Monitors mainly KRK Rokit 6 or 8.

How do studio active monitors react to EQ in general, i have no dealings with these speakers whatsoever.

Has anyone got any opinions with the Rokits or active speakers, any recommendations.
My main listening is 2 channel HiFI
They will be run with dual subs

The room is 6 meters long x 3.7 wide, listening position is approx 4.5 meters from the speakers, not a studio.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

There’s no reason to believe they wouldn respond differently to EQ than any other speaker. Didn’t have any problems equalizing the active speakers I use for my computer system, although they aren’t specifically “studio” monitors. After all, many active monitors have at least some equalization built in...

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> There’s no reason to believe they wouldn respond differently to EQ than any other speaker. Didn’t have any problems equalizing the active speakers I use for my computer system, although they aren’t specifically “studio” monitors. After all, many active monitors have at least some equalization built in...
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Thanks Wayne, a good option to look into having active studio monitors in a mostly used 2 channel system or a waste of time? Do they have a character of there own?

I was going to post this on Pro forum but not sure if that's the right place to post due to be using them for 2 channel + very little movies. 

I could run them with the Z9 through the Preouts.

Active studio monitors are more nearfield? My room is 6 meters long x 3.7 wide

Was looking at the KRK Rokit 6 or 8s then running dual subs.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

I wouldn’t say active speakers are necessarily all near field. It depends on the intended use they’re marketed for. If they’re marketed as “studio monitors,” then I’d say they’re designed for near field. If it’s a “professional” brand like M-Audio, Presonus, KRK, Mackie etc. then it’s a pretty safe bet they’re intended as studio monitors, and hence near field. I’d be less certain about active speakers from a consumer brand, like Paradigm, Monitor, Ascend (don’t know of these companies actually make any active speakers, just throwing some familiar names out there) then I’d be inclined to think they are intended for a more traditional listening positional (which I’ll call “far field” for the purpose of this discussion). 

I wouldn’t say they have their own “character” so much as their own “characteristics.” The main difference with near fields compared to regular speakers is that the former will likely have attenuated highs, which would make them sound correct “up close and personal,” but a bit soft at far field. Near field monitors I would also expect to be designed to achieve proper imaging up close, which may not translate as well when they’re situated at a distance.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I agree with Wayne, the KRK Rokits are more suitable for near field listening than for a larger space like you have. That said with proper EQ they would probably do a decent job however I would seriously consider the KRK Rokit 8 over the 6


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

> I wouldn’t say active speakers are necessarily all near field. It depends on the intended use they’re marketed for. If they’re marketed as “studio monitors,” then I’d say they’re designed for near field. If it’s a “professional” brand like M-Audio, Presonus, KRK, Mackie etc. then it’s a pretty safe bet they’re intended as studio monitors, and hence near field. I’d be less certain about active speakers from a consumer brand, like Paradigm, Monitor, Ascend (don’t know of these companies actually make any active speakers, just throwing some familiar names out there) then I’d be inclined to think they are intended for a more traditional listening positional (which I’ll call “far field” for the purpose of this discussion).


Thanks Wayne yes i went in again yesterday to the retail shop and talked to different assistance and he said the KRKs were certainly nearfield and wouldn't suit HiFI far field use.



> I wouldn’t say they have their own “character” so much as their own “characteristics.” The main difference with near fields compared to regular speakers is that the former will likely have attenuated highs, which would make them sound correct “up close and personal,” but a bit soft at far field. Near field monitors I would also expect to be designed to achieve proper imaging up close, which may not translate as well when they’re situated at a distance.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Sounds like i need to look at Active Monitors that are specifically for HiFI home use.
What got me thinking was the extra detail but that was more due to nearfield.

Thanks again


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> I agree with Wayne, the KRK Rokits are more suitable for near field listening than for a larger space like you have. That said with proper EQ they would probably do a decent job however I would seriously consider the KRK Rokit 8 over the 6


Thank you

The assistant did suggest the 8s but on my return, different assistant advised me they are only for nearfield.

Any other Active Monitors company's come to mind for HiFi use?

Thanks again


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Tannoy and JBL also make great speakers that are active as well. 
May I ask why you are determined to go active over the traditional passive speakers most people use?


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

> Tannoy and JBL also make great speakers that are active as well.


Thank you, will look at those, also found ATC.



> May I ask why you are determined to go active over the traditional passive speakers most people use?


No worries, wouldn't say determine more trialing at this stage.

Some people say they are more detailed and less expensive, but i think this is more for the studio nearfield monitors.

Thanks again


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Personally I think you would get a better speaker for the money if you just used the amps in your receiver and got some nice passive speakers. There are many really really nice speakers out there that will do far better than active monitors.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Tony makes a good point there. You already have “free” amplification in your receiver. At a given price point, theoretically you should be able to get a better passive speaker, since it isn’t carrying the expense of the electronics. To me active speakers make more sense as a computer system (which would also describe computer-based music production), where desktop real estate is at a premium.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> Personally I think you would get a better speaker for the money if you just used the amps in your receiver and got some nice passive speakers. There are many really really nice speakers out there that will do far better than active monitors.


Thanks Tony

Active have a rather limited amount of manufactures for HiFi.

I have currently Yamaha Z9 and Energy Veritas 2.3i floorstanders + Paradigm S2s stand mount.

Thanks again


----------



## Phillips (Aug 12, 2011)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Tony makes a good point there. You already have “free” amplification in your receiver. At a given price point, theoretically you should be able to get a better passive speaker, since it isn’t carrying the expense of the electronics. To me active speakers make more sense as a computer system (which would also describe computer-based music production), where desktop real estate is at a premium.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Thanks Wayne

I think i am looking for other / different options to trial but looks like i am on the right side, so to speak.

Thanks again


----------

