Neumann KH 150 Monitor Review

[sarumbear]

An outstanding performance at a reasonable price. Add 2 subwoofers and you have an exceptional system. Great review Amir!

Not just outstanding, using decent subwoofers you can have THD that is better than tube amplifiers across the audio spectrum! Incredible achievement!

 

[beagleman]

Outstanding measurements for sure!
So is the very flat response a result of nearly perfect drivers, or mostly DSP equalization?

What actual low frequency driver does this use?

 

[thewas]

So is the very flat response a result of nearly perfect drivers, or mostly DSP equalization?

I would say mostly of very well engineered drivers as otherwise you can manage though to smoothen the response by EQ but problems can still be seen in terms of distortion, waterfall etc. An EQ by far cannot transform poor mechanics and acoustics into great ones.

 

[Pearljam5000]

It's excellent and all but still has stiff competition at not much more money.
8350,1032, and KH310 and 8050 are actually cheaper

 

[Trell]

KH 150 is 130$ cheaper than Genelec 8331 here in Indonesia, wonder which one should I choose for my desktop setup with 1m-1,2m listening distance

I'm sitting at a 70 cm to 120 cm distance from them, and a larger speaker (like KH 150) would be physically too large and I would sit too close to them.

However, for the price of a pair of Genelec 8331 I bought a pair of 8330A, 7360A subwoofer, GLM Kit (for roomEQ), Genelec L-Stands, cables and still had some change over. Adding a subwoofer is a bigger sound quality improvement for me than a possible improved sound quality from the 8331, allows me to place the subwoofer for better response.

 

[oversky]

Why would it change over distance?

Because of the law of reflection.

 

[thewas]

It's excellent and all but still has stiff competition at not much more money.
8350,1032, and KH310 and 8050 are actually cheaper

KH310 and 8050 do not have room correction DSP so its an apple with pears comparison. Its direct competitor is 8340 which is older and does not have the same measured performance and its list price is similar to the KH150 one, it is offered cheaper though because it is older.

 

[kimmosto]

Can you please show then measurements of 2-way DIY loudspeakers of similar size and directivity which have better balanced directivity as you claim?

For example Directiva R1 has smoother directivity because tweeter's WG is significantly smaller than woofer cone. Smaller or shallower WG is usually better for matching and smoothing directivity with phase matching XO such as acoustical L-R. Of course more balanced DI alone does not guarantee better sound.
Here is DI curves of some cheap in-wall designs and smaller Kef coaxials visualising the difference to KH150; how much and smoothly DI could/should increase to get more balanced and open sound to off-axis and random listening positions.

 

[MCH]

8340 which ... does not have the same measured performance

Hi thewas, can you elaborate on this briefly? Thanks

 

[thewas]

For example Directiva R1 has smoother directivity because tweeter's WG is significantly smaller than woofer cone. Smaller or shallower WG is usually better for matching and smoothing directivity with phase matching XO such as acoustical L-R. Of course more balanced DI alone does not guarantee better sound.
Here is DI curves of some cheap in-wall designs and smaller Kef coaxials visualising the difference to KH150; how much and smoothly DI could/should increase to get more balanced and open sound to off-axis and random listening positions.
View attachment 249041

With wide radiation tweeters/waveguides it is of course easier to blend the directivity to the relatively small woofer (thats why I had written with similar size and directivity), the difficulty and compromise starts when due to the needs of higher listening distances a high directivity is desired but the loudspeaker should not be too large and lead to a typical kink of the DI and kind of constant directivity above. The KEFs (which I also own) of course have also the advantage that vertically they don't have a lobe that makes the kink of the DI bigger.

 

[anphex]

I thought there was some mistake when I saw the too-good-to-be-true linearity. Wow, just wow. Then again, you can do really cool stuff with active DSP speakers. But the bass extension paired with THIS low distortion? I can't think of a way to make anythink better at this size and price. And if I read right they seem to have room calibration too!

 

[thewas]

Hi thewas, can you elaborate on this briefly? Thanks

See their on and off-axis measurements here which don't have the level of perfection of the much newer KH150, personally I think also that the distortion performance of the KH150 will be better but since there are no directly comparative measurements thats just a guess/speculation of mine after seeing the so low distortion measurements of the KH150 which are in big parts comparative to the very good, bigger and 3-way KH310.

 

[kimmosto]

EQ doesn't improve things much.

EQ is more okay for far field listening when you need to drop level of direct sound a bit - for example 1-2 dB at mid-treble in order to smooth ER, LW and SP. The reason is that typically/naturally room acoustics increase acoustical resolution at HF so that is the range where you can decrease relative power of direct sound. Increasing level high mid...low treble could increase biting of the sound too much so clear directivity step/hump at low treble is more difficult to fix with EQ. This is also the reason why sound of 2-ways without waveguide or with small WG are easy to get balanced and open sounding with just XO design. There is less directivity at low treble compared to large WG which increases requirements to room acoustics, but that is best way to improve sound anyway.

 

[abdo123]

For example Directiva R1 has smoother directivity because tweeter's WG is significantly smaller than woofer cone. Smaller or shallower WG is usually better for matching and smoothing directivity with phase matching XO such as acoustical L-R. Of course more balanced DI alone does not guarantee better sound.
Here is DI curves of some cheap in-wall designs and smaller Kef coaxials visualising the difference to KH150; how much and smoothly DI could/should increase to get more balanced and open sound to off-axis and random listening positions.
View attachment 249041

I don't understand what you mean with messy directivity, like it's very typical for 2-ways to have a blip at the crossover due to the mismatch vertically between the drivers.

 

[kimmosto]

due to the needs of higher listening distances a high directivity is desired

Higher directivity is not required or at least not the best solution imo when listening distance increases. Of course massive directivity and radiating area could move sound images closer and make them bigger, but acoustic resolution is maintained to very long distance with adequate room acoustics (=without flutter echo). So that is the best approach if possible.

 

[kimmosto]

I don't understand what you mean with messy directivity, like it's very typical for 2-ways to have a blip at the crossover due to the mismatch vertically between the drivers.

Small peak is typical but you can keep peak at lower level with smaller WG or without WG. Just compare Directiva R1 and KH150.

 

[abdo123]

Small peak is typical but you can keep peak at lower level with smaller WG or without WG. Just compare Directiva R1 and KH150.

The Directiva R1 has a blatant directivity mismatch (that has been discussed to death on the directiva threads). the KH150 is arguably more text book perfect.

 

[calugg]

Wow. A refreshing find! Glad to see a company dispell all the voodoo and make a product to show for it.

well, it is Neumann. I remember the microphones from 40 years ago when my work-study job was in an ersatz recording studio (music ed major). They were just fabulous, fabulous then. The Crown real-to-real? Not so much.....

 

[RobL]

I don't understand what you mean with messy directivity, like it's very typical for 2-ways to have a blip at the crossover due to the mismatch vertically between the drivers.

View attachment 249042

I always viewed the DI trend line more like two or more slopes (1 per driver) rather than a continuous line. More like this:

The woofer purple and the tweeter yellow. That peak being a simple artifact of wher they meet, because of their differing angles. Am I wrong about that?

 

[kimmosto]

The Directiva R1 has a blatant directivity mismatch (that has been discussed to death on the directiva threads).

That is diffraction above XO range. For example this is the same tweeter with 5.25" woofer. Some diffraction exist due to baffle fitting of fast prototype, but XO area at 2.3 kHz and above is smooth.

So combination of WG and box dimensions and edges should be designed properly if WG is small or does not exist.