boxerfan88
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2018
- Messages
- 407
- Likes
- 452
Out of curiosity, what's the distance between KH310 acoustic center to the side wall in your room?
Mine is ~69cm.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Neumann KH 310A Review (Powered Monitor)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Out of curiosity, what's the distance between KH310 acoustic center to the side wall in your room?
Mine is ~69cm.
Stereo image is very stable and precise here, but I also have over 3m distance to the sidewalls. Mine are in a ~3m triangle with the 310s pointing slightly behind my listening position and with the woofers on the inside. It did take some tweaking to get the stereo image like I wanted it however, my previous speakers had a narrower beam width and they gave a precise stereo image as long as I was in the main listening position.
The 310s are not the loudest, but I have not heard any breakup either when they are crossed to subwoofers. I think that the test from Sound & Recording is worth a read if you wanna see some actual data on the loudness:
www.soundandrecording.de
The 310s are not the loudest, but I have not heard any breakup either when they are crossed to subwoofers. I think that the test from Sound & Recording is worth a read if you wanna see some actual data on the loudness:
Studiomonitor Neumann KH 310 im Test
Mit dem KH-120 gelang dem traditionellen Mikrofonhersteller Neumann ein fulminantes Debüt im Marktsegment der Nahfeldstudiomonitore. Der kleine Monitor konnte sich binnen kurzer Zeit an der Spitze der Verkaufslisten platzieren − völlig zu Recht hinsichtlich der Klangeigenschaften und des...
www.soundandrecording.de
Something like that, i don't know exactly. My room looks like this:
Neumann MA1 vs. Dirac Live Bass Control (DLBC) - Dual KH750 subs
Hello, i have a dual sub Neumann system (2x KH310, 2x KH750 DSP). I use the MA1 microphone and software for room EQ. I also own a Dirac Live license (PC standalone) that i have not used for a long time. Because Dirac released DLBC, i decided to get the trial version and compare the results of...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Likewise, as a Hi-Fi user, I would have to agree-as I'm sure would Pierre who built these speakers; see posts 15266, 15,276.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/beyond-the-ariel.100392/page-764
But what is "voicing", where the crossover is tweaked to do what beyond its generally intended function? And I understand that voicing can also be defined as selecting electronics to impart a certain sonic character, such as preamp and/or DAC choices. If so, then doesn't such voicing betray the alleged goal of persuing onic neutrality?
Ze Frog
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2024
- Messages
- 644
- Likes
- 733
Yeah, pretty much. Thing is though we all like different things really. I like flat and boring as a baseline, then I'll add EQ/voicing if I feel necessary. Advantage of a totally neutral speaker is having that nice flat response to work from. I like flat a lot of the time, but I don't really hold myself to that's how it HAS to be all of the time. Some days or genres I want a bit more or less of something, a flat sounding speaker with good directivity effectively means you can tailor the sound far easier and more infinitely than swapping components all the time. It's a win win really.
Andreas007
Active Member
I‘m confused. Suddenly this speaker is not good enough anymore?
Doesn‘t match with Amir‘s review and neither with the fact that many studios are using them as a reference.
Also look at Amir‘s conclusion with respect to bass capability when comparing 150 vs 310. 310 clearly wins.
To me it sounds like complaining on very high level.
Doesn‘t match with Amir‘s review and neither with the fact that many studios are using them as a reference.
Also look at Amir‘s conclusion with respect to bass capability when comparing 150 vs 310. 310 clearly wins.
To me it sounds like complaining on very high level.
JustCoolin‘
Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2022
- Messages
- 60
- Likes
- 133
I often think that people who call flat speakers „boring“ don‘t really understand what „flat“ or „neutral“ in audio means, and are the victim of some weird, misinformed linguistic association simply based on the general meaning of the words „neutral“ or „flat“. 
Very useful reply, thanks.
It's as subjective as it gets, but these speakers have put an end to my upgraditis. They sound fantastic. I don't need them to go louder, even if that is a potential real issue (see the S&R review above).
