Dynaudio LYD 5 Studio Monitor Review

[KaiserSoze]

I did audition the LYD-48 at one of my local dealers. They did sound amazing to me, although consider this a very biased opinion as I am kinda a fan of Dynaudio. What I love the most about them is the specious soundstage they create.

I split tested them with the Neumann KH310 (which is also an awesome 3-way speaker). I preferred the LYD-48 over it. Although, from what I have been told, with the switches on the back, you can basically make KH310 sound to your personal preference.

Basically, you can't go wrong with both of them. The mids on the KH310 are crazy-good.

To satisfy my curiosity I Gurgled the price for the KH310, and after I learned enough to avoiding confusing the KH310 with the one that has digital inputs (310D), it looks like the price for the KH310 is $2,200, vs. $1,150 for the LYD-48. The total amplifier power of the KH310 is +2 dB vs. the LYD-48. Ordinary differences in efficiency and sensitivity for two different brands/models of speaker are often greater than 2 dB, so it wouldn't make a lot of sense to pay much attention to the difference in amp power without also comparing the measured sensitivity of both speakers. There is no doubt something else that someone else would point out, but given the information I have, the LYD-48 appears to be a substantially better value.

 

[thewas]

There is no doubt something else that someone else would point out, but given the information I have, the LYD-48 appears to be a substantially better value.

The KH310 has a set of really neutral measurements and very low distortions https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/1719/download , plus its 3" mid range dome is one of the lowest distortion drivers beating even legends like the ATC one, while for the LYD-48 there don't exist detailed 3rd party measurments and even the manufacturer ones (sonogrammes) don't look really great https://dynaudiodata.blob.core.windows.net/media/6539/spec_for_lyd48_2017pdf.pdf so while it may sound nice I personally wouldn't say its better value, which is something I would have wished as the KH310 are too expensive for my current situation.

Just as an example from above linked measurements this

vs this

Personally I am looking since years for cheaper equivalent alternatives to the KH310 and ADAM S3V but unfortunately haven't found ones yet.

 

[watchnerd]

The KH310 has a set of really neutral measurements and very low distortions https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/1719/download , plus its 3" mid range dome is one of the lowest distortion drivers beating even legends like the ATC one, while for the LYD-48 there don't exist detailed 3rd party measurments and even the manufacturer ones (sonogrammes) don't look really great https://dynaudiodata.blob.core.windows.net/media/6539/spec_for_lyd48_2017pdf.pdf so while it may sound nice I personally wouldn't say its better value, which is something I would have wished as the KH310 are too expensive for my current situation.

I don't think Dynaudio positions the LYD 48 as their KH310 competitor.

The LYD series is for small scale, hobbyist, amateur, and home studio markets.

The Core 47 is more of a direct competitor to the KH310 in terms of pricing and features.

 

[thewas]

I don't think Dynaudio positions the LYD 48 as their KH310 competitor.

The LYD series is for small scale, hobbyist, amateur, and home studio markets.

The Core 47 is more of a direct competitor to the KH310 in terms of pricing and features.

I also don't see it as a direct competitor, I just responded to the comparison that the previous poster did.

 

[watchnerd]

Something about the way this guy from Dynaudio says "gear slutz" cracks me up...

 

[KaiserSoze]

The KH310 has a set of really neutral measurements and very low distortions https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/1719/download , plus its 3" mid range dome is one of the lowest distortion drivers beating even legends like the ATC one, while for the LYD-48 there don't exist detailed 3rd party measurments and even the manufacturer ones (sonogrammes) don't look really great https://dynaudiodata.blob.core.windows.net/media/6539/spec_for_lyd48_2017pdf.pdf so while it may sound nice I personally wouldn't say its better value, which is something I would have wished as the KH310 are too expensive for my current situation.

Just as an example from above linked measurements this

View attachment 83406

vs this

View attachment 83407

Personally I am looking since years for cheaper equivalent alternatives to the KH310 and ADAM S3V but unfortunately haven't found ones yet.

