Review: Dynaudio BM6A mk I, BM12A mk III & Eve SC408

The new Dynaudio BM-range (click to enlarge)

In my last post I reviewed the differences between the Dynaudio BM5A mk II and mk III. Following on from the same review-day at ProLyd in Oslo last spring, I’ll have a closer look at the original Dynaudio BM6A mk I and the brand new BM12A mk III. The BM6A mk I is a much-celebrated monitor through many years. It is quite telling that it has been in production parallely with Dynaudio producing its successor, the mk II. Producers have still wanted to buy the mk I, and it is known for amongst other things, having a more powerful amplifier than the BM6A mk II. Now however, it is being discontinued. I have never worked on it and have been keen to try it out for a long time!

For good measure and some serious big sounding fun, we wired up a pair of Eve AudioSC408 as well. The first time I heard them was at the Music Production Show in London last year (read what I wrote then), and from the quick impression I got, I understood they were worth getting better acquainted with. When this is being released, Sound on Sound will just have published their review of the same monitor. Our reviews have two different approaches and I encourage you to read both.

As I always do in my monitor-reviews, I’ll tell you what tracks I played and how the speakers performed. That information will hopefully give you an impression of the sound of the speaker. I'll leave it up to you to click on the links and read up on the technical details that are already published by the manufacturers.

BM6A mk I & BM12A mk III

 

The much loved and acclaimed BM6A mk I

Montrel Darrett “When It Comes Back Around”

This neo-soul/ gospel track has a lot of vocal layering contrasted by plenty of action in the lows.

The BM6A mk I immediately stood out as some of the most impressive monitors I have heard in this segment. It is not hard to understand how they earned their reputation! Mids and vocals are clear and present, and there’s a real sense of control over what the bass is doing.

When I switched to the BM12A mk III my first thought was “what I have I gained?” The all-important vocals were much further back in the mix. The BM6A has a 7-inch bass element, while the BM12A has an 8-inch element. It is not uncommon that an 8-inch element in a two-way system leaves too big a distance between the highs and the lows. In those cases the vocals and the mid-range tend to get less distinct. It felt like that is what I was experiencing with these.

Beastie Boys “Nonstop Disco Powerpack”

Everything was very much in its place and the mix was crisp and clear in the BM6A mk I. I felt I was possibly missing some of the lowest extension, but the there is both a clear sense of what the bass is doing and the bass is more than low enough lows to shake the walls. For reference the BM6A mk I is rated down to 45 Hz and there are limits to how much deeper one should expect a 7-inch driver to go. The BM6A gives an excellent sense of where I'm at with the levels internally in the mix.

In the BM12A mk III the reverb tales came out more. If you read my last review, this is the same effect that I found in the BM5A mk III versus the mk II. The BM12A gave a clearer sense of what goes on at the back of this mix. The main vocals however, are lower than expected—just like with the track above. As I browsed through other tracks on the same album I found that the BM12A came more to its right on some tracks than on others. The BM6A stayed quite consistent.

A point could be made that if the BM12A were pulled further back from the work-position and some eq switches were fiddled with to tailor it to the room, it could possibly fill a larger space in a better way than the BM6A.  —like a mid-field monitor. This is just a theory though, and remains to be seen.

Eve SC408

 
My eyes could tell my all the way from the start that the Eve SC408 would be too large for the tiny listening-room. And quite right, Beastie Boys’ “Nonstop Disco Powerpack” was threatening to tear down a wall or two from the outset! I cut the lows on the inbuilt eq. with 5dB (the maximum amount), and things started to tidy up quite a bit. There was still too much bass for the little room, but the vocals came out much clearer after the eq-correction. This could mean one of two things: either the writer of this review is an idiot for playing on main monitors in a way to small room, or, this big monster-pair of mains are extremely flexible since things were sounding ok after a quick correction. I’ll leave it up to you to choose! The mid-range clarity is really good, but the BM6A revealed more mid-range details in comparison. This as expected though, when you consider the BM6A as a high-quality dedicated nearfield monitor, and the SC408 as a huge crate with impressive bass-extension and a friendly price-tag.

Corinne BaileyRae ”Put Your Records On”

The bass on the SC408 was still set to -5dB and the hi-shelf got one last adjustment to +1dB. On this track the vocals, Hammond, backing and everything fell beautifully into placed in the mix! Lovely rounded highs, warm mid-range and nice clarity! The bass extension is fantastic and well controlled, even with the low eq. turned down. After the adjustments on this track, the SC408 shone as a much more open sounding speaker than the BM6A. Again, this is in line with the expectations, but I was genuinely surprised of how well this speaker performed with all the odds stacked against it (the size of the room and all the eq. adjustments). There is a good sense of depth, fidelity and clarity here!

