A Blind Test Attempt: Neumann KH310+Sub vs KH120+Sub, and My Thoughts on CEA2034 and Preference Rating

[Haskil]

There is the problem that you will never get a high amount of direct sound with distances beyond 2.5m. Even 2.5 is a stretch it might slight fit with an overdamped room. 1.3m Listening distance is about the best distance in a standard room. The potential lack of direct sound is not good compared with a proper listening distance it is much more important to choose a speaker which does this right over getting a speaker which looks better "on paper".

And yet, in a very high quality broadcasting studio - Radio France -, I listen to these Neuman 310s at a distance greater than 2.5. The studio is large, has a double height ceiling and its walls, floors and ceilings are acoustically treated and the acoustics are adjustable, and we listen to music at high levels... and the sound is not in nothing constrained. The scale, the precision of the sound planes, the timbres, the dynamics are very well reproduced. There are four listeners sitting in front of the speakers.

 

[test1223]

And yet, in a very high quality broadcasting studio - Radio France -, I listen to these Neuman 310s at a distance greater than 2.5. The studio is large, has a double height ceiling and its walls, floors and ceilings are acoustically treated and the acoustics are adjustable, and we listen to music at high levels... and the sound is not in nothing constrained. The scale, the precision of the sound planes, the timbres, the dynamics are very well reproduced. There are four listeners sitting in front of the speakers.

Try it with ~1.3m listening distance and you will know what I am talking about.

 

[Haskil]

Try it with ~1.3m listening distance and you will know what I am talking about.

And ? As I wrote, I got closer to them and the difference was not of a nature to make you laugh when you were a little more than 2.5 m away to be in ecstasy at 1.5 m ! These speakers can be perfectly listened to at a distance of between 2.5 and 3 m in a living room with not too reverberant acoustics, and thus have excellent quality listening at sound levels that will make the audience tap. wall the most conciliatory neighbor. You need a little pragmatism in life. Listening to music for pleasure is not listening for mixing. I have large monitors for long distance listening (Focal-Divatech MC 210) in my living room and I listen to them either at 2 meters or 4 m depending on the seat I choose. The two listens are different, like two twin sisters can be different when they grow up. And I also listen to small Kali IN8 V2 monitors at a distance of about 2m and it's also very good... when I step back to the back of my desk. The sound fills the room well.
In technical work it's something else, another use of similar products. But these speakers were chosen by the technical staff of the Radio France Studios after testing other speakers in situ for several weeks and the Neumann KH 310s were chosen for this studio intended for listening to recorded music with several people. They have reached consensus in this use where they provide satisfaction. The 420 would perhaps be much better, however the 310 works very well in this use: high level of classical music, at a distance between 2.5 and 3 meters.

 

[test1223]

And ? As I wrote, I got closer to them and the difference was not of a nature to make you laugh when you were a little more than 2.5 m away to be in ecstasy at 1.5 m ! These speakers can be perfectly listened to at a distance of between 2.5 and 3 m in a living room with not too reverberant acoustics, and thus have excellent quality listening at sound levels that will make the audience tap. wall the most conciliatory neighbor. You need a little pragmatism in life. Listening to music for pleasure is not listening for mixing. I have large monitors for long distance listening (Focal-Divatech MC 210) in my living room and I listen to them either at 2 meters or 4 m depending on the seat I choose. The two listens are different, like two twin sisters can be different when they grow up. And I also listen to small Kali IN8 V2 monitors at a distance of about 2m and it's also very good... when I step back to the back of my desk. The sound fills the room well.
In technical work it's something else, another use of similar products. But these speakers were chosen by the technical staff of the Radio France Studios after testing other speakers in situ for several weeks and the Neumann KH 310s were chosen for this studio intended for listening to recorded music with several people. They have reached consensus in this use where they provide satisfaction. The 420 would perhaps be much better, however the 310 works very well in this use: high level of classical music, at a distance between 2.5 and 3 meters.

If my understanding is right, you don't know the room and placement well, in therms of some hours or few days of listening experience.
So your ability of listening through the room should therefore be very limited. In this case your whole experience is kind of useless to determine the quality of a speaker especially since you don't have another speaker for comparison. It indicates only that the speaker and room acoustic combined sound good, which is no surprise in an studio environment. The listening distance is the distance for a main monitor. Which was probably to expensive and to big for practical reasons.

You need to know the room and the speakers in that room for at least a few hours to automatically train the ability of listening through the room. If you conduct an "experiment" in such a room by altering the listening distance, you will find the right listening distance for the speaker and room. For the KH310 it is typically around 1.3m which fits perfectly in the category of a small midfield monitor.

If you ever heard a speakers at 2.5m with the right amount of direct sound you will recognize the degradation of quality in sound in that room if your speaker can't deliver that.

 

[Haskil]

If my understanding is right, you don't know the room and placement well, in therms of some hours or few days of listening experience.
So your ability of listening through the room should therefore be very limited. In this case your whole experience is kind of useless to determine the quality of a speaker especially since you don't have another speaker for comparison. It indicates only that the speaker and room acoustic combined sound good, which is no surprise in an studio environment. The listening distance is the distance for a main monitor. Which was probably to expensive and to big for practical reasons.

You need to know the room and the speakers in that room for at least a few hours to automatically train the ability of listening through the room. If you conduct an "experiment" in such a room by altering the listening distance, you will find the right listening distance for the speaker and room. For the KH310 it is typically around 1.3m which fits perfectly in the category of a small midfield monitor.

If you ever heard a speakers at 2.5m with the right amount of direct sound you will recognize the degradation of quality in sound in that room if your speaker can't deliver that.

You misunderstand, I know these studios and broadcast booths very well of a station whose programs I have directed and to which I have worked for 40 years.

I heard speakers of different brands and types there. And I am starting to get to know the new Neumann KH 310 well which were installed in addition to that in parallel with others to leave the choice while the final choice is made by the technical services of this public radio. And the choice fell on these KH 310 speakers and those who made this choice for the use we make of them are competent.

And each time for this performance comparison show, the listening sessions last a little over two hours. I've been going to these places for years and years: I've produced a few hundred programs there based on listening to records, among other things.

The only thing I say is that your assertion that the sound degrades terribly after 2.5 m... when listening which is done, I remind you, between 2.80 and 3 m is absurd, all like your insistence on wanting to be right in this discussion by asserting that beyond 2.5 m, you need the KH 420. Your statement is excessive, to say the least.

 

[GoFaster]

You misunderstand, I know these studios and broadcast booths very well of a station whose programs I have directed and to which I have worked for 40 years.

I heard speakers of different brands and types there. And I am starting to get to know the new Neumann KH 310 well which were installed in addition to that in parallel with others to leave the choice while the final choice is made by the technical services of this public radio. And the choice fell on these KH 310 speakers and those who made this choice for the use we make of them are competent.

And each time for this performance comparison show, the listening sessions last a little over two hours. I've been going to these places for years and years: I've produced a few hundred programs there based on listening to records, among other things.

The only thing I say is that your assertion that the sound degrades terribly after 2.5 m... when listening which is done, I remind you, between 2.80 and 3 m is absurd, all like your insistence on wanting to be right in this discussion by asserting that beyond 2.5 m, you need the KH 420. Your statement is excessive, to say the least.

quit fucking around and buy the genelec 8361a

 

[Haskil]

arrête de déconner et achète le genelec 8361a

Why not? I really like all the Genelec models I've heard on the radio, including those used to control orchestral recordings, as well as chamber music and solo recordings made outside radio, with control booths installed in a wide variety of locations, from a church sacristy to the end of a hallway....
But that's not what we're talking about here...