Value is entirely subjective. Anyone could argue that as long as Thing B is incrementally better than Thing A that Thing B is a better value even if it costs two or more times as much. To my way of thinking, the KH310 would pretty much have to be a perfect transducer to be a better value than the LYD48, given the substantial difference in cost.

It is risky to compare those two different sets of curves. Among the differences in the measurement procedure that could strongly affect the measurements is the distance from the speaker to the microphone.

In the vertical plot for the KH310 the cancellation between the tweeter and the midrange is at the frequency where it should be, 2 kHz, but the "eyes", that identify the vertical polar axes for the nulls (above and below the horizontal) that define the main forward radiation lobe, are located at +95 degrees and -140 degrees. This seems fishy to me. At 2 kHz the wavelength is 6.8 inches, which is roughly equal to the vertical separation distance for the pair. Since interference yields full cancellation when the listening location is a half-wavelength nearer to one driver than the other, and since the difference in the two distances will be roughly a full wavelength for a listening position +/- 90 degrees from the horizontal, it seems apparent that the polar angle for the strong nulls above and below the horizontal, that define the main lobe, would not be nearly as great as +/- 90 degrees from the horizontal. If you do the simple trig it quickly becomes apparent that the polar angles for the nulls are influenced by the mic distance, which is why the nulls on a polar graph do not follow a straight path until you get some minimal distance from the speaker.

Of course it goes without saying that the vertical polar response of the LYD48 is going to be worse due to the fact that while the vertical separation distance for the two drivers is comparable to the KH310, the wavelength in question is nearly 3x shorter (barely 1/3 as great), due to the crossover frequency at 5.5 kHz. The eyes are much more apparent in the graph for the LYD48, but perhaps they are not as audible at 5.5 kHz as they would be at 2 kHz.

Another question that should maybe stimulate further investigation, for anyone contemplating the purchase of one of these speakers or some similar speaker, is the question of distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range. The Newmann document includes a graph that shows max SPL as a function of frequency for 3% THD. According to the graph the distortion throughout the midrange and lower treble is much lower than for the woofer at 100 Hz (because the max SPL is much greater in the midrange and lower treble). The insinuation is that the tweeter distortion at the low end of its range is very low, but I would still prefer to see graphs of distortion components as a percentage of power output, for 86 dB and 96 dB referenced to standard SPL.

All that said, I don't think there is any question that the KH310 is the better speaker. I just am hesitant to think that the difference is great enough to make up for the very significant difference in price. Were I to sit down and listen to the LYD48 I doubt very much that I would hear anything that would make me hesitate to buy it if the alternative were to spend nearly twice as much on the KH310. But value is subjective.

 

[KaiserSoze]

I also don't see it as a direct competitor, I just responded to the comparison that the previous poster did.

No one said anything about the LYD48 and the KH310 being "direct competitors". I simply made the comment, responding to someone else's comment about having listened to both, that the LYD48 is the better value. The notion of "value" is not objective. But it was proper for you to have shown objective evidence to the effect that the KH310 is a more accurate speaker than to have simply said that the KH310 is better because it costs more (which is what a lot of people would have done).

 

[thewas]

Value is entirely subjective.

Of course it is, your original statement though gave me the impression of rather an absolute statement then a personal subjective opinion, maybe I misinterpreted it though as English is not my first language.

It is risky to compare those two different sets of curves.

Usually they are made at 1 meter and the ones I posted for the KH310 are from a renowned acoustics professor who does all the studio monitor measurements the same way. I also strongly doubt that Dynaudio did those measurements at a different distance, even more if they would make them look worse.

Of course it goes without saying that the vertical polar response of the LYD48 is going to be worse due to the fact that while the vertical separation distance for the two drivers is comparable to the KH310, the wavelength in question is nearly 3x shorter (barely 1/3 as great), due to the crossover frequency at 5.5 kHz. The eyes are much more apparent in the graph for the LYD48, but perhaps they are not as audible at 5.5 kHz as they would be at 2 kHz.

