Kali Audio IN-8 Studio Monitor Review

[Jaxx1138]

Are the JBL 305p monitors measured in the same acoustic space as the KaliIN8? At a 1 foot distance for acoustical data (unless I misunderstand) you will be unable to determine an accurate directivity on a speaker of this size or larger. Now I am aware the Klippel system uses different distances in order to calculate the vector and amplitude of different frequencies. Is it possible to get more information about the test set-up or acoustic environment? Based on my listening experience with the Kali IN8 and the JBL 305p, I have a hard time reconciling the metrics of these two loudspeakers shown in this thread. I own a pair of 305's and have heard the Kali IN8's in a hotel at last years NAMM. I believe that a reference measured in the exact same circumstances would assist here as an anchor. The Kali in this case would appear to either be broken or the settings (dip switches) are set inappropriately for this test. Something here does dot seem correct especially if you look at many of the reviews on the IN8. Audio metrics can be tricky if not conducted properly(not an accusation of any kind). Reading or interpreting them is also something that takes a bit of experience. In my experience if you can hear it, there is a way to measure it. It's simply knowing what to measure and how to do it in a meaningful way that correlates to what we hear. It would be good to follow up and perhaps if anyone has the proper facilities and a Kali IN8 do some more measurements. I would be happy to do some if someone is near me with a Kali IN8 sample.
[FULL DISCOLSURE; I have know Mr Charles Sprinkle for 30 years. I too work in the in the industry. I have worked at Wisdom Audio, Harman International, Logitech and Apple as an acoustics engineer]

 

[Jmudrick]

Are the JBL 305p monitors measured in the same acoustic space as the KaliIN8? At a 1 foot distance for acoustical data (unless I misunderstand) you will be unable to determine an accurate directivity on a speaker of this size or larger. Now I am aware the Klippel system uses different distances in order to calculate the vector and amplitude of different frequencies. Is it possible to get more information about the test set-up or acoustic environment? Based on my listening experience with the Kali IN8 and the JBL 305p, I have a hard time reconciling the metrics of these two loudspeakers shown in this thread. I own a pair of 305's and have heard the Kali IN8's in a hotel at last years NAMM. I believe that a reference measured in the exact same circumstances would assist here as an anchor. The Kali in this case would appear to either be broken or the settings (dip switches) are set inappropriately for this test. Something here does dot seem correct especially if you look at many of the reviews on the IN8. Audio metrics can be tricky if not conducted properly(not an accusation of any kind). Reading or interpreting them is also something that takes a bit of experience. In my experience if you can hear it, there is a way to measure it. It's simply knowing what to measure and how to do it in a meaningful way that correlates to what we hear. It would be good to follow up and perhaps if anyone has the proper facilities and a Kali IN8 do some more measurements. I would be happy to do some if someone is near me with a Kali IN8 sample.
[FULL DISCOLSURE; I have know Mr Charles Sprinkle for 30 years. I too work in the in the industry. I have worked at Wisdom Audio, Harman International, Logitech and Apple as an acoustics engineer]

I'm in Los Angeles, sent you a PM.

 

[amirm]

Are the JBL 305p monitors measured in the same acoustic space as the KaliIN8? At a 1 foot distance for acoustical data (unless I misunderstand) you will be unable to determine an accurate directivity on a speaker of this size or larger. Now I am aware the Klippel system uses different distances in order to calculate the vector and amplitude of different frequencies. Is it possible to get more information about the test set-up or acoustic environment?

What acoustic environment? The whole purpose of the Klippel NFS is to perform near-field/gated measurements so that it eliminates the room effects. You simply give a couple points above and below of the speaker so that the system knows not to push the microphone into the speaker and the rest is automatic. Over 500 measurements are taken (optimized for each situation), dual parallel scans are made which using holographic techniques, eliminates room reflections (below 1 kHz; above 1 kHz gating is used).

Something here does dot seem correct especially if you look at many of the reviews on the IN8.

Subjective reviews are not reliable as you know from your work at Harman. People like any and all things regardless of true performance.

Reading or interpreting them is also something that takes a bit of experience.

