HEDD Type 20 MK2 Monitor Review

[Superhero123]

Now let’s see how they measured it:

• From the beginning of the rubber: 11 cm = 4.3"
• From rubber to rubber (including the surround): 13 cm = 5.1"
• From the first outer ring: 15.5 cm = 6.1"
• From one side to the other: 17.5 cm = 6.9"

So yeah… that explains a lot.
When I switched on my Genelec S30CH with a real 8" woofer, I immediately noticed how much more low-end fullness they had — even though they only go down to 40 Hz on paper. The HEDD are listed at 32 Hz, but in practice, that feels quite optimistic.


To be fair, they’re not bad speakers at all. I’ll definitely spend more time mixing with them before saying anything final. But honestly, for almost 5.000 €, I just expected a bit more low-end authority — or at least a clearer definition of what “7-inch” actually means.


If the spec had simply said 5-inch woofer, I wouldn’t be disappointed at all. The sound itself is clean, tight and detailed — but the way the size was communicated created expectations that just don’t match reality. Measuring from the outer metal plate (that’s part of the chassis) doesn’t make sense to me. It’s like saying your girlfriend is 6 feet tall… with her heels on.


Anyway — this isn’t hate, it’s just honest feedback from someone who grew up around analog gear, where specs were might or might not have been more straightforward. I’ll keep using them, maybe even add a sub, and see how that combination feels.


By the way — if anyone has experience integrating a HEDD sub with room correction systems like Audient (Sonarworks) or IK ARC Studio, I’d love to know more about that. Especially regarding future compatibility or calibration accuracy.


I’ll share more thoughts after mixing a few songs. Maybe my first impression will change — I really hope so.

 

[ozonepaul]

Now let’s see how they measured it:

• From the beginning of the rubber: 11 cm = 4.3"
• From rubber to rubber (including the surround): 13 cm = 5.1"
• From the first outer ring: 15.5 cm = 6.1"
• From one side to the other: 17.5 cm = 6.9"

So yeah… that explains a lot.
When I switched on my Genelec S30CH with a real 8" woofer, I immediately noticed how much more low-end fullness they had — even though they only go down to 40 Hz on paper. The HEDD are listed at 32 Hz, but in practice, that feels quite optimistic.


To be fair, they’re not bad speakers at all. I’ll definitely spend more time mixing with them before saying anything final. But honestly, for almost 5.000 €, I just expected a bit more low-end authority — or at least a clearer definition of what “7-inch” actually means.


If the spec had simply said 5-inch woofer, I wouldn’t be disappointed at all. The sound itself is clean, tight and detailed — but the way the size was communicated created expectations that just don’t match reality. Measuring from the outer metal plate (that’s part of the chassis) doesn’t make sense to me. It’s like saying your girlfriend is 6 feet tall… with her heels on.


Anyway — this isn’t hate, it’s just honest feedback from someone who grew up around analog gear, where specs were might or might not have been more straightforward. I’ll keep using them, maybe even add a sub, and see how that combination feels.


By the way — if anyone has experience integrating a HEDD sub with room correction systems like Audient (Sonarworks) or IK ARC Studio, I’d love to know more about that. Especially regarding future compatibility or calibration accuracy.


I’ll share more thoughts after mixing a few songs. Maybe my first impression will change — I really hope so.

According to Amir's measurements of the HEDD Type 20 mk2 at 32Hz the Type 20 mk2 is at around -6dB/-8dB roll off.

A good 7-8 years ago while monitor hunting I compared the mk1 Type 20 to my KH310s and even though I thought the Type 20 was a great monitor for the price, I found that making mix decisions in my own room (especially in the lows/low-mids) was much easier on the KH310. I'm sure the mk2 is an improved version of the mk1 but looking at the measurements, it's pretty clear that the KH310 still has an advantage over the mk2 as far as bass extension.

+ For me, data sheets like what you find on the website of HEDD, with info like "Frequency Range: 32 Hz - 40 kHz" is not very informative. At least some info about the slope would be nice. E.g. the filters in the KH310s are pretty aggressive (as expected in such a small closed cabinet with such low bass extension) but at least Neumann is very precise when it comes to their data sheets:

Free field frequency response ±6 dB	30 Hz … 22 kHz
Free field frequency response ±3 dB	34 Hz … 21 kHz
Pass band free field frequency response	36 Hz … 20 kHz, ±2 dB
Free field frequency linearity deviation between 100 Hz and 10 kHz	± 1.1 dB
Reproduction accuracy between 100 Hz and 10 kHz: 100%, 80%, 50% of loudspeakers produced	±0.87; ±0.39; ±0.23 dB

[th]Acoustics[/th]
Or looking at the data sheet of ATC SCM25A: "Low Frequency Cut-off: 47Hz (-6dB, anechoic)" at least we know what they're talking about. Now just comparing the Type 20's "32Hz" to the SCM25A's "47Hz" is like comparing apples to oranges.

Finally a suggestion: if it turns out you're dissatisfied with the bass clarity/amount/extension of the Type 20 than before buying extra subs I highly suggest you to check out a pair of KS Digital A200 MK2s. At least in Europe they are only 600 EUR/pair more expensive than the Type 20 mk2 and (in most average sized pro/semi-pro home studios) you don't need any subs with them. I would say these are my favorite monitors under 8000 EUR/pair, especially so if I put bass clarity/amount/extension/detail on the top of my priority list.

 

[dfuller]

the spec had simply said 5-inch woofer, I wouldn’t be disappointed at all. The sound itself is clean, tight and detailed — but the way the size was communicated created expectations that just don’t match reality. Measuring from the outer metal plate (that’s part of the chassis) doesn’t make sense to me. It’s like saying your girlfriend is 6 feet tall… with her heels on.

Yeah, but it's the standard, for better or worse.

 

[TheDichotomist]

There was no CSD plot for closed vs ported.... And the CSD we did see for ported showed a window of only a few milliseconds. (between like 14 and 21)
I'm super interested in how the ported vs closed configuration measures, given how much audiophiles talk about bass decay time, and even mix engineers say they prefer closed designs like the KH310 or Footprint 03.

 

[dfuller]

There was no CSD plot for closed vs ported.... And the CSD we did see for ported showed a window of only a few milliseconds. (between like 14 and 21)
I'm super interested in how the ported vs closed configuration measures, given how much audiophiles talk about bass decay time, and even mix engineers say they prefer closed designs like the KH310 or Footprint 03.

The footprint 03 is ported.

 

[TheDichotomist]

The footprint 03 is ported.

So it is... Derp~

 

[viktorapo]

It has a 10“ woofer, the C88 is 8“, most are 7-8“. But I guess it‘s more about cabinet size where it falls relatively in line.
I have read bad things about self-noise about KSD monitors though.

@amirm How about noise from this HEDD, anything bothersome?

though, im dying for a thread of KSD A200mk2 or C88 like this. I hear a lot of positive words for those monitors but still not much data online, esp an ASR review