The problem imho is not so much vertically but horizontally due to the higher crossover frequencies and not usage of waveguides.

The insinuation is that the tweeter distortion at the low end of its range is very low, but I would still prefer to see graphs of distortion components as a percentage of power output, for 86 dB and 96 dB referenced to standard SPL.

I would also prefer such, it must be said though at least Neumann is one of the few monitor manufacturers that shows at least HD measurements at all, while for example the mentioned Dynaudio doesn't.
Also I personally find multitone distortion measurements more meaningful and closer to perceived cleanness of sound than HD

I just am hesitant to think that the difference is great enough to make up for the very significant difference in price. Were I to sit down and listen to the LYD48 I doubt very much that I would hear anything that would make me hesitate to buy it if the alternative were to spend nearly twice as much on the KH310. But value is subjective.

I would strongly recommend you listening to the KH310 if you have the chance, their superb mid dome and well controlled directivity gives a "cleanness" to the sound which till now no cone mid driver has in my personal subjective perception, a reason why I also really like the 3-way ATC loudspeakers, although they don't have as smooth directivity. Also in the country I live the KH310 is 1700€ vs 1050€ for the LYD which is quite rather 50% more than double the price but this seems to be an difference to your country where the difference is unfortunately larger.

 

[thewas]

Dammit to hell, up until a few days ago I wasn't even aware of the Core 59. Now I can't stop thinking about it. Great Scott, what are we gonna do?

For the same money I would personally buy the Adam S3V with quite smooth directivity due to the waveguide and detailed measurements from both the manufacturer and the S&R magazine:
https://www.adam-audio.com/en/s-series/s3v/ (click on measurement data)
https://www.soundandrecording.de/equipment/messwerte-adam-audio-s3v/
And if you more "home-hifi" design and like the Dynaudio not perfect directivity due to the lack of waveguides but exclusive tweeter and the option to switch from 3-way midfield to 2-way nearfield listeing, the bit more expensive Focal:
https://www.soundandrecording.de/equipment/focal-trio11-be-−-midfield-monitor-im-test/
When a studio monitor manufacturer doesn't provide measurements I get suspicious and in most cases unfortunately confirmed when third party measurements come out.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Usually they are made at 1 meter and the ones I posted for the KH310 are from a renowned acoustics professor who does all the studio monitor measurements the same way. I also strongly doubt that Dynaudio did those measurements at a different distance, even more if they would make them look worse.

The problem imho is not so much vertically but horizontally due to the higher crossover frequencies and not usage of waveguides.

I'm curious to know what you think the explanation can be for the problem I pointed out with the vertical polar graph for the KH310. It is fairly obvious that the main lobe at the crossover frequency, 2 kHz, is made to appear much thicker (in the vertical plane) than it possibly could be. I could do the math and prove it, but I think that what I wrote previously shows clearly that the main lobe at 2 kHz cannot possibly be nearly as thick as that graph indicates. Rather than respond to this, you brought up a problem you perceive with the LYD48, i.e., the horizontal directivity mismatch at the 5.5 kHz crossover point.

I would also prefer such, it must be said though at least Neumann is one of the few monitor manufacturers that shows at least HD measurements at all, while for example the mentioned Dynaudio doesn't.

The reason I made reference to that distortion graph is because I was specifically curious about the distortion at the low end of the tweeter range and that graph didn't really tell me what I was curious to know. The possibility of distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range in the KH310 is a conspicuous possibility because the tweeter takes over at frequency lower than is typical for most 2-way speakers. The designer presumably did this in the desire to achieve a good directivity match between the midrange and the tweeter. Whenever a speaker is unusual in some specific way, it is always prudent to inquire as to what tradeoff may have occurred, i.e., what price was paid in order to achieve what the designer was wanting to achieve. The designer chose an unusually low crossover point to the tweeter, for a 3-way speaker, so is there a ramification for distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range? The fact that Neumann provided a distortion graph while Dynaudio didn't provide a distortion graph tells me nothing about the KH310's distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range.

I would strongly recommend you listening to the KH310 if you have the chance, their superb mid dome and well controlled directivity gives a "cleanness" to the sound which till now no cone mid driver has in my personal subjective perception, a reason why I also really like the 3-way ATC loudspeakers, although they don't have as smooth directivity. Also in the country I live the KH310 is 1700€ vs 1050€ for the LYD which is quite rather 50% more than double the price but this can be of course different in your country.

I don't personally have much interest in the LYD48 and I even said so fairly plainly. I also gave you plenty of reason to understand that I wouldn't be inclined to spend that much more money for the KH310. A couple of other people had shown interest in the LYD48 and I merely said, "Yeah, I think that's probably a good speaker and a great value." I would like to be allowed to do that kind of thing without having someone come along and tell me all the reasons why that speaker isn't a good value and strongly recommending to me what speakers I should be listening to. And besides, it ought to be as obvious to you as it likely is to most everyone else that the LYD48 is an exceptional value. Given that the KH310 is in a much higher price range, there was no possible way that you could have given a persuasive argument to the effect that KH310 is a better value. This is something that you should have realized, and as such, if you wanted to tout the qualities of the KH310, it seems to me that you should have done so on a basis other than value.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Not to suggest that this wouldn't be informative, but what I would personally find interesting is a comparison test between this speaker's 8" biggest brother and the least-expensive JBL active monitor using an 8" woofer.

I agree.
8" is good for bass, distortion and power handling but difficult to blend into a tweeter and more likely to have cone breakup at a difficult to deal with frequency.
All these little driver 2-ways are uninteresting to me, personally, and are probably amongst the easiest to get the good scores.
It would be interesting to see how makers have managed to design these more difficult speakers. Maybe 8" is too big for a 2-way but also maybe somebody has made a good job of it.

 

[thewas]

I'm curious to know what you think the explanation can be for the problem I pointed out with the vertical polar graph for the KH310. It is fairly obvious that the main lobe at the crossover frequency, 2 kHz, is made to appear much thicker (in the vertical plane) than it possibly could be.

Do you want to suggest that the measurements from Prof. Goertz are manipulated? As said he does all monitor measurements with the same way.

Rather than respond to this, you brought up a problem you perceive with the LYD48, i.e., the horizontal directivity mismatch at the 5.5 kHz crossover point.

Because I personally find it much more critical than above "nitpicking" on the vertical one.

The reason I made reference to that distortion graph is because I was specifically curious about the distortion at the low end of the tweeter range and that graph didn't really tell me what I was curious to know. The possibility of distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range in the KH310 is a conspicuous possibility because the tweeter takes over at frequency lower than is typical for most 2-way speakers. The designer presumably did this in the desire to achieve a good directivity match between the midrange and the tweeter. Whenever a speaker is unusual in some specific way, it is always prudent to inquire as to what tradeoff may have occurred, i.e., what price was paid in order to achieve what the designer was wanting to achieve. The designer chose an unusually low crossover point to the tweeter, for a 3-way speaker, so is there a ramification for distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range? The fact that Neumann provided a distortion graph while Dynaudio didn't provide a distortion graph tells me nothing about the KH310's distortion at the low end of the tweeter's range.

Your worry is understandable, although for a well engineered 1" tweeter and steep crossover 2kHz are not really a problem, here are HD measurements till 100 dB(!!!) of the small KH120 which uses the same tweeter also crossed at 2 kHz:

Source: https://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/testberichte/fertiglautsprecher/470-neumann-kh-120a

As you can see its extremely and inaudibly low even at 100 dB!

