Neumann KH80 DSP Monitor Measurements #3

[hmt]

 

[hmt]

Imo this is pretty bad. This was expected as it uses a high crossed dome without waveguide and a 7" tweeter.

 

[q3cpma]

Yes, they use a different type of voice coil. It'd be stupid to use a crossover that high with a typical driver. The very high crossover is to move all crossover distortion out of the region where your ears are most sensitive to it. It works.

I had discounted drivers without waveguides as well, however, the LYD has a gigantic advantage in its price class by having a 7" woofer where everyone else only has 5" (or less). The directivity isn't as bad as you'd think either. Charts are available on Dynaudio's website.



RME Fireface UC

What is "crossover distorsion"? If you mean distorsion at the crossover point, it has nothing to do with the crossover itself but drivers playing out of their comfort zone. Thus, moving the crossover even higher will make this distorsion even worse; not to mention IMD.

 

[temps]

What is "crossover distorsion"? If you mean distorsion at the crossover point, it has nothing to do with the crossover itself but drivers playing out of their comfort zone. Thus, moving the crossover even higher will make this distorsion even worse; not to mention IMD.

Dynaudio is a multi-million dollar company that's been around for over 40 years. They've thought of this... the woofer is bespoke for the application. https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/dynaudio-lyd-5-8 explains.

I used "crossover distortion" as shorthand for irregularities in the crossover region, forgetting it's already used to describe something totally different in amps. Oops.

Imo this is pretty bad. This was expected as it uses a high crossed dome without waveguide and a 7" tweeter.

You aren't using the correct words to refer to any part of the speaker.... the LYD 5 chart is much better, but it doesn't sound as good.

You guys need to start going out and listening to speakers again. I was pretty surprised by my test, expecting the KH 80 and 8030 to be so much better than the other speakers in the room that I would be walking out with one or the other in 2 minutes. The KH 80 especially, I thought it was going to be untouchable - it was going to sound the best, look the best, integrate the best and it was the cheapest! But that was absolutely not the case. It's an extreme opinion but I don't think either speaker is good for anything without a subwoofer. Factoring in that cost, their on-paper price/performance advantage completely disappears. I'll take a pair of Barefoot Footprint-02s over a KH80/8030+sub any day.

You also have forgotten the application. Sure, broad directivity means you don't need to treat the room as heavily or maybe at all... except a studio has to be treated for reverberations anyways; in a treated room having massive directivity matters much less than it does in an untreated space. I think you can deal with a little waistbanding in the directivity chart if the room is dead and your listening position is just one chair.

And last but not least I don't think the test suite here does a good job of capturing a speaker's performance. The preference score is almost completely useless but gets an unfortunate amount of attention. The waterfall chart also obscures crucial differences in how a speaker sounds. I would prefer to see it as a spectogram - comparing my new monitors to the old ones, most of the charts made them look exactly the same but the spectogram clearly shows the differences and explains why the old ones had such harsh, sibilant treble but the Dyns are perfectly smooth. With a few more months (or years) of refinement no doubt we'll have a more comprehensive test suite but as is, it doesn't in any way replace going out and hearing things for yourself.

 

[hmt]

Yes, I meant the woofer. Anyway that does not invalidate my argument.

 

[q3cpma]

Dynaudio is a multi-million dollar company that's been around for over 40 years. They've thought of this... the woofer is bespoke for the application.

You can "think of this" as much as you want, beaming will occur and distorsion will rise at such a high frequency. It's telling that Dynaudio doesn't give any distorsion figure.

You aren't using the correct words to refer to any part of the speaker.... the LYD 5 chart is much better, but it doesn't sound as good.

You guys need to start going out and listening to speakers again. I was pretty surprised by my test, expecting the KH 80 and 8030 to be so much better than the other speakers in the room that I would be walking out with one or the other in 2 minutes. The KH 80 especially, I thought it was going to be untouchable - it was going to sound the best, look the best, integrate the best and it was the cheapest! But that was absolutely not the case. It's an extreme opinion but I don't think either speaker is good for anything without a subwoofer.

