Neumann KH 150 Monitor Review

[fuzzychaos]

I know the general sentiment is that fidelity is king, but the requirements for monitoring are different than listening for enjoyment. When the studio monitor manufacturers talk about suitability for listening distance, that is in reference to SPL and direct vs indirect sound dominance. They achieve this through controlled directivity, and a larger speaker is required to control directivity down to lower frequencies.

This same requirement doesn't necessarily apply to home listening for enjoyment. Direct sound dominance is essential for monitoring but not so when listening for enjoyment. And aside from a few very large speakers, the "far field" towers and bookshelves for home listening are not achieving direct sound dominance at a distance either. In fact many state they enjoy speakers with wider directivity (which will mean more indirect sound), because it provides greater envelopment.

So while I don't think there is harm in selecting a monitor that adheres to the manufacturer's guidelines for distance, most people don't have studio SPL requirements, and it's uncertain if direct sound dominance is a necessary goal.

This is how Genelec specs the distance recommendation in addition to SPL.

Correct Monitors - Genelec.com

A monitor, by definition, observes, checks, controls, warns or keeps a continuous record of something. An audio monitor, studio monitor or monitoring speaker is more than just a good-sounding loudspeaker. It is a device used in the process of recording, mixing or broadcasting audio in any...

www.genelec.com

Exactly, I agree with your sentiment.

Direct sound vs room sound. Every living room speaker whether they are monitors, bookshelves, or towers are going to be more room sound and less direct based on the fact they are being listened to at a further distance. These Genelec’s and Neumann’s are being marketed to studios where direct sound would be important for mixing/mastering. For the living room, you are going to get the room sound regardless of speaker (unless you are sitting very close). I don’t get why it’s so hard for these guys to wrap their head around that. It’s quite simple, if you are mixing/mastering place them so they are within the recommended distance for direct sound, if not, it doesn’t matter (as long as they can get the SPL you desire at the distance you are sitting). As I have said several times before on here, Genelec makes the G series marketed toward consumers, they are 80xx monitors with an RCA connection and they fully expect them to be used at a further distance than the 80xx because they are using them for pleasure and not mixing. Same speaker, different use.

 

[MrSoul4470]

Correct, but useable up to 6m. Their recommendation is also about studio monitor use and not as a living room system. I.e. if you’re mixing, stay in the recommended, otherwise you are fine.

In my experience the maximum distance recommended by Genelec is rather optimistic for domestic rooms. My 8331 are recommended up to 2m. I think the limit is more like 1m/1.2m. Farther away the sound quality regrades rapidly. I have some basic room treatment (2 basstraps in corners, absorbers behind speakers), but it's a living room. Maybe I just really prefer direct sound.

 

[fuzzychaos]

In my experience the maximum distance recommended by Genelec is rather optimistic for domestic rooms. My 8331 are recommended up to 2m. I think the limit is more like 1m/1.2m. Farther away the sound quality regrades rapidly. I have some basic room treatment (2 basstraps in corners, absorbers behind speakers), but it's a living room. Maybe I just really prefer direct sound.

Quite possibly. We all have preferences about audio that vary. I’m just used to more “room” sound I guess as I’ve always listened to my speakers in my living room from 11’ to 13’.

 

[Robbo99999]

In my experience the maximum distance recommended by Genelec is rather optimistic for domestic rooms. My 8331 are recommended up to 2m. I think the limit is more like 1m/1.2m. Farther away the sound quality regrades rapidly. I have some basic room treatment (2 basstraps in corners, absorbers behind speakers), but it's a living room. Maybe I just really prefer direct sound.

As another subjective datapoint, I'd say my JBL 308p's sound good at 2m as well as 3.8m in different untreated rooms. I think the main thing is the good horizontal directivity. They really do fill the room with a good even sound. (My experience must be simply just different to yours as Genelec have good horizontal directivity too - maybe I'm not too fussed about direct sound & speakers with good horizontal directivity minimise issues).

 

[MrSoul4470]

Of course it takes some "getting used to it" to suddenly sit close to your speakers. I also started the nearfield thing just a couple of years ago. To me it was an absolute game changer.

No one's upset because people use nearfield speakers in midfield/farfield. But I think it's a pity, because they could get so much more from their speakers. But if that is really what they want, then it's all good.

 

[Robbo99999]

Of course it takes some "getting used to it" to suddenly sit close to your speakers. I also started the nearfield thing just a couple of years ago. To me it was an absolute game changer.

No one's upset because people use nearfield speakers in midfield/farfield. But I think it's a pity, because they could get so much more from their speakers. But if that is really what they want, then it's all good.

Equilateral Triangle with listening position is the most important aspect I think based on my experience, and I've used my speakers at distances ranging from 1.5 - 3.8m in various perfect or imperfect "triangles". Either way the speakers always fill the room with good even sound, but imaging is best using equilateral triangle.

 

[AudioJester]

I find active monitors at 2.5-5m to be superb. When i listen at my desk or amateur mixing its more of a headphone type experience, crystal clear and precise. Add some reflections and space in a tyical lounge room and they can be brilliant, what the average punter desires!