I don't care. I don't personally have much interest in the LYD48 and I even said so fairly plainly. I also gave you plenty of reason to understand that I wouldn't be inclined to spend that much more money for the KH310. When you write something like, "I would strongly recommend you listening to the KH310 if you have the chance ..", and when you do this when someone hasn't given any indication of interest in your recommendation and has even given you plenty of reason to understand that they wouldn't be interested in the speaker you want to tout, it is bad manners for you to write something like this.

Jeez, you listened to the LYD48 and liked it and jumped to the conclusion that you doubt a KH310 would be worth more to you, I don't find it bad manner to recommend someone to try something different too, but a priori declining such and calling such a proposal like this.

And besides, it ought to be as obvious to you as it likely is to most everyone else that the LYD48 is an exceptional value.

For me not, spending more than $2000 for some monitors with poor directivity and unknown detailed measurements.

Given that the KH310 is in a much higher price range, there was no possible way that you could have given a persuasive argument to the effect that KH310 is a better value. This is something that you should have realized, and as such, if you wanted to tout the qualities of the KH310, it seems to me that you should have done so on a basis other than value.

As said here the difference is just 50% and again, I personally rather buy nothing than something strongly compromised for that money, if you see it differently that is ok, but don't block other opinions in a public forum, even if you don't agree to them (talking about manners).

 

[kezman]

the measurement of lyd5 is has not been finish yet...because with this settings "Bass extension -10Hz: 50Hz - 21kHz"
the speaker promises a lot! we are waiting for this!

 

[q3cpma]

the measurement of lyd5 is has not been finish yet...because with this settings "Bass extension -10Hz: 50Hz - 21kHz"
the speaker promises a lot! we are waiting for this!

Pretty sure the speaker was returned, newfriend.

 

[richard12511]

Just got my pair of Genelec 8030c in last week, and I must say I'm very impressed. They sound almost perfect crossed to 4 12 inch subs. These seem to measure almost as well, and they're cheaper. Would be interested in comparing them to both my 8030c and 308p to see how they stack up.

 

[KaiserSoze]

Do you want to suggest that the measurements from Prof. Goertz are manipulated? As said he does all monitor measurements with the same way.

I pointed out an obvious problem with the graph, which you should have been able to confirm for yourself with little effort if you had any true, honest interest in the question. But instead of looking at it honestly, you responded by saying that Prof. Goertz's measurements are infallible, as though he were some sort of God whose measurements are beyond reproach. I strongly disdain this kind of arrogance. The graph that shows the vertical polar response shows the two nulls above and below the horizontal separated by 235 degrees, whereas, given the vertical separation between the two drivers and given that the wavelength at the crossover point is roughly equal to the separation distance, the angular distance separating the two nulls absolutely must be substantially less than 180 degrees! If you do not understand the simple analysis by which this is manifest, then please say plainly that you do not understand this and I will attempt to explain it again. If you do not want to do this, then I have no problem with that so long as you do not respond to me by insinuating that I am wrong because the person who took the measurement is incapable of error. Sheesh.

Jeez, you listened to the LYD48 and liked it and jumped to the conclusion that you doubt a KH310 would be worth more to you, I don't find it bad manner to recommend someone to try something different too, but a priori declining such and calling such a proposal like this....if you see it differently that is ok, but don't block other opinions in a public forum, even if you don't agree to them (talking about manners)

I did not say that I had listened to the LYD48, nor did I jump to any conclusions. Nor did I give you any reason to think that I desired for you to tell me which speakers I should be listening to. In fact it should have been entirely apparent to you that neither the LDY48 nor the KH310 is the sort of speaker in which I would personally be interested. Why should this have been apparent to you? Because I said this in a very plain manner in the same post where I made the comment about the LYD48 being the better value!

