High End Munich 2025 - May 15-18

[boXem]

It's interesting to read feedback from the different forums. How colored they are by what they believe in the first place.
Here, the Genelec and Kii speakers are praised by several but not mentioned at all at more typical "high end" forums. And the exact opposiste by some of the expensive systems.

There's very little of common agreement on what sounded good. Part of the reason is obviously because people listen at different places in the rooms and with different music. But I think pre conceived ideas and bias are major causes.

The fact is that some systems are much better than others and some are very poor, but most audiophile don't seem to be able to distinguish it in these types of exhibitions. It shows us the importance of proper AB tests with level matching, but something that's not easy to carry out in practice.

P.S. Also noticed how few that can actually be able to say something in detail about how it sounded? There's basically "it sounded great" or "I didn't like" it with no further descriptions.

Another conclusion could be that fora are not really representative from the average audiophile. I went twice to the Kii demo on the Thursday, and each time it was crowded and people were staying a long time just listening to music.

 

[Arindal]

Here, the Genelec and Kii speakers are praised by several

Which is a bit funny as particularly the bigger models of these two brands in slightly bigger rooms sound very very different. Would go so far to say that who finds one of these neutral and ideal, will inevitably speak of the other brand as colourating and flawed. Don't know a single recording engineer who likes both.

I went twice to the Kii demo on the Thursday, and each time it was crowded and people were staying a long time just listening to music.

Have seen pictures of the Genelec demo painting a very similar picture. These brands may not be discussed much among typical highenders, audiophiles or in dealerships, but they are seemingly very attractive at trade shows.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Which is a bit funny as particularly the bigger models of these two brands in slightly bigger rooms sound very very different. Would go so far to say that who finds one of these neutral and ideal, will inevitably speak of the other brand as colourating and flawed. Don't know a single recording engineer who likes both.

Every speaker sounds colored to me after hearing the Genelecs

 

[Bjorn]

And there’s also the possibility of audiophiles seeking different things. You might hear a big horn system and be put off by the coloured frequency response, whereas another audiophile might zero in on what they find to be some exciting or lifelike qualities.

I got to listen a number of times to the Klipsch La scalas at my friends house.
He’s had a ton of high-end speakers in that room, and I could hear some of the frequency response colouration in the Klipsch, but was there ever a sense “life energy” and a dense palpable solidity to the sound that felt more live than the other speakers. Despite their liabilities, I would’ve chosen to listen to those speakers then most of the other ones he had reviewed.

So there can be that element of things to what you are focussed on versus other people.

I agree and I disagree.
If you have two systems that both generally measure very well, but are different in two aspects I would agree. For example a difference in directivity, broad vs narrow dispersion but both being uniform and broadband. The preference here may very depend on room, acoustics, music material and partially taste. Sure, there's that aspect.

But I don't believe people prefer speakers that measure off in i.e. tonality or speakers that suffer from a lot phase issues, no time alignment and vertical lobing. Sure, a horn speaker can sound better in certain areas vs a front firing speaker, but there's no reason why the horn speaker today should be colored. That's a poor design and a better horn speaker wouldn't have that issue.

 

[Pearljam5000]

But I don't believe people prefer speakers that measure off in i.e. tonality or speakers that suffer from a lot phase issues, no time alignment and vertical lobing.

You'd be surprised
Some people like colored sound
That's why vinyl and tubes are so popular

 

[Arindal]

Every speaker sounds colored to me after hearing the Genelecs

That assessment would make we worried if it would happen to me. Particularly with a brand having pretty differently sounding models in their lineup such as Genelec. Indeed, after having worked with a 8341A for an extended period, I found S360 and 8381A to deliver colored tonal balance. So which one sounds right?

Personally prefer brands which deliver a more or less consistent voicing/tonality regardless the size of the loudspeaker. And according to my experience most of such models sound more or less compatible from brand to brand. Which is a good sign for me personally as you can do mastering with adjusting the tonal balance on any of them with pretty reliable results.

For example a difference in directivity, broad vs narrow dispersion but both being uniform and broadband.

Came to the conclusion after listening to a legion of speakers that neither broad vs. narrow is the main issue regarding directivity, nor is it uniformity in the sense of continuous behavior. In my understanding, constant directivity vs. increasing directivity vs. alternating directivity is much more important, and I would always prefer the former even if it comes with some flaws and necessity to treat the room or adjust the listening distance.

I don't believe people prefer speakers that measure off in i.e. tonality or speakers that suffer from a lot phase issues, no time alignment and vertical lobing.

It is all a compromise, and with on-axis tonality it is a matter of how much and how broad it is off, in which frequency bands under which angles. Vertical lobing I agree, but that is pretty much a non-issue under studio-grade conditions, very much a problem of underdamped living rooms.

Some people like colored sound
That's why vinyl and tubes are so popular

Both can be absolutely neutral to a degree the tolerance in tonal balance would be inaudible. As mentioned, I would have much more problems with tonal coloration of the reverb in the room which is definitely audible (for me: annoyingly audible), if the directivity is off just a few dB in the most sensitive bands.

