Uh, Yamaha NS-10's were used because they were crappy sounding speakers. That's why Bob Clearmountain used them, but idiots THOUGHT they were a reference quality uncolored sound, which is total hogwash. If you talk to one of the leading mastering engineers, Bob Ludwig, he hates using them because they sound like crap. Utter garbage. Why does he use them? Because he gets requests by record labels to spit out mastering jobs specifically catering to radio versions or just music that's meant for the teenagers that typically have crappy sounding speakers. That's what type of reference speaker they are. They are certainly not uncolored sounding speakers.
It's all over the map but the NS-10's are FAR from an uncolored sound. Yamaha is like the Bose of the recording studio industry. Great at marketing, great at attracting big names to use as endorsers, but the bottom line is their NS-10's were junk. I think people misused the term "reference" thinking they were flat response and accurate sounding speakers, they aren't. They were a reference for an average pair of cheap speakers and that's what they were good for. People producing pop oriented music cater to teenagers and younger adults that don't have high end audio systems, the classical/acoustic jazz record labels cater more towards the demanding audiophile that want accurate sounding recordings. That's the difference I see.
If you listen to predominately pop oriented "produced" music with a lot of computer generated sounds and lots of signal processing, it's not as critical because sonic accuracy is not a high priority. But for the classical and acoustic jazz buffs that want a piano, violin, etc. to sound like the real thing, cheap speakers simply fall apart in those listening tests. The average consumer listens to more "produced" music and nowadays, it rarely has actual REAL instruments that are unprocessed, most of the stuff the masses listens to are heavily processed computer based sounds, samples, etc. so again, sonic quality is not a high priority.
I only reason I brought up the professional audio world is because, while us audio professionals are ALSO consumers - we just know from experience and expertise that we are getting a very low grade audio product when we look at Beats or Bose.
Consumers have little these days to educate themselves on and even fewer places to check out products from various brands. People defending those products as "great audio" is proof of that.
A debate on why professionals use NS-10s is really missing the point. But since we are on the topic - I worked with a lot of different mixers on a lot of different mixes of popular music from Rock to Hip Hop to Pop, in the 90s and 2000s. If you asked 10 different big mixers in 1998 about why they use NS-10s they would give you different answers, to a degree, and maybe one would say "I dont" - but yes, some of it had to do with having a more "average" sounding speaker that was "relatively" flat in freq response (relatively being the key word) to represent how things would sound in the average home - as opposed to the other speakers in the studio that cost thousands and didnt represent what anyone had.
But you are both missing one of the main reasons NS-10s became so common everywhere was ALSO just so mixers working at various studios always had a common reference point they were familiar with. If there was a different "average sounding" speaker in every studio - they wouldnt be familiar with what they were listening to. NS10s were common because mixers KNEW how they should sound, everywhere they went. I knew one great mixer who brought in his own pair with a matched Sub and he prominently mixed loud noisy guitar music on them. And yes, compared to other speakers typically found in studios - they didnt sound that good, but to say they are JUNK - well its all relative right? Mixers also brought in various other speaker pairs they wanted to also mix on, I saw anything and everything pumping audio carefully balanced on the meter bridge of the console next to the burning candles. I went into their cars to do the "car listen" and I even knew a very big mixer who started doing the FM freq thing and broadcasting it from the mixing room to his FM stereo in his car - and we would do a listen like that too. Of course - it sounded like crap. And I DID see some mixers that spend a few hours of the day mixing on headphones as well despite a claim made here. Most common brands were Fostex, AKG and Sony for any headphone use in the studios. Usually if they brought in their own - it was a Sony pair. I think I knew of one guy that brought in a pair of Sennheisers.
But enough of that...
Bose and Beats has clearly done a FANTASTIC job marketing a mediocre product to consumers considering there truly are people here that
1. Are defending either as a "great audio product" and
2. Seem to think there is little out there other than those 2 brands to consider.
And now that apple bought Beats - it will further make average consumers THINK that it is a great product COMPARED to others. But my question was "compared to what?"
Compared to the iphone speaker - sure. Compared to all the other brands they get to try out in the box stores? Oh yeah - what other brands?
And thats really my point - these companies have given uneducated consumers little else to think about - and compared to NOTHING - sure they sound great.
Now we could argue forever what makes a "Great product" - as half the teenagers (and many adults too) out there just want whatever all the other "cool" people they know have - and know little about good audio. I mean, teenagers drop their iphones in a glass (I just learned about this) and listen to a badly compressed version of a song coming out of an iphone speaker and call it "great sounding".
I simply wanted to give my 2 cents and say that there is a reason that most audio professionals would never buy Bose and likely not Beats either, and average consumers should consider that if they are seeking out the best audio product for any given price. Its not to say we can all afford such expensive speakers. Not at all. I simply was saying - FOR THE PRICE POINT, there is better stuff out there for more accurately producing good sound - but its not as easy to find perhaps - its not in every store, and it doesn't have a prominent well placed in your face all the time "advertisement", like being placed movies like Transformers 4 and the backing of a big Hip Hop producer or large displays at Costco where you can test out the speakers and compare them against... well against NOTHING.
Its real smart on Bose's part - cause I remember when Costco DID carry a few diff brands of speaker systems, and I don't see it anymore, and the Bose displays are bigger than ever. If consumers don't see any options, well they tend to not think there ARE other options. The fact that some here seem to act like its all about either Beats or Bose is amazing to me - but then I look around at what exists in store options these days for such products, and then what is IN those stores, and I see whats happened. Its too bad.
Its simple really, if you want better audio for your money, you will look a little harder than the brand or two the apple store carries. If you want to be slave to heavy marketing genius designed to get the most profit from the masses they can then keep buying this crap. Any speaker will sound better than NO speaker. I dont expect EVERY average consumer to care about quality audio, but in general I am a person that wants to get the most and best for my hard earned money no matter what I am buying, and Beats and Bose are simply not that in the world of speakers. Unfortunately, most people know very little about that world. Not that you learn much shopping from a store that wants to sell its own brands.
*disclaimer, I did not see Transformers, but I HEARD Beats had a huge blatantly placed ad for a pill type speaker in it. You couldn't pay me to watch that crap.