I will tell you again, now for the 2nd time, that some other people had spoken favorably of the LYD48, one of whom shared pictures of them in his setup, and that all I did was to more or less say that they looked to me like a very good value, given that there are very few active 3-way speakers made by top-name manufacturers, that are as affordable as the LYD48. This was a perfectly reasonable statement for me to have made, or for anyone else to have made, given the very substantial difference in price for the LDY48 vs. the KH310. You took exception to an opinion that was concerned expressly with value, because you had ample reason to believe that the KH310 is a better speaker. Is the fact, that the KH310 is a better speaker, a reason for you to dispute other people's opinions that are concerned expressly with value? Absolutely not. Do you have any mathematical proof that the KH310 is a better value? No, you obviously do not. And yet, you were not satisfied until you had written, "I would strongly recommend you listening to the KH310...". And even after having written that rude sentence you still were not satisfied.

 

[temps]

This series (all the way back to the K+H O104) came about due to public broadcasters' needs for a compact monitor, presumably for mobile studio use and such. (If memory serves they didn't get that contract though... went to ME Geithain or Genelec at the time, which was a bit of a shock to K+H who had been a long-time preferred supplier.) IOW, making them as small as they are was kind of the point - the woofer is about as big as it can get already.

And what do you mean the bass performance is not good? Those are some of the best 5" class midwoofers you'll find, their level handling is up to par with some 6.5"s. In comparison, the KH80s' 4" jobs kind of stink.

Yes, a larger woofer will easily provide substantially better level handling at moderate extra cost. (Case in point: Behringer B2031A.) That's not exactly helping the suitability for short listening distances and driver directivity matching though.

4" jobs are generally level handling limited well before they are dispersion limited, unless adequately supported by subs. 8" ones, by contrast, will generally provide adequate levels way beyond the maximum sensible listening distance based on dispersion. Performance of 5" and 6.5" class jobs varies.

I already explained all this, thanks for reading. My post also made it clear (or so I thought) I was shopping in a price bracket, not a size range so naturally I don't care about the KH 120's performance relative to its size. Performance per dollar was the key concern and the KH 120 is dead last by that metric. The charts just posted by thewas_ is great because it illustrates the issues with the KH 120 very clearly. It's basically incapable of playing a kick drum fundamental, bass fundamentals, without audibly distorting. Anything with synth bass or even a modern metal production is utterly beyond their capabilities.

I can see casual listeners getting confused by listening to the KH 120. They would tend to think it sounds very good and full in the low end, but a large part of that impression is going to be the harmonic content the speaker is adding because the woofer distorts so easily. This would also muddy and mask the region from 100-300hz. The LYD 5, it may have less bass - but at least you only hear what's actually in the source material.

Do you want to suggest that the measurements from Prof. Goertz are manipulated? As said he does all monitor measurements with the same way.

Because I personally find it much more critical than above "nitpicking" on the vertical one.

Your worry is understandable, although for a well engineered 1" tweeter and steep crossover 2kHz are not really a problem, here are HD measurements till 100 dB(!!!) of the small KH120 which uses the same tweeter also crossed at 2 kHz:

Source: https://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/testberichte/fertiglautsprecher/470-neumann-kh-120a

As you can see its extremely and inaudibly low even at 100 dB!


Jeez, you listened to the LYD48 and liked it and jumped to the conclusion that you doubt a KH310 would be worth more to you, I don't find it bad manner to recommend someone to try something different too, but a priori declining such and calling such a proposal like this.

For me not, spending more than $2000 for some monitors with poor directivity and unknown detailed measurements.

As said here the difference is just 50% and again, I personally rather buy nothing than something strongly compromised for that money, if you see it differently that is ok, but don't block other opinions in a public forum, even if you don't agree to them (talking about manners).

With studio monitors, directivity is hardly a concern. The room is generally configured to solve acoustic problems and has to be treated for RT60 and clarity anyways, so reflections are less concern. The listening position is also small and practically fixed, so the Klippel predicted in room response & Olive scores are worthless.