My only complaint is that they get real warm and toasty when powered on, nice during the winter and less so in the summer. I would like the same speaker, but with more efficient amplification.
How far away are the side walls are you considering to be "big/wide"? 15-20 ft? 30+?
I never had a big room, so I don't know how many and which body part's lengths you'll need. Far enough for the reflections to become quiet and late enough.
You need to toe-in the speakers to your listening point, especially if you intend to listen from 1,5 meters away, otherwise the stereo image will increase to the point where in between the speakers (so called "phantom speaker") you may hear pretty close to nothing. This is normal to speakers that have a rather narrow field, as per below picture from page no. 1 of this review thread:
Many of us consider this narrow field as being a PRO and not a CON, especially that horizontal reflections to the side walls will be greatly reduced this way, so room acoustics will be diminished and stereo separation increased. The fact that you're seeing this as a CON is due to the fact that you were listening to studio monitors from a closer distance (which seems normal for critical listening), but next time try to increase the distance between your listening point and the speakers or lower the distance between the speakers and see how it sounds. For larger audition rooms you may be better off with something else than studio monitors, perhaps with big full size floorstanding speakers.
P.S.: I love the stereo imaging of the AKG K701 & Q701 headphones, but sometimes I felt that it's too much, so I was using crossfeed plug-ins; you may also try such a plug-in for speakers as well, if you feel that the "phantom channel" needs revived.
P.S.: I love the stereo imaging of the AKG K701 & Q701 headphones, but sometimes I felt that it's too much, so I was using crossfeed plug-ins; you may also try such a plug-in for speakers as well, if you feel that the "phantom channel" needs revived.
Last edited:
Hey, thanks for taking the time and for the informative reply. I would take the chane to ask (with an ounce of shame) how you read that graph..You need to toe-in the speakers to your listening point, especially if you intend to listen from 1,5 meters away, otherwise the stereo image will increase to the point where in between the speakers (so called "phantom speaker") you may hear pretty close to nothing. This is normal to speakers that have a rather narrow field, as per below picture from page no. 1 of this review thread:
Many of us consider this narrow field as being a PRO and not a CON, especially that horizontal reflections to the side walls will be greatly reduced this way, so room acoustics will be diminished and stereo separation increased. The fact that you're seeing this as a CON is due to the fact that you were listening to studio monitors from a closer distance (which seems normal for critical listening), but next time try to increase the distance between your listening point and the speakers or lower the distance between the speakers and see how it sounds. For larger audition rooms you may be better off with something else than studio monitors, perhaps with big full size floorstanding speakers.
P.S.: I love the stereo imaging of the AKG K701 & Q701 headphones, but sometimes I felt that it's too much, so I was using crossfeed plug-ins; you may also try such a plug-in for speakers as well, if you feel that the "phantom channel" needs revived.
I also really like my Q701, and I am happy to have them for some headphones check from time to time. I just take into account that they have this enhanced wideness (and I think objectively a weak phantom center), and I would say also a bit light below the 50 hz.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2018
- Messages
- 847
- Likes
- 645
Like most good monitors they can't do everything. At very close distances, nearfield, you are probably better off with KH80/120/150.
If you are looking something midfield the 310s are a better bet, I reckon. Particularly with subs. They are not made to go loud without them tbh.
You can bet that the woofers in the 80/120/150 will be distorting badly at volume without subs. More so than the 310 most likely.
If you are looking something midfield the 310s are a better bet, I reckon. Particularly with subs. They are not made to go loud without them tbh.
You can bet that the woofers in the 80/120/150 will be distorting badly at volume without subs. More so than the 310 most likely.
"A wide directivity speaker is typically thought of as one that maintains amplitude (sound pressure level, SPL) consistency between the on and off axis sound. A narrow directivity speaker is one where the on and off axis amplitudes are substantially different" as per https://acousticfrontiers.com/blogs/articles/speaker-directivity-off-axis-response-theory-and-measurement-techniques#:~:text=Directivity is the term used,on and off axis sound. In case of near field monitors we need to keep our ears in the center of the drivers otherwise some frequencies of the sound will propagate without us perceiving it at their full amplitude.