The work done by Harman/Dr. Toole/Olive/Devantier, etc. has reduced this unknown quite a bit. This is why it is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 so that even a custom installer person can understand them.

[FULL DISCOLSURE; I have know Mr Charles Sprinkle for 30 years. I too work in the in the industry. I have worked at Wisdom Audio, Harman International, Logitech and Apple as an acoustics engineer]

And I have known your colleagues at Wisdom and Harman for 10 to 15 years. I have written countless published articles on room acoustics and measurements, extensive research behind it and so on. Since this review was written, I have measured two other speakers for which I have Harman spin data and those match one to one. We will see how another IN-8 performs. Until then, the data is the data.

 

[Rockfella]

FYI the LP-6 has arrived which I bought myself. Still in the box though. Am anxious to see how it measures but first had to test member speakers that had arrived earlier. Hopefully Kali sends in the IN-8 now that the NAMM show has ended.

Can't wait man

 

[Jaxx1138]

What acoustic environment? The whole purpose of the Klippel NFS is to perform near-field/gated measurements so that it eliminates the room effects. You simply give a couple points above and below of the speaker so that the system knows not to push the microphone into the speaker and the rest is automatic. Over 500 measurements are taken (optimized for each situation), dual parallel scans are made which using holographic techniques, eliminates room reflections (below 1 kHz; above 1 kHz gating is used).


Subjective reviews are not reliable as you know from your work at Harman. People like any and all things regardless of true performance.


The work done by Harman/Dr. Toole/Olive/Devantier, etc. has reduced this unknown quite a bit. This is why it is standardized in CEA/CTA-2034 so that even a custom installer person can understand them.


And I have known your colleagues at Wisdom and Harman for 10 to 15 years. I have written countless published articles on room acoustics and measurements, extensive research behind it and so on. Since this review was written, I have measured two other speakers for which I have Harman spin data and those match one to one. We will see how another IN-8 performs. Until then, the data is the data.

Yes of course, although something is amiss. Your results indicate the unit does not work correctly(based on your metrics presented here). This is why I ask. I can atest to the fact that the Kali IN8 is clearly a better monitor to the JBL 305p. This is why it seems odd that your experience and metrics indicate something that is inconsistent with so many other listening experiences that myself and others have had. I would guess the unit is defective. But you never did respond to my question about your testing environment. Kali as a company has the responsibility to respond and explain. But I would suggest so do you. Evidence and clarification are the only way to clear this up in a meaningful manner. Otherwise this becomes a practice of ego's claiming they are correct without supplying the validation of evidence or the information on how these tests were conducted and in what conditions. I will obtain a Kali IN 8 and do some metrics myself to see if I can assist in validating some of these conclusions. I would find it useful if you could also provide some data describing your methodology and other loudspeakers measured in the exact same conditions. Perhaps you are correct. That would be simple enough to establish. I am interested in seeing another measurement with different speakers measured in the exact same configuration. The only reason I question this review at all is because of the comparison to the JBL 305p. This raises an eyebrow with me. I have had experience with both monitors and find it difficult to believe that the 305 is sonically outperforming the Kali IN8 (unless the IN8 is defective). I would like to see further investigation into this.

 

[amirm]

But you never did respond to my question about your testing environment.

I absolutely did. Your question is akin to asking the color of the wedges in an anechoic chamber. It is not a factor in testing. The Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS) uses special (holographic) techniques to remove the room reflections from the direct sound. So it makes no difference what the "testing environment" is. It is in a nutshell, the Klippel NFS system. Please read the AES paper, Holographic Nearfield Measurement of Loudspeaker Directivity, by Wolfgang Klippel, and Christian Bellmann in addition to their ALMA presentation. This slide in the specific:

The system then allows free-field measurements in ordinary spaces. Since room reflections are excluded from presented responses, then it doesn't matter what exists there (as long as the analysis of the performance shows that their levels were too high which they were not).

Every speaker is tested using the exact same system, in exactly the same position as you see in the above picture. Here is the Revel C52 speaker: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...el-c52-speaker-review-and-measurements.10934/

My measurements using Klippel NFS:

And Harman's own anechoic measurements:

There is remarkable agreement here despite using different speakers samples, microphone and measurement techniques (mine using NFS, theirs using compensated anechoic measurements).

Here is another example, the Yamaha HS5:

As you see once again from the inset measurement performed by Harman, the correlation is excellent once again between my Klippel NFS measurements and Harman's anechoic.

Let's remember that over 500 points are used in Klippel NFS. That is far more than 70 point used in anechoic CEA-2034 measurements. They are summed to boil down CEA-2034. As such, the underlying measurements are actually much high resolution than any 70 point measurements.

Back to this review, there is no sudden hike in response exactly where the crossover for the Kali IN-8 has:

These are the hard facts we have. On the other side we have reputation of people and statement that they would never design a speaker that would look like this. If we could just trust people's reputation, then we would not need to measure or even perform listening tests. For this reason, I almost never talk about who is behind a product in reviewing it. It makes no difference. What makes a difference is what the data says.

Now, I still leave room for doubt and am patiently waiting for a new sample. Unfortunately none has arrived, nor do I have an indication that one is shipped to me. I have purchased a Kali LP-6 from my own money and will test that. Let's see if lack of mid-range shows better results there. That is all I can do. Further protests that "this can't be" is not helpful.

 

[Jaxx1138]

I absolutely did. Your question is akin to asking the color of the wedges in an anechoic chamber. It is not a factor in testing. The Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS) uses special (holographic) techniques to remove the room reflections from the direct sound. So it makes no difference what the "testing environment" is. It is in a nutshell, the Klippel NFS system. Please read the AES paper, Holographic Nearfield Measurement of Loudspeaker Directivity, by Wolfgang Klippel, and Christian Bellmann in addition to their ALMA presentation. This slide in the specific:
View attachment 47102

The system then allows free-field measurements in ordinary spaces. Since room reflections are excluded from presented responses, then it doesn't matter what exists there (as long as the analysis of the performance shows that their levels were too high which they were not).

Every speaker is tested using the exact same system, in exactly the same position as you see in the above picture. Here is the Revel C52 speaker: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...el-c52-speaker-review-and-measurements.10934/

My measurements using Klippel NFS:

And Harman's own anechoic measurements:

There is remarkable agreement here despite using different speakers samples, microphone and measurement techniques (mine using NFS, theirs using compensated anechoic measurements).

Here is another example, the Yamaha HS5:

As you see once again from the inset measurement performed by Harman, the correlation is excellent once again between my Klippel NFS measurements and Harman's anechoic.

Let's remember that over 500 points are used in Klippel NFS. That is far more than 70 point used in anechoic CEA-2034 measurements. They are summed to boil down CEA-2034. As such, the underlying measurements are actually much high resolution than any 70 point measurements.

Back to this review, there is no sudden hike in response exactly where the crossover for the Kali IN-8 has:

These are the hard facts we have. On the other side we have reputation of people and statement that they would never design a speaker that would look like this. If we could just trust people's reputation, then we would not need to measure or even perform listening tests. For this reason, I almost never talk about who is behind a product in reviewing it. It makes no difference. What makes a difference is what the data says.

Now, I still leave room for doubt and am patiently waiting for a new sample. Unfortunately none has arrived, nor do I have an indication that one is shipped to me. I have purchased a Kali LP-6 from my own money and will test that. Let's see if lack of mid-range shows better results there. That is all I can do. Further protests that "this can't be" is not helpful.

 

[LeftCoastTim]

I absolutely did. Your question is akin to asking the color of the wedges in an anechoic chamber. It is not a factor in testing.

@amirm Excellent response. Can you maybe re-post this in a separate pinned thread with subject like "Validation of Kippel Measurements"? I think anyone new coming to the forum could be pointed there instead of clogging up every single speaker review they disagree with. I'm sure we'll get more of that!

 

[Jaxx1138]

I appreciate the information. I am familiar with Klippel's NFS testing system. Your assumptions about my questions are without merit though. I am simply seeking to understand your particular application of acoustic metrics. I am mostly curious as to your metric and listening experience with this sample. I know you are the guru on this forum, but please do not be offended at my questions, as I am only attempting to understand what is happening in this evaluation. "The color of your wedges" comment is not productive to determining what is happening here. Perhaps you could seek to understand rather than condescend. I am not attempting to offend you. I am seeking understanding of your practices. Has no one ever questioned your work before? I am questioned constantly as an engineer and how I can substantiate my claims. I am required to prove what I know and even when textbook examples would support the metric. I thought that the intent of this forum was to learn and educate. Am I wrong in my assumptions?