Did you just discover that low frequency extension makes 30% of the Olive score? I must add that the 8030C goes almost as low as the LYD 7 (around 47 Hz at -6 dB for both), according to the data.

Factoring in that cost, their on-paper price/performance advantage completely disappears. I'll take a pair of Barefoot Footprint-02s over a KH80/8030+sub any day

The Barefoot is something like $3500, which can get you a 8330A pair + 7350A + GLM kit and still have some money left; and that's using US prices, it's much cheaper in Europe. I don't see how you can claim such a thing, then.
I don't doubt that the Footprint 02 would be better without sub, though.

You also have forgotten the application. Sure, broad directivity means you don't need to treat the room as heavily or maybe at all... except a studio has to be treated for reverberations anyways; in a treated room having massive directivity matters much less than it does in an untreated space. I think you can deal with a little waistbanding in the directivity chart if the room is dead and your listening position is just one chair.

Probably meant "narrow directivity". You can mitigate off-axis problems, but you can't really make them dissappear. The thing is that Dynaudio knows all of this but still doesn't use a waveguide while not even providing a larger dispersion than waveguided models; don't really see the point.

And last but not least I don't think the test suite here does a good job of capturing a speaker's performance. The preference score is almost completely useless but gets an unfortunate amount of attention.

I do find the preference score misleading for newbies, but "useless" is a bit much; I really doubt that something from the bottom will sound good and something from the top won't (at least in their intended usage domain).

The waterfall chart also obscures crucial differences in how a speaker sounds. I would prefer to see it as a spectogram

Me too, much more readable.

- comparing my new monitors to the old ones, most of the charts made them look exactly the same but the spectogram clearly shows the differences and explains why the old ones had such harsh, sibilant treble but the Dyns are perfectly smooth.

Correlation isn't causation. There's already much data pointing to resonances being at most minor if they don't show up in the power response.

With a few more months (or years) of refinement no doubt we'll have a more comprehensive test suite but as is, it doesn't in any way replace going out and hearing things for yourself.

You sure convinced me with those hot opinions.

 

[temps]

You can "think of this" as much as you want, beaming will occur and distorsion will rise at such a high frequency. It's telling that Dynaudio doesn't give any distorsion figure.

You skipped over all the stuff where beaming doesn't matter as much (or at all) in a single seat, treated room, studio application. Dynaudio has used this type of woofer in studio monitors for their entire history and somehow have managed to garner a pretty sterling reputation - this would not have happened if they had issues with distortion.

Did you just discover that low frequency extension makes 30% of the Olive score? I must add that the 8030C goes almost as low as the LYD 7 (around 47 Hz for both), according to the data.

LOL. At very low levels, maybe. 7" woofer vs. 5" is just physics. The 8030 has next to no headroom in the low bass . In fact all the Genelecs I heard have little volume capability, so you need to be very happy working <85dB at all times, forever, because they have nothing more to give.

The Barefoot is something like $3500, which can get you a 8330A pair + 7350A + GLM kit and still have some money left. I don't see how you can claim such a thing, then. I don't doubt that the Footprint 02 would be better without sub, though.

The 7350A is undersized and underpowered, I would not consider it at all except in a 2.2 setup as some forum members here run... but you can't run the 7350A with 8030s. 2x 8030 + 7360A is $4,100 CDN. Two 8330s, 7360A, GLM kit and you are into Footprint-01/Neumann KH 310 territory, where you have nearly as much low end extension except with sealed boxes.

Correlation isn't causation. There's already much data pointing to resonances being at most minor if they don't show up in the power response.

In a studio application "minor" resonances in the vocal region are not so minor. I'd be willing to bet the majority of the "house sound" of various studio monitor brands are due to these resonances.

You sure convinced me with those hot opinions.

I don't care. I have 15 years studio experience, found this site, drank the kool-aid, set up a bunch of demos, wondered why all this Klippel wizardry did such a poor job explaining what I was hearing, graphed it out myself, went "oh" then bought the monitors I like the best.

 

[Deleted member 16502]

In fact all the Genelecs I heard have little volume capability, so you need to be very happy working <85dB at all times, forever, because they have nothing more to give.