Summing Up

For me the BM6A mk I and the SC408 are the clear winners of the day! I’ll be sad to see the BM6A mk I discontinued and this review has left me seriously wanting a set. However, I’m hoping to get my hands on a pair of mk III as soon as possible for testing (or buying). For all-round use, great detail, power and reasonable bass-extension, this is one of the most impressive nearfield monitors I have come across in the segment around a thousand Pounds for a pair.

To treat the BM12A mk III with the respect it rightfully deserves I should play around with it in a bigger room and have more time to explore its eq. settings. None the less, I do have a feeling that I would end up with a pair of BM6A of one generation or the other, instead of the BM12A. I prefer the BM6A both to the BM12A and both the BM5A that I reviewed in my last post.

The SC408 is clear, open and has a very comfortable smooth top-end that I find in all Eve monitors. The BM6A mk I reveals the most details in the mids and in a large studio these two would complement each other nicely, as mains and nearfield monitors respectively. What's more, the SC408 retails at less than six thousand Pounds for a pair! As far as mains go, that’s very affordable, and the benefit of superb bass-extension coupled with great clarity is made available for most semi-professionals who own a studio alone or as a group together.

If you are looking at a pair of Eve SC408 or a pair of Dynaudio BM6A mk I, you have my warmest recommendations for both! I am really looking forward to hearing the BM6A mk III and to find the SC408 in its native environment some day soon—that is, in a large studio! With luck, hopefully my own!

Review setup at ProLyd's listening room.

All files were played as WAV from CD, through a Lynx Hilo and an SM Pro Audio M-Patch 2.1

Massive thanks to ProLyd (ProSound) in Oslo for letting me play (annoyingly) loud in their showroom!

Dynaudio BM5A (mk II vs. III) and Oslo in the Spring

Last Spring I visited Oslo a few times, both for business and pleasure. On the groovy side, Norwegian ticket agency Bilettservice gave me a couple of tickets for Angie Stone’s tour. At the Rockefeller Music Hall in Oslo she put on an amazing night of Soul, Gospel and R’n B. Great band, amazing backing singers, and fantastic audience! Anything with Funk, Gospel or melodic Soul tends to do well in Norway.

(Angie Stone in Paris this Spring - from her Twitter)

I also had time to visit Norwegian pro audio distributor ProLyd. I used them as a supplier for education-facilities and a studio I set up in the city of Trondheim and was very happy with their services. On this visit I had the time to play around at their facilities for a few hours and had a list of speakers I wanted to do a simple comparative test on.

Dynaudio have just launched generation three of their much acclaimed BM-series and I was curious to more about the difference between the generations. Since ProLyd are huge on Dynaudio there were plenty of models to choose between. Time eventually limited my review and there is much more to be written about the new models. This blog-entry looks at the BM5A mk II & mk III. In the next post I will look at the Dynaudio BM6A mk I, the new BM12A mk III, and the Eve Audio SC408.

Introduction to the Dynaudio BM5A

The BM5A is probably one of the most popular nearfield monitors in its size, and it has been for a number of years. It is a very powerful speaker with a reasonably good sense of balance. Although it has a 7-inch woofer, the cabinet is quite small and compact for the driver-size, and there has traditionally (until the new generation) not been much bass extension to talk about. Higher bass/ low mid-range is quite abundant in the mk II though, and although it won’t let you feel the lowest lows you’ll still get a decent sense of the bass levels from the upper bass-range. For reference, the BM5A mk II frequency response goes down to 48 Hz. Though the overall balance is pretty good, in the mids they are not as revealing as for instance a pair of Adam A7X. Their strength is rather in delivering a tighter and more powerful sound. The BM5 are comfortable speakers to work with over a long period of time. Thus are my memories of working on the mk II.

For those who have read my blog before you’ll know that in my monitor-reviews I name commercial music-tracks and tell you how the monitors respond to them. From the test we’ll derive information about the relationship between the mix and its representation through the monitor. For a technical overview I encourage you to follow the links provided to the manufacturer’s web-page and read a few conventional reviews along with my own review.

Mk II vs. Mk III

BM5A mk II

BM5A mk III

Corinne BaileyRae ”I'd Like To” and ”Put Your Records On”

These mixes have plenty of lows, well-recorded instruments and beautifully layered vocals and I use them regularly as test-tracks.

To start with the mk II, I perceived it as more of a narrow and tight “radio-sound” than the mk III. The sound is more flat and less flattered than the mk III.

The mk III on the other hand sounds fuller, richer and a bit more forward. The high mids are more present and the bass extends a little deeper. The bass may be a little less defined (possibly both in level and in time), but Dynaudio’s pages say that they extend to 42 Hz, and this is a difference you clearly can hear. In spite of a fuller sound I also found the mk III a notch more fatiguing on the ear, but the difference is very subtle.