 

[Jaxx1138]

@amirm Excellent response. Can you maybe re-post this in a separate pinned thread with subject like "Validation of Kippel Measurements"? I think anyone new coming to the forum could be pointed there instead of clogging up every single speaker review they disagree with. I'm sure we'll get more of that!

I absolutely did. Your question is akin to asking the color of the wedges in an anechoic chamber. It is not a factor in testing. The Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS) uses special (holographic) techniques to remove the room reflections from the direct sound. So it makes no difference what the "testing environment" is. It is in a nutshell, the Klippel NFS system. Please read the AES paper, Holographic Nearfield Measurement of Loudspeaker Directivity, by Wolfgang Klippel, and Christian Bellmann in addition to their ALMA presentation. This slide in the specific:
View attachment 47102

The system then allows free-field measurements in ordinary spaces. Since room reflections are excluded from presented responses, then it doesn't matter what exists there (as long as the analysis of the performance shows that their levels were too high which they were not).

Every speaker is tested using the exact same system, in exactly the same position as you see in the above picture. Here is the Revel C52 speaker: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...el-c52-speaker-review-and-measurements.10934/

My measurements using Klippel NFS:

And Harman's own anechoic measurements:

There is remarkable agreement here despite using different speakers samples, microphone and measurement techniques (mine using NFS, theirs using compensated anechoic measurements).

Here is another example, the Yamaha HS5:

As you see once again from the inset measurement performed by Harman, the correlation is excellent once again between my Klippel NFS measurements and Harman's anechoic.

Let's remember that over 500 points are used in Klippel NFS. That is far more than 70 point used in anechoic CEA-2034 measurements. They are summed to boil down CEA-2034. As such, the underlying measurements are actually much high resolution than any 70 point measurements.

Back to this review, there is no sudden hike in response exactly where the crossover for the Kali IN-8 has:

These are the hard facts we have. On the other side we have reputation of people and statement that they would never design a speaker that would look like this. If we could just trust people's reputation, then we would not need to measure or even perform listening tests. For this reason, I almost never talk about who is behind a product in reviewing it. It makes no difference. What makes a difference is what the data says.

Now, I still leave room for doubt and am patiently waiting for a new sample. Unfortunately none has arrived, nor do I have an indication that one is shipped to me. I have purchased a Kali LP-6 from my own money and will test that. Let's see if lack of mid-range shows better results there. That is all I can do. Further protests that "this can't be" is not helpful.

 

[amirm]

I appreciate the information. I am familiar with Klippel's NFS testing system. Your assumptions about my questions are without merit though. I am simply seeking to understand your particular application of acoustic metrics. I am mostly curious as to your metric and listening experience with this sample. I know you are the guru on this forum, but please do not be offended at my questions, as I am only attempting to understand what is happening in this evaluation. "The color of your wedges" comment is not productive to determining what is happening here. Perhaps you could seek to understand rather than condescend. I am not attempting to offend you. I am seeking understanding of your practices. Has no one ever questioned your work before? I am questioned constantly as an engineer and how I can substantiate my claims. I am required to prove what I know and even when textbook examples would support the metric. I thought that the intent of this forum was to learn and educate. Am I wrong in my assumptions?

People challenge me all the time. I am used to it. I simply do not understand your question especially since it is coming after two explanations. Please give some example answers to your questions so that I can see what you mean by them.

Your questions as I understand them go to how the Klippel NFS works. Something that I just answered and you say you already know. So I am at a loss as to what else to explain.

 

[amirm]

@amirm Excellent response. Can you maybe re-post this in a separate pinned thread with subject like "Validation of Kippel Measurements"? I think anyone new coming to the forum could be pointed there instead of clogging up every single speaker review they disagree with. I'm sure we'll get more of that!

Very good point. Will do!

 

[Jaxx1138]

People challenge