 

[Purité Audio]

Every speaker sounds colored to me after hearing the Genelecs

All decent measuring speakers sound more alike than dissimilar in my experience, Kii and Genelec sound very similar, both by default have a relatively horizontal target and can sound a little ‘thin’ you can adjust them both of course to your preference.
Keith

 

[Arindal]

All decent measuring speakers sound more alike than dissimilar in my experience,

If you include all measurements defining sound quality including those telling a story about room integration, I agree.

Kii and Genelec sound very similar, both by default have a relatively horizontal target and can sound a little ‘thin’

That assessment is a bit surprising to me. Which Genelec model have you compared to a Kii? I do not find them similar at all, particularly the bigger Genelec models. And differences are beyond what can be adjusted, at least under home conditions.

 

[Pearljam5000]

All decent measuring speakers sound more alike than dissimilar in my experience, Kii and Genelec sound very similar, both by default have a relatively horizontal target and can sound a little ‘thin’ you can adjust them both of course to your preference.
Keith

In theory you're right
But Neumann and Genelec are both considered neutral but sounded completely different to me

 

[thewas]

That assessment would make we worried if it would happen to me. Particularly with a brand having pretty differently sounding models in their lineup such as Genelec. Indeed, after having worked with a 8341A for an extended period, I found S360 and 8381A to deliver colored tonal balance. So which one sounds right?

Personally prefer brands which deliver a more or less consistent voicing/tonality regardless the size of the loudspeaker. And according to my experience most of such models sound more or less compatible from brand to brand. Which is a good sign for me personally as you can do mastering with adjusting the tonal balance on any of them with pretty reliable results.

Which brand does sound more consistent through different sized models for you? If there is one thing that I appreciate on brands like Genelec or Neumann is their relative sound consistency between models given the limitation of quite different size and thus directivity borders.

 

[Purité Audio]

I don’t know if you were able to instantly switch between speakers with volume matched, but again imho there are not huge differences, tonality for example between ‘good’ speakers.
What is noticeable is the difference between target curves, Genelec/Kii tend to be more horizontal whereas something like the 8Cs have a slightly steeper drop, so have a little more body to the sound out of the box.
Keith

 

[Purité Audio]

If you include all measurements defining sound quality including those telling a story about room integration, I agree.



That assessment is a bit surprising to me. Which Genelec model have you compared to a Kii? I do not find them similar at all, particularly the bigger Genelec models. And differences are beyond what can be adjusted, at least under home conditions.

The 8260 and 7380 subs? we’re the first Genelecs I actually purchased they were a revelation more recently 8351B and very recently the 8361s.
I have written to Genelec enquiring about the ‘domestic’ 8381…
Keith

 

[Arindal]

Neumann and Genelec are both considered neutral but sounded completely different to me

Same here.

Which brand does sound more consistent through different sized models for you?

Kii Audio, MEG, PSI, PMC, ATC with pro audio provenance, for example. Cannot really speak of well-known hi-fi brands as I do not overview all their models, but MoFi, Magico, TAD, Paradigm, PMC and others I heard several surprisingly consistent examples from.

If there is one thing that I appreciate on brands like Genelec or Neumann is their relative sound consistency between models given the limitation of quite different size and thus directivity borders.

Particularly with these two brands I have made different experience. Switching from 8341A to S360 was a day/night experience, for example, almost the same with O300 (still labeled K+H, admittingly) to KH150.

The 8260 and 7380 subs?

Okay, that model was possibly the best regarding constant directivity and reverb tonality, together with 8341A. In a well-treated room, it might be showing more of similarity with Kii Audio than others. Still, would expect an audible difference, in these two particular cases maybe preferring the Genelecs.

 

[thewas]

Kii Audio, MEG, PSI, PMC, ATC with pro audio provenance, for example. Cannot really speak of well-known hi-fi brands as I do not overview all their models, but MoFi, Magico, TAD, Paradigm, PMC and others I heard several surprisingly consistent examples from.

Some of the brands you mention like Kii above don't offer that wide range of sizes and models and the others in my experience have much larger audible and measurable differences than the brands I mentioned. Also most of these brands don't really offer the option to directly compare them professionally level matched and bass corrected them like for example Neumann does which I had the pleasure to compare all of their models directly in the past.

 

[DSJR]

I had the same experience at the show here in Tampa.

Don't know the model, they were big, not the biggest, in a big room, with a lot of wall damping, I think.

Somehow the sound just "floated" in the air, for lack of a better description. It seemed to be "with me" and not coming from "over there". At least, that's the impression I got.

I even took a picture:

View attachment 452045

Liked the little Harbeth setup, too. It was playing Dean Martin, eventually bought the CD for a couple of bucks.

The huge sub(s) behind them probably helped a lot as well with the floating with you' subjective impression.

 

[Arindal]

the others in my experience have much larger audible and measurable differences than the brands I mentioned.

Interesting. Which models of which manufacturer did you compare A/B?

most of these brands don't really offer the option to directly compare them professionally level matched and bass corrected them

With studio monitors, I would say this is a standard at least for professional buyers. If an institution is deciding to organize some kind of shootout, they usually do their own level matching and room correction.

In your photo the comparison seemingly takes place in some kind of A/V editing suite like room. These are usually pretty well damped and offer more or less nearfield listening conditions, so naturally differences caused by directivity issues will be much smaller, if not negligible.

Maybe I did not make myself completely clear. Not saying that the brands I mention offer perfect frequency response at a certain point absolutely equal between models (Kii does, for sure). I was rather referring to the subjective impression of the imaging and the tonal balance of the reverb, if there is noteworthy one. Even if the speakers I have mentioned, might vary in on-axis linearity, which can be equalized at any time, they will lead to similar results in terms of mixing, panning and adding reverb, so the result is consistent.

 

[thewas]

Interesting. Which models of which manufacturer did you compare A/B?

I have listened to a few ATC, PMC, MEG models but not with perfect A/B conditions like in the Neumann room what about you?

With studio monitors, I would say this is a standard at least for professional buyers. If an institution is deciding to organize some kind of shootout, they usually do their own level matching and room correction.

Yes, that is what is usually claimed, there is usually though no real documentation of such events for example how the equalisation was performed (which can completely change the results).

In your photo the comparison seemingly takes place in some kind of A/V editing suite like room. These are usually pretty well damped and offer more or less nearfield listening conditions, so naturally differences caused by directivity issues will be much smaller, if not negligible.

Of course as it was for monitoring. No manufacturer can make a tiny loudspeaker radiate like a large one which can be audible of course.

Even if the speakers I have mentioned, might vary in on-axis linearity, which can be equalized at any time, they will lead to similar results in terms of mixing, panning and adding reverb, so the result is consistent.

Which in my experience happens even more with the brands I mention (even without EQ above bass), of course you cannot compare an 8010 vs 1236 to SCM100 bs SCM150.

 

[Arindal]

what about you?

Have taken part in reliable A/B listening tests with different Genelec, Neumann, MEG and Kii models. The latter completely non-distinguishable from one model to the other, same with medium or big MEG models (if I recall it correctly, only an 8"/3-way was sounding lower midrange-heavy). Interestingly with Genelec, compact units were pretty consistent (my favorite being the 8341A), bigger ones like S360 completely off. 8381 I have listened to in a separated session.

With Neumann I found particularly the comparison between KH150 and an older version K+H O300 revealing. Not only did they sound different, particularly when it comes to imaging and ambience, I would also assume that recording engineers will come to completely opposite decisions regarding mixing. The O300 was showing spacious impression with vast distance to the projection plane and deep yet compact ambience, while the KH150 reminded me of typical horn-loaded hi-fi speakers with very close, almost obtrusive, super dry phantom sources and completely detached ambience/reverb.

there is usually though no real documentation of such events for example how the equalisation was performed

The EBU and attached institutions tried to implement some standard procedures and documented the tests to exchange results, but this for obvious reasons got never published.

Of course as it was for monitoring. No manufacturer can make a tiny loudspeaker radiate like a large one which can be audible of course.

Kii and D&D definitely can do that ;-) Same with MEG models from a certain size. Nearfield monitoring in a well-treated room is a bit different from main monitors or on-location monitoring, so I would not really assume that results of one being applicable to the other.

 

[thewas]

Have taken part in reliable A/B listening tests with different Genelec, Neumann, MEG and Kii models.

Where and when this was done and is there any documention as photos from such cool event?

With Neumann I found particularly the comparison between KH150 and an older version K+H O300 revealing. Not only did they sound different, particularly when it comes to imaging and ambience, I would also assume that recording engineers will come to completely opposite decisions regarding mixing. The O300 was showing spacious impression with vast distance to the projection plane and deep yet compact ambience, while the KH150 reminded me of typical horn-loaded hi-fi speakers with very close, almost obtrusive, super dry phantom sources and completely detached ambience/reverb.

While I can imagine well what you say (the two times I visited Neuman the KH150 and KH120II were not released yet), truth to be said the O300 is also more than 20 years older than the K+H so rather almost 2 model generations and the KH150 has a bit difference to their other models with its stronger directivity kink.

Kii and D&D definitely can do that ;-) Same with MEG models from a certain size.

You contradict yourself there, those are all of similar size, not David vs Goliath like a 8010 vs 1236.

 

[MattHooper]

Which brand does sound more consistent through different sized models for you?

For me the first brand that comes to mind is Joseph Audio speakers. Their flagship Pearl floor standing speakers, smaller Perspective floorstanding speakers (which I own) and stand-mounted Pulsar speakers sound remarkably alike. The only real thing that changes is deeper bass and scale of presentation. If you fall in love with the sound of the bigger Pearl speakers, but can’t afford them, you can get that same quality of sound from the smaller models. Joseph kept everything he could as consistent as possible, for that reason.

Another one for me might be Thiel’s last speakers. I had the last flagship 3.7s and replaced them with the smaller 2.7s. I had both of them for a long time to compare and they sounded remarkably similar.