Say that again? I can't hear you over my Genelecs blastin'

 

[Hephaestus]

You skipped over all the stuff where beaming doesn't matter as much (or at all) in a single seat, treated room, studio application. Dynaudio has used this type of woofer in studio monitors for their entire history and somehow have managed to garner a pretty sterling reputation - this would not have happened if they had issues with distortion.


LOL. At very low levels, maybe. 7" woofer vs. 5" is just physics. The 8030 has next to no headroom in the low bass . In fact all the Genelecs I heard have little volume capability, so you need to be very happy working <85dB at all times, forever, because they have nothing more to give.


The 7350A is undersized and underpowered, I would not consider it at all except in a 2.2 setup as some forum members here run... but you can't run the 7350A with 8030s. 2x 8030 + 7360A is $4,100 CDN. Two 8330s, 7360A, GLM kit and you are into Footprint-01/Neumann KH 310 territory, where you have nearly as much low end extension except with sealed boxes.


In a studio application "minor" resonances in the vocal region are not so minor. I'd be willing to bet the majority of the "house sound" of various studio monitor brands are due to these resonances.


I don't care. I have 15 years studio experience, found this site, drank the kool-aid, set up a bunch of demos, wondered why all this Klippel wizardry did such a poor job explaining what I was hearing, graphed it out myself, went "oh" then bought the monitors I like the best.

What is the reason for the aggression?

I have purchased 3 pairs of monitors based on what I have learned from this forum. They all serve different purpose and I am very pleased with them.
In the end you have found your thing and it needs to satisfy only you!

 

[Lbstyling]

What is the reason for the aggression?

I have purchased 3 pairs of monitors based on what I have learned from this forum. They all serve different purpose and I am very pleased with them.
In the end you have found your thing and it needs to satisfy only you!

I'm not sure I would characterise the comment as aggressive? Spending money and being dissatisfied with the results is a logical response. I believe Amir's review of at least one of the genelecs gives reference to his thoughts that power is a limiting factor.

Seams ok to me?

 

[Hephaestus]

I'm not sure I would characterise the comment as aggressive? Spending money and being dissatisfied with the results is a logical response. I believe Amir's review of at least one of the genelecs gives reference to his thoughts that power is a limiting factor.

Seams ok to me?

Let’s put it this way: There is a little seed of disappointment between the lines clearly.

My post has nothing to do with the power as limiting factor. What gave you such an impression?

See;
“I don't care. I have 15 years studio experience, found this site, drank the kool-aid, set up a bunch of demos, wondered why all this Klippel wizardry did such a poor job explaining what I was hearing, graphed it out myself, went "oh" then bought the monitors I like the best.”

 

[Sancus]

LOL. At very low levels, maybe. 7" woofer vs. 5" is just physics. The 8030 has next to no headroom in the low bass . In fact all the Genelecs I heard have little volume capability, so you need to be very happy working <85dB at all times, forever, because they have nothing more to give.

I don't understand the number of words expended here to say you want more bass SPL than 4-5" woofers provide. You make excuses for the issues with the LYD 7 saying they don't matter because 7" woofer, OK, that's fine if it works for you. But Genelec and Neumann both make options with 8" and larger woofers. If you simply don't want to spend that much, there are cheaper options with waveguides and 8" woofers, like the Kali LP-8/IN-8.

Nobody is saying that the KH80/Genelec 8030 are the best speakers on the planet for every use case. They are simply what has been reviewed here so far and shown good performance within their limitations. I'm sure that when the Genelec 8351B or 8361A get reviewed they'll have more than enough SPL for anyone. Or the Neumann KH310/KH420. Or the Genelec 8050B. Etc.

People on the site are obviously going to recommend things that have been reviewed, but it's been shown that Genelec's and Neumann's measurements are very accurate so you can pretty much buy anything in their product lines that meets your requirements and expect it to perform accordingly, which is a very rare thing from speaker manufacturers, and why they get so much attention here.

And yes, you pay extra for that attention to detail and quality.

 

[q3cpma]

You skipped over all the stuff where beaming doesn't matter as much (or at all) in a single seat, treated room, studio application.