If you are using a 3 way studio monitor in the mid or far field, then these directivity concerns all come back and sure, the KH310 looks better on paper. But is it twice as good? Probably not. Is it as good as a Revel floorstander in that application? I really doubt that too... the argument was focused on value. Up here a KH310 costs double a LYD48; for the same amount of money as a pair of KH310s, you could easily pair the LYD48s with a very high quality sub (maybe even two), or get some room treatment, etc. and I would think that system would sound much better than the 310s on their own.

 

[thewas]

The charts just posted by thewas_ is great because it illustrates the issues with the KH 120 very clearly. It's basically incapable of playing a kick drum fundamental, bass fundamentals, without audibly distorting. Anything with synth bass or even a modern metal production is utterly beyond their capabilities.

Its one of the best performing 5" monitors and plays absolutely fine most music at the required SPLs for such a nearfield setup, I have also a pair of JBL 305 and it stands no chance next to it in any discipline, which is ok though as it costs much less.

With studio monitors, directivity is hardly a concern.

Of course it is, as even in a nearfield studio setup and environment two monitor both flat on-axis with different directivities tonally sound different and also image differently.

But is it twice as good? Probably not.

An increase in quality at high level of course gets more and difficult and expensive, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
and with this logic we should all only buy $100 JBL 305s as the quality increase is never proportional to the price difference.

Up here a KH310 costs double a LYD48; for the same amount of money as a pair of KH310s, you could easily pair the LYD48s with a very high quality sub (maybe even two), or get some room treatment, etc. and I would think that system would sound much better than the 310s on their own.

Well, thats a kind of apple and comparison and similarly it could be said why use than a Revel or a 3-way monitor and not a pair of Infinity bookshelves or KH120 with a double bass array and/or even better room treatment.

 

[thewas]

But instead of looking at it honestly, you responded by saying that Prof. Goertz's measurements are infallible, as though he were some sort of God whose measurements are beyond reproach.

Well, those measurements are standardised and not easy to falsily or manipulate even if you want too and I will explain also why I believe they aren't wrong.

I strongly disdain this kind of arrogance. The graph that shows the vertical polar response shows the two nulls above and below the horizontal separated by 235 degrees, whereas, given the vertical separation between the two drivers and given that the wavelength at the crossover point is roughly equal to the separation distance, the angular distance separating the two nulls absolutely must be substantially less than 180 degrees! If you do not understand the simple analysis by which this is manifest, then please say plainly that you do not understand this and I will attempt to explain it again.

Before writing condescending to others you should first understand that real non-point source radiating drivers in real encloses with their baffle diffraction effects and real crossover slopes show different radiation pattern then your oversimplified assumption and calculation of point sources with no diffraction and infinite crossover slopes.
This also come to you back about arrogance...

This was a perfectly reasonable statement for me to have made

As said you might see it this way, I see it differently, this is a public forum and different opinions not only should be banned but also invited.

 

[temps]

Its one of the best performing 5" monitors and plays absolutely fine most music at the required SPLs for such a nearfield setup, I have also a pair of JBL 305 and it stands no chance next to it in any discipline, which is ok though as it costs much less.

I disagree entirely. I have mentioned studio use over and over and over again. The KH 120 has no place in a studio and you WILL have translation issues because the 5" driver (whether it's one of the best or not) is simply tasked with too much. At 85dB, which is a a common working level, it's already distorting in the bass and masking the low mids. You will make poor decisions because your monitors are steering you wrong. They are, simply put, poor tools for the job. Spoken word stuff? Sure, but I don't know why you wouldn't just get 80s instead.

Simply put - no, it is not one of the best performing 5" monitors. Not even close. Maybe in 2011 but certainly not in 2020. Dynaudio showed with the LYD the correct approach to take for a studio monitor; roll off the bass early and keep it clean. Neumann's unwillingness to do the same destroys its usefulness as a studio tool.

Of course it is, as even in a nearfield studio setup and environment two monitor both flat on-axis with different directivities tonally sound different and also image differently.

Citations needed.

You are having tremendous issues accounting for application, value, etc. here.