Derek Frank ”Pinball Number Count”

For this track I started with the mk III, which again gave me an impression of the ‘largest’ sound in the comparison. The track has quite a lot of horns and the mk III gave a very clear sense of both the horns and the space around them, such as the reverb. The reverbs sounded more detailed and a little less 'washy' in the mk III. I also got a good sense of what the bass was doing at any point in time.

The mk II did not appear fully as three-dimensional as the mk III. But they appeared a little more accurate all-over. Although they contain less bass extension, I felt they provided me with a little more accuracy in determining what the bass actually was doing in the mix.

Miles Davis “Freddy Freeloader”

Like I found with the previous track, the mk III has more detail in determining the impression of 'room' in the mix. Reverb comes across more clearly defined and I preferred this for listening. The mk II gave a sense of more tightness and accuracy again, which would make me prefer to mix on them in most cases.

To see if I could do anything to improve the sense of flatness and accuracy of the mk III, I turned both the high and the low eq down on the mk III’s rear dip-switches. This made them sound closer to the mk II and it also came across as less fatiguing (although it isn’t a very fatiguing speaker in the first place). After adjusting the dipswitches on the mk III, the mk II seemed like the brightest one of the two.

Martha and The Vandellas “Nowhere To Run”

This reiterated the sensation of a nice low bass extension with marginally less control over the levels in the mk III. On this track too, I'd choose mk II for mixing and mk III for listening.

Summing up:

The mk III is a bit more hi-fi like than the mk II. With the right eq-adjustments for your room, I am not sure if this would provide much difference in mix-quality at the end of the day. For recreational listening, the mk III sounds more exciting, but I found myself going back to the mk II for a slightly ‘truer’ sense of these tracks. I have always felt like I was missing some bass extension in the mk II and the mk III now provides what has previously been missing. This comes at the cost of some low-end control though. Reducing the high and low eq-shelves provide a more tidy sound from the mk III and makes it come across as more accurate and similar to the mk II. For the pure pleasure of listening this might not be the way to go.

In a radio studio or for mixing, the mk II is for me the winner, but in a scenario where the speakers are to inspire music creation (songwriting, beat-making etc.) the race is much closer. For music creation the mk III with its more impressive sound would probably be preferable to most users. For education and home-studios, both these monitors would be great tools. And finally, for the guys at the other side of the fence: home-cinema owners and hi-fi people; the mk III would be a great tool to open up and present material that is already well mixed.

Don’t get this review wrong, the differences between these speakers are not as big as it may appear. Both are very good monitors and the mk III is a solid heir to its predecessor—especially given the flexibility you get from the dipswitches and the improved extension in the low bass.

Review setup at ProLyd's listening room.

All files were played as WAV from CD, through a Lynx Hilo and an SM Pro Audio M-Patch 2.1

Big thanks to ProLyd (ProSound) in Oslo!

Three Shouts! (pt. 1 - Musicians)

(Picture-source)

  

In this post I’ll give a shout out to three people I have either met or worked with recently. They are three names in the world of music well worth getting to know. The observant reader may have noticed the ‘(pt. 1)’ in the header, which indicates that there will be more of these posts coming soon!

Eddie Hick

Eddie Hick is a professional UK-based drummer. We met while visiting a small studio in Blantyre, Malawi, last December. It turned out we went to Leeds College of Music at the same time but had never met before! In a relatively short amount of time Eddie has worked with an impressive collection of well-known artists. Just to name a few, these include Mark Ronson, Alicia Keys and Tinie Tempah. Jazzwise has named him a musician to look out for and he recorded on the theme song for the London 2012 Olympics, ‘Anywhere in the World’ by Mark Ronson and Katy B. A quick browse through the long and eclectic list of artists he has played with is recommended if you are looking for a top-drawer drummer. Eddie tours, records and teaches and have worked extensively both in Europe and America. For more information or to get in touch, here is a link to his webpage.

DJ Xfuse

Last year in Malawi I programmed the music for a wedding-dinner. Making people dance is entirely another business though, since regional music scenes always have their own vibe. DJ Xfuse, who played at the late night dance, knows well what’s going on in the Malawian and regional music scenes. He and his team travel both in- and outside of Malawi to play music, and have all the necessary gear. You can find him on Facebook.

Geir Simonsen

Geir Simonsen is another top-pick drummer who has moved gradually into production. In the 90’s he was touring and recording, and in the 2000’s he led a radio station in Norway. He has collaborated with both local and international acts and has provided recording-opportunities for several up-and-coming artists. He’s been involved in the early stages for Norwegian bands like Lionheart Brothers, Silence The Foe and Marry Me Young. Over the last few years Geir has focused on developing a portfolio of local talents in his converted radio-studio. I have mentioned him in a couple of earlier post, like when I worked with him on the live-webcast for the release of singer/ songwriter An-Magritt’s album ‘Memoriam.’ This album was produced by him and has gained a fair bit of Norwegian radio-play.