Not all of us appreciate "more" all the time. The crusade that these should only be used in nearfield seems silly to me

 

[changer]

no fancy surround geometry like the purifi

I thought of the same! We will sadly never see measurements for the woofer. Purifi uses the surround for physical limiting, while rumor has it that Neumann created the KH 150’s woofer with the DSP taking over some functions that are usually physical properties. This could explain the difference of how the surround looks.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I pity anyone that has to live with this driver exposed

 

[dfuller]

I thought of the same! We will sadly never see measurements for the woofer. Purifi uses the surround for physical limiting, while rumor has it that Neumann created the KH 150’s woofer with the DSP taking over some functions that are usually physical properties. This could explain the difference of how the surround looks.

I'm not quite sure how you'd use DSP to replace a physical phenomenon. What do you mean by that?

 

[Blockader]

I'm not quite sure how you'd use DSP to replace a physical phenomenon. What do you mean by that?

DSP can be used to reduce distortion of drivers. The method is called as non linear control, NLC in short.

Devialet use that in their hi-fi speakers. Warwick audio use it on their proprietary dac/amp modules of their headphones.

 

[changer]

I'm not quite sure how you'd use DSP to replace a physical phenomenon. What do you mean by that?

It is said that in the case of KH 150 woofer, purely electronic controls over excursion limits remove sources of non-linear distortion from the suspension, that previously had been necessary to implement to prevent driver damage.

 

[dfuller]

purely electronic controls over excursion limits

Okay, so a limiter and a very steep high pass filter below Fb. That's... not that extraordinary.

 

[gino1961]

I thought of the same! We will sadly never see measurements for the woofer. Purifi uses the surround for physical limiting, while rumor has it that Neumann created the KH 150’s woofer with the DSP taking over some functions that are usually physical properties. This could explain the difference of how the surround looks.

you are right Measurements strangely enough can tell one of two things I am watching this datasheet https://purifi-audio.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/PTT6.5W04-NFA-01-Data-Sheet-0.91.pdf
i would love if they used % for distortion
anyway a graph (attached) is not complete ... while i see the 255Hz test signal i cannot see the 30Hz signal
And why limiting the testing level to just 80dB/1 meter when musical peaks can reach also 100dB ? am i missing something ? is it a woofer for evening listening ? come on ... pump up the volume
However i love this graph a lot Any woofer should come with a graph like this ... maybe measured at 95dB ?

 

[Marc v E]

It is said that in the case of KH 150 woofer, purely electronic controls over excursion limits remove sources of non-linear distortion from the suspension, that previously had been necessary to implement to prevent driver damage.

I think this is very smart.

I can remember seeing a graph from the Tonmeister at B&O that a driver only delivers a clean signal reproduction if not fully extended. Not using a physical limitation in excursion but using dsp to limit it will probably give a better result than limiting it physically. However good it gets in the physical surround, there will be a point where distortion sets in.

I will try and find the blog as he is great at explaining. Btw I was wrong that it was focussing on the surround; it's about the suspension and its stiffness. The original point on physical limitation vs dsp is still valid:

B&O Tech: Why select one driver over another? (Part 1)

#49 in a series of articles about the technology behind Bang & Olufsen loudspeakers Once-upon-a-time, I wrote an article in this series about how a loudspeaker driver is made and (to som…

www.tonmeister.ca

 

[LTig]

Not quite I think. Especially in mostly untreated rooms nearfield will sound significantly better.

Under this conditions it will be true for almost any speaker, not just for specific nearfield monitors. A room with empty hard reflective walls (modern lifestyle) will always sound horrible, regardless of the speaker type.

 

[Sokel]

I know the general sentiment is that fidelity is king, but the requirements for monitoring are different than listening for enjoyment. When the studio monitor manufacturers talk about suitability for listening distance, that is in reference to SPL and direct vs indirect sound dominance. They achieve this through controlled directivity, and a larger speaker is required to control directivity down to lower frequencies.

This same requirement doesn't necessarily apply to home listening for enjoyment. Direct sound dominance is essential for monitoring but not so when listening for enjoyment. And aside from a few very large speakers, the "far field" towers and bookshelves for home listening are not achieving direct sound dominance at a distance either. In fact many state they enjoy speakers with wider directivity (which will mean more indirect sound), because it provides greater envelopment.

So while I don't think there is harm in selecting a monitor that adheres to the manufacturer's guidelines for distance, most people don't have studio SPL requirements, and it's uncertain if direct sound dominance is a necessary goal.

This is how Genelec specs the distance recommendation in addition to SPL.

Correct Monitors - Genelec.com

A monitor, by definition, observes, checks, controls, warns or keeps a continuous record of something. An audio monitor, studio monitor or monitoring speaker is more than just a good-sounding loudspeaker. It is a device used in the process of recording, mixing or broadcasting audio in any...

www.genelec.com

This chart always hurts my feelings

 

[dshreter]

This chart always hurts my feelings

Why?

 

[Sokel]

Why?

Cause my room volume (one of the most significant aspects in far field) falls between the last two of the chart.
Somewhere between 40.000 and 80.000 euros to tell things by their name.

 

[dshreter]

Cause my room volume (one of the most significant aspects in far field) falls between the last two of the chart.
Somewhere between 40.000 and 80.000 euros to tell things by their name.

If you aren't monitoring though, I don't think it applies. 1236A is an insane speaker.