However, toeing-in the speakers is recommended for most speakers, even for full-range floorstanding, usually between 15 to 30 degrees for each speaker, to better match the audience in the room.
However, toeing-in the speakers is recommended for most speakers, even for full-range floorstanding, usually between 15 to 30 degrees for each speaker, to better match the audience in the room.
Stereo image is very stable and precise here, but I also have over 3m distance to the sidewalls. Mine are in a ~3m triangle with the 310s pointing slightly behind my listening position and with the woofers on the inside. It did take some tweaking to get the stereo image like I wanted it however, my previous speakers had a narrower beam width and they gave a precise stereo image as long as I was in the main listening position.
The 310s are not the loudest, but I have not heard any breakup either when they are crossed to subwoofers. I think that the test from Sound & Recording is worth a read if you wanna see some actual data on the loudness:
Studiomonitor Neumann KH 310 im Test
Mit dem KH-120 gelang dem traditionellen Mikrofonhersteller Neumann ein fulminantes Debüt im Marktsegment der Nahfeldstudiomonitore. Der kleine Monitor konnte sich binnen kurzer Zeit an der Spitze der Verkaufslisten platzieren − völlig zu Recht hinsichtlich der Klangeigenschaften und des...
I start to be confused here, I have to say.
I navigated the forum a bit, and it seems that according to it, the world should be a sort of dystopic post-communism place, where each studio has either kh150, 310, or 420. Maybe some Genelecs are allowed, in your studio B.
But then I am told that:
-the kh310 (which is sold as a nearfield monitor), has to be far way, because that's how it is supposed to be. 3 meters away??? ok...but then..
- ..you can't push the kh310 too loud, because they push the lows too far for a sealed cabinet of that size
The Neumann page for the kh310 is full of misleading information then, I have too assume. Or, simply, they play on what the speaker shines at (not just that, I really enjoyed listening actual music on the kh310): measurements.
What studios? Famous studios using Neumann, afaik, have them for their multi-speaker setups. Because for sure they are pretty good for the purpose, and for a really good price. But those studios don't have Neumann as their main. And I am not saying they wouldn't be good enough to be mains. They are just not better as you may want to believe, and their "status" is not there with ATC & co.
I spent quite a few hours myself in an ambisonics room using 40+ KH120. They've been selected because they were really flat, and for a price that wouldn't kill you when you purchase 50 of them.
Most of it is in the measurements. You can see exactly how loud they can play before bass distorts. For me, it is very loud. Much louder than i ever want. If you are in a bigger room with more distance, listen to highly dynamic, very bass heavy stuff and/or you don't have neighbours, YMMV.
Regarding the distance, from my experience i say they i would place them at least 1.5 meters away. I did not like them closer subjectively. This is still nearfield.
Thanks DJBonoBobo.
When I wrote my experience and my feelings after checking out the speakers, a lot of assumptions have been made on the reason why the speakers didn't perform well (if you believe on my judgement, of course). Thinking back to the experience, for sure I could have been more careful in creating the best listening scenario, but what I heard, for experience, is something beyond just being out of the sweet-spot. And I don't think speakers should be so dependent on all these factors. I remember the first time I listened to Genelecs, and some spatial music was played. I was sitting in a school pretty small room, with other people around, in a random spot, and I still remember how those Genelec showed me how a a pair of monitors can really create the acoustic illusion that a stereo field is. I don't think that if that day I was sitting 40 cm closer or further, or 50 cm left of right, it would have been any different.
Measurements. I believe in measurements. I like measurements. And I know that if you design something with measurements in mind, you can make choices to pass those measurements in the best way. But measurements are "discrete" representations of performances. It's a bit like passing a test with 100/100 because you studies the exact questions the test was about. And it's one of the easiest thing to achieve nowadays.
In my experience, the more commercial a product/brand is, the most it relies in showing measurements, linearity, wide frequency response, etc. They measure better then products considered to be the standard.
Then some of them (like Neumann) are actually good, but some of them are actual crap.
Last edited:
