Neumann KH 80 DSP Monitor Review

[napilopez]

While it may be worthwhile, keep in mind their own vertical polar plots show constrained directivity at the same region.

Yes, so shouldn't that mean we should be careful about our reference axis? Don't get me wrong; In the grand scheme of thing, I really don't think this matters much. These differences in vertical positioning are surely in the realm of almost minimal audibility (though we are sensitive to small low q changes, but it's still a tiny difference).

But just for some evidence, here are my KH80 measurements at 0, 5, and 10 degrees above the reference axis between waveguide and woofer.

(7ms gated at 1m/85dB)

Still super well controlled, but just a bit less than the perfection promised, with a dip at 2k and a bigger rise in the treble. Presumably, sound power would look the same since it's a spherical measurement though.

(Again, just being supremely nitpicky for the sake of measurements going forward)

 

[BYRTT]

Thanks. I am in a bit of a pickle in that I am running my sweeps at 106 dB, and the others are at 90 dB. I could lie to the system and make it think it is at 90 dB. Soundstage does this I think. What say you?

At 106dB sweeps if scale in software can be adjusted to cover either a 65-115dB scale as @MZKM did in "Preference Rating" into post #2 or a 60-110dB think should do it, in a way think present 106dB sweep scales is fine in it remind us readers learn to start think a bit of used DUT sweep distance process verse SPL while we read graphs, but make scanner think its 90dB is also fine.

 

[aarons915]

I was then surprised that I did not prefer the KH 80 considering that it has even smoother response than the LSR305P. There were two issues here:

1. The scale was too small. This may be a visual bias but the KH 80 sounded more like a little computer speaker than a large speaker that the 305P sounds like. It was a more focused sound emanating from a smaller source. This was a much smaller issue than #2 though.

It seems like the bass differences are influencing you quite a bit here since the KH80 appear to be a much more neutral speaker with wider dispersion. The JBL could still have a higher overall preference score due to bass being about 30% of the overall weight in the algorithm but either way it seems like the fullness in the bass was a big factor for you. I personally think since most people use subs these days, we should be trying to normalize the bass between speakers when comparing them like this, I typically compare in mono with 80Hz 4th order high passes in place to ensure the speaker with more bass doesn't easily win. This is a personal decision of course, someone who plans on using speakers in a 2.0 setup is going to be much more interested in how full the speakers sound on their own and will want to run them full range.

 

[beefkabob]

I can see discounting the importance of bass performance, but not everybody buys a sub.

 

[dukanvadet]

I would not worry about that tiny difference in the bass between Amirs and Neumanns measurements, it might just be that the speaker Neumann measured was used less or more. fs tends to usually drop after some use on bass drivers. or there is just some variance during production of the bass drivers. If you buy really expensive drivers some manufacturers sell them in matched pairs but you will never have the exact same t/s parameters for every driver of the same model.

 

[amirm]

Amir, i have one important question about the measurement: The photo indicates that the "Settings"-control has been switched to one of the "Network control" options. This means that any setting made by the owner have been active.
IMO to rule this out the correct position should have been the second from top. Or are you sure that there was no active network setting?

I checked with the other. He says that he had NOT changed any eq settings. The only thing he changed was playback level from 94 to 100 dB which should have been a good thing, not bad for my testing.

Good point anyway.

 

[napilopez]

It seems like the bass differences are influencing you quite a bit here since the KH80 appear to be a much more neutral speaker with wider dispersion. The JBL could still have a higher overall preference score due to bass being about 30% of the overall weight in the algorithm but either way it seems like the fullness in the bass was a big factor for you. I personally think since most people use subs these days, we should be trying to normalize the bass between speakers when comparing them like this, I typically compare in mono with 80Hz 4th order high passes in place to ensure the speaker with more bass doesn't easily win. This is a personal decision of course, someone who plans on using speakers in a 2.0 setup is going to be much more interested in how full the speakers sound on their own and will want to run them full range.

Oh I don't know if I'd say "most" people use a subwoofer, even among ASR readers. The sans-sub high pass could be a good idea, though some speakers might benefit more from a specific bass cutoff than others, especially if the bass is not flat as it might unduly affect timbral balance.

But bass aside, it might be better to do listening tests in a different setting. I can see how bass reinforcement from a desk would benefit the 305P and hurt the KH80, or at least not help it as much as the 305P. Not sure if amir is using them right on the desks or on a stand, but presumably there'd still be at least a bit of bass reinforcement.

It may also just be that Amirs prefers the 305P for slight differences in bass bass or directivity, or that it jived better with the music he played. They're both good speakers. I bring back the Revel vs M2, where the prettier graph doesn't always win, although this is the opposite in terms of directivity.

 

[digitalfrost]

Well it's a question of what you want to test. I think anybody serious about hifi will not use the KH80 without a subwoofer. So if you want to evaluate small speakers like this fairly, you'd need like a standardized subwoofer setup to use with all kinds of speakers. We compare the DACs and the preamps and all the other stuff to the highest standards.

I think anyone after highest standard would run the bass active, probably with room correction.

 

[napilopez]

Well it's a question of what you want to test. I think anybody serious about hifi will not use the KH80 without a subwoofer. So if you want to evaluate small speakers like this fairly, you'd need like a standardized subwoofer setup to use with all kinds of speakers. We compare the DACs and the preamps and all the other stuff to the highest standards.

I think anyone after highest standard would run the bass active, probably with room correction.

Don't disagree with you, but I'm talking from a review perspective - perfectly integrating a sub into every non-full range speaker (aka almost all of them) would not be practical from a listening test perspective. You'd have to choose the crossovers very carefully. Do you always set the crossover at, say 80Hz, and risk one speaker-sub system having a more linear response than the other? Or do you try to find the frequency that sounds and measures best, which would probably add significant time expense.

Ultimately, the nice thing about measurements is we can judge for ourselves what we'd rather spend our money on. From the measurements, I'd still go with the Neumanns over the JBLs for nearfield listening if price weren't a factor, despite what Amir preferred. The listening impressions help contextualize the measurements, but I think the data is enough to judge for yourself what you'd prefer. I know you're not negating that, but just making the point that it's probably safer to keep the listening tests relatively simple than complicate them by adding a subwoofer.

I would not worry about that tiny difference in the bass between Amirs and Neumanns measurements, it might just be that the speaker Neumann measured was used less or more. fs tends to usually drop after some use on bass drivers. or there is just some variance during production of the bass drivers. If you buy really expensive drivers some manufacturers sell them in matched pairs but you will never have the exact same t/s parameters for every driver of the same model.

I don't know if I'd say 3dB down from an otherwise superbly flat is response is tiny from a high-end measurements perspective. Again, in practice, it's probably not a big deal in considering schroeder, especially if you plan to use a sub and room correct. But it is distinctly different from Neumann and Sound and recording's anechoic measurements (although i think they use the same chamber?) - (and my own nearfield quasi-anechoic.

I think I'd be rather concerned if a pro-grade speaker announced in 2017 (I don't know when the owner bought it) showed 3DB lower bass than expected. I still imagine it's just measurement volume related, but it'd be good to know for sure if we're aiming for utmost precision.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

This measurement system is on another level from Stereophile and even the NRC, going to become indispensible in my next speaker buying decision.

 

[LeftCoastTim]

@amirm I see that the scale bar on the left no longer shows 1db tick marks unlike your other reviews. Would it be possible to rescale and show them in future reviews? Thanks for the amazing reviews!

 

[Typevii]

@amirm Do you hear any hiss or hum one or 0.5 meter away? I want to use it as my desktop speaker. Thanks

Just to add, I use these as desktop speakers, listening distance 2-3ft. Absolutely silent, no hiss or hum whatsoever audible.
The only hiss is as previously stated, if I really get my ear into the waveguide, there is a barely audible hiss (which I had never heard until I just tried getting my ear right in there).

 

[napilopez]

Just to add, I use these as desktop speakers, listening distance 2-3ft. Absolutely silent, no hiss or hum whatsoever audible.
The only hiss is as previously stated, if I really get my ear into the waveguide, there is a barely audible hiss (which I had never heard until I just tried getting my ear right in there).

I can second this.

 

[aarons915]

Oh I don't know if I'd say "most" people use a subwoofer, even among ASR readers. The sans-sub high pass could be a good idea, though some speakers might benefit more from a specific bass cutoff than others, especially if the bass is not flat as it might unduly affect timbral balance.

It may also just be that Amirs prefers the 305P for slight differences in bass bass or directivity, or that it jived better with the music he played. They're both good speakers. I bring back the Revel vs M2, where the prettier graph doesn't always win, although this is the opposite in terms of directivity.

I would say anyone serious about bass should be using subs and learning how to properly integrate them with their mains, you'll achieve much smoother bass throughout the room and be able to deal with room modes much easier. For those who truly don't want a sub or just don't have room then I agree that woofer size becomes much more important but it's still a large compromise compared a multi sub system. I personally think these KH80 could be made into a really nice system that would play plenty loud for most people but subwoofers would be mandatory to round out the bass.

I agree I might be a bit different with comparing speakers after normalizing the bass between them but I think it makes it easier to compare the range I am most interested in, which is 80Hz and up. I recently compared my LS50 to the KEF R3 like this and the LS50 sounded clearly better to my ears but when running them both full range I can see why some would prefer the R3, they sound fuller and more rounded than the LS50 when run like that.

The difference in the Salon 2 and M2 is the Salon 2 was still a very neutral speaker and it's issues are all within the threshold of audibility, they are also a wider dispersion speaker. The 305P is pretty ragged compared to the KH80 but should be much stronger in the bass, maybe that's enough to make up for it's disadvantages above 200Hz.

 

[dukanvadet]

I don't know if I'd say 3dB down from an otherwise superbly flat is response is tiny from a high-end measurements perspective. Again, in practice, it's probably not a big deal in considering schroeder, especially if you plan to use a sub and room correct. But it is distinctly different from Neumann and Sound and recording's anechoic measurements (although i think they use the same chamber?) - (and my own nearfield quasi-anechoic.

I think I'd be rather concerned if a pro-grade speaker announced in 2017 (I don't know when the owner bought it) showed 3DB lower bass than expected. I still imagine it's just measurement volume related, but it'd be good to know for sure if we're aiming for utmost precision.

I made some t/s measurements on an sb acoustic driver (they manufacture drivers for revel and are a serious manufacturer). Measurements before break in, after break in and then again after they where in storage for about a year. They all where slightly different, not a big deal but still different. They add a disclaimer on every data-sheet that t/s parameters are measured on drivers that are broken in.
In tymphany data sheets they add a 15% tolarance on their fs specification. That is not because they are bad drivers its because their spec sheets are honest.

 

[bobbooo]

It seems like the bass differences are influencing you quite a bit here since the KH80 appear to be a much more neutral speaker with wider dispersion. The JBL could still have a higher overall preference score due to bass being about 30% of the overall weight in the algorithm but either way it seems like the fullness in the bass was a big factor for you. I personally think since most people use subs these days, we should be trying to normalize the bass between speakers when comparing them like this, I typically compare in mono with 80Hz 4th order high passes in place to ensure the speaker with more bass doesn't easily win. This is a personal decision of course, someone who plans on using speakers in a 2.0 setup is going to be much more interested in how full the speakers sound on their own and will want to run them full range.

As I suggested in this thread, two different scores can be calculated for each speaker - one using Sean Olive's original preference formula as is for 2.0 set-ups, and another 'maximum potential preference rating' for the speaker as if it were used with an ideal sub (with bass extension down to approximately 14.5 Hz at -6dB), thus allowing different speakers to be ranked in both scenarios, all using the same measurement data. Amir agreed this would be a good idea and so @MZKM has incorporated this second score into his excellent spreadsheets for the preference rating calculations.

 

[pozz]

I can record the preference scores for each speaker as part of the planned review database.

Nice work @MZKM.

 

[amirm]

@amirm I see that the scale bar on the left no longer shows 1db tick marks unlike your other reviews. Would it be possible to rescale and show them in future reviews? Thanks for the amazing reviews!

Thank you. I looked and there are no controls for the tick marks. It is deciding on its own to show or not show them. Limiting the span to 50 dB brings them back though:

Are people OK with the tail of the response being cut off this way? I can shift the directivity plots up so that is not a problem.

 

[aarons915]

As I suggested in this thread, two different scores can be calculated for each speaker - one using Sean Olive's original preference formula as is for 2.0 set-ups, and another 'maximum potential preference rating' for the speaker as if it were used with an ideal sub (with bass extension down to approximately 14.5 Hz at -6dB), thus allowing different speakers to be ranked in both scenarios, all using the same measurement data. Amir agreed this would be a good idea and so @MZKM has incorporated this second score into his excellent spreadsheets for the preference rating calculations.

I saw that and agree it's a good idea but it's only half the equation, which is the measurement side. When doing actual listening tests, you have to decide if you want to run every speaker full range or normalize the bass to not give the bigger one an advantage. This is a personal choice and depends on how you're using them but generally people buying a speaker with a 4" driver are going to be using a sub.

 

[Xyrium]

Amir,
You mentioned "JBL LSR305P", which might confuse some people...since "JBL LSR305" was the first generation.
You obviously meant "JBL 305P Mkii" (second generation)...

Can't tell if this was a joke, but from everything I've seen online, they are essentially the same barring aesthetic changes, For instance, the mkii appears to hiss as badly as any other iteration...

Edit: Deleted link to reddit rant on 305p hissing...too much vulgarity

Are there any teardowns that have indicated otherwise by showing different builds internally and via part numbers, etc.? I'm curious, because they're so damned cheap, it could hurt to have a pair to bang around, perhaps connected to my kid's e-drum kit. Some folks reported better performance out of the 306 amp though.