Didn't skip it, I clearly said that you can mitigate it, but I see no reason to pay that much to get something I must work around.

Dynaudio has used this type of woofer in studio monitors for their entire history and somehow have managed to garner a pretty sterling reputation - this would not have happened if they had issues with distortion.

Please, we see the "popularity means it can't be bad" argument every day, and it's wrong every time. The fact is that Dynaudio didn't provide distorsion data when their main argument for that high crossover frequency is moving the "crossover distorsion" higher up; basically the same as selling a sport car and pretending it's the fastest without giving any acceleration/speed figure.

LOL. At very low levels, maybe. 7" woofer vs. 5" is just physics.

Obviously, but the port design and crossover frequency may play a role too.

The 8030 has next to no headroom in the low bass.

Look at the review here, it can do 86 dB at 1m with extremely low distorsion and the limit seems to be between 86 and 96. Thus I don't see any headroom problem in a nearfield scenario; it doesn't like sub-bass too much, though.

In fact all the Genelecs I heard have little volume capability, so you need to be very happy working <85dB at all times, forever, because they have nothing more to give.

First time I've heard that. Unless their specs are bullshit, I doubt Genelec has a problem with output.

The 7350A is undersized and underpowered

It's a nearfield and very sensitive sub, not needing extreme amplifier power. The port design makes it possible to do such a small sub, but it is still a 8" woofer, don't expect ridiculous things from it.

7360A, GLM kit and you are into Footprint-01/Neumann KH 310 territory, where you have nearly as much low end extension except with sealed boxes.

A 8" crossing at 650 Hz or 2 x 6.5" at 180 Hz in a small volume sealed cabinet reaching a well designed ported sub with a 10" crossing at 80~100 Hz ? Maybe in dreamland.

In a studio application "minor" resonances in the vocal region are not so minor. I'd be willing to bet the majority of the "house sound" of various studio monitor brands are due to these resonances.

I mostly agree that research isn't complete in the field and some more recent study by Olive did make that clear.

I don't care. I have 15 years studio experience, found this site, drank the kool-aid, set up a bunch of demos, wondered why all this Klippel wizardry did such a poor job explaining what I was hearing, graphed it out myself, went "oh" then bought the monitors I like the best.

Well, good for you, but don't go all audiophile on us by crying "kool-aid".

 

[temps]

What is the reason for the aggression?

I have purchased 3 pairs of monitors based on what I have learned from this forum. They all serve different purpose and I am very pleased with them.
In the end you have found your thing and it needs to satisfy only you!

I have been frustrated lately by a pattern I've noticed on this forum, where people chime in without accounting for someone's application, budget, too much importance is placed on preference scores, too little on other elements of a speakers performance, so on. Generally I think you could sum it up, the forum generally places too much on theory and measurement, and has discounted subjective opinions to a fault. Yes, there are very bad subjective reviewers out there and this site has done good work to highlight that, but there are some guys with honest ears and long track records that I trust quite a bit, for instance, Phil Ward from Sound on Sound, who said the speakers have no cons unless you get the LYD-8 .

But take this situation - guy has said: he wants a "big box" sound; he is sitting nearfield with proper speaker placement; he has already tried other 7" monitors. He apparently either has a budget or space limitations. I suggest LYD 7s; why is this suggestion rejected by other members because of poor off-axis performance? Why is a waveguide required for a nearfield application, where I presume he is going to take the trouble to align everything correctly? Why is a design rejected due to an unusually high crossover without even listening the speaker? I mention the long and quite positive track record of the company & driver - no good. Oddities warrant investigation, not being dismissed out of hand. And so on.

I don't understand the number of words expended here to say you want more bass SPL than 4-5" woofers provide. You make excuses for the issues with the LYD 7 saying they don't matter because 7" woofer, OK, that's fine if it works for you. But Genelec and Neumann both make options with 8" and larger woofers. If you simply don't want to spend that much, there are cheaper options with waveguides and 8" woofers, like the Kali LP-8/IN-8.

The guy I initially replied to wants a big box sound, hence, big woofers. I don't particularly like 8" class monitors. At that point, too many compromises are being made because the woofer is being asked to do too much.

People on the site are obviously going to recommend things that have been reviewed, but it's been shown that Genelec's and Neumann's measurements are very accurate so you can pretty much buy anything in their product lines that meets your requirements and expect it to perform accordingly, which is a very rare thing from speaker manufacturers, and why they get so much attention here.

True, but the measurements that get the most attention don't paint a full picture of the speaker's sound at all. Neumann's measurements show lots of bass distortion; it is very clearly audible, and I wouldn't run KH 80s as monitors because of it.

And yes, you pay extra for that attention to detail and quality.

True, because my LYD-7s had noise problems I've never had with any other monitor. Solved those at the source though - it was the VRM section of my motherboard and some BIOS tweaks cured it. Very happy now.

 

[richard12511]

I do find the preference score misleading for newbies, but "useless" is a bit much; I really doubt that something from the bottom will sound good and something from the top won't (at least in their intended usage domain).

Not many, but we've had a few of those cases. Revel M55XC is the 9th worst speaker measured so far, yet sounded excellent enough to get golf panther. Canon S-50 is the 2nd worst speaker measured so far, yet sounded good, subjectively. SVS Ultra Bookshelf is the 9th best speaker measured so far, yet it sounded bad. For the most part, though, the Olive score does seem to correlate fairly well with Amir's impressions.

 

[q3cpma]

Not many, but we've had a few of those cases. Revel M55XC is the 9th worst speaker measured so far, yet sounded excellent enough to get golf panther. Canon S-50 is the 2nd worst speaker measured so far, yet sounded good, subjectively. SVS Ultra Bookshelf is the 9th best speaker measured so far, yet it sounded bad. For the most part, though, the Olive score does seem to correlate fairly well with Amir's impressions.

Well, this is only based on one person's impressions with the potential for bias it brings or the obvious problem being that mono listening overwhelmingly favours wide dispersion designs.
Omni designs were probably not considered in the making of the equation, though.

 

[amirm]

I have been frustrated lately by a pattern I've noticed on this forum, where people chime in without accounting for someone's application, budget, too much importance is placed on preference scores, too little on other elements of a speakers performance, so on. Generally I think you could sum it up, the forum generally places too much on theory and measurement, and has discounted subjective opinions to a fault.

Huh? Did you ignore what i do in the review? I listen and those listening impressions are consistent with what I read in your last few pages. I noted lack of power in both Neumann and Genelec and scored them down appropriately. The preference scores are not part of my reviews either.

If you think there is a better speaker either objectively or subjectively, send it in for testing. Until then, you are offering an opinion which has far, far less value than what we do here. You may think your opinion is correct but they are dime a dozen online. Everyone seemingly likes everything online -- good or bad.

 

[richard12511]

Well, this is only based on one person's impressions with the potential for bias it brings or the obvious problem being that mono listening overwhelmingly favours wide dispersion designs.
Omni designs were probably not considered in the making of the equation, though.

Is there actual evidence to support that "mono listening overwhelmingly favours wide dispersion designs"? I'll admit, it seems intuitive that it would be the case, but the only evidence I'm aware of is Toole's research that preferences remain the same between multi-channel, stereo, and mono.

 

[hmt]

@temps
Fair enough. There are dozens of forums where only subjective impressions matter. If it bothers you that ASR is mostly about science this is obviously not the right place for you.

 

[q3cpma]

Is there actual evidence to support that "mono listening overwhelmingly favours wide dispersion designs"? I'll admit, it seems intuitive that it would be the case, but the only evidence I'm aware of is Toole's research that preferences remain the same between multi-channel, stereo, and mono.

Well, Toole's book part trying to justify mono listening test says "Comb filtering is often though to be involded in all delayed sounds. However, a delayed sound arriving from a different angle than the direct sound is perceived as spaciousness, not comb filtering". It also show that the spatial quality ranking for the Rega - KEF - Quad speakers goes from 7.5 - 6.0 - 4.5 in mono to basically ~6.7 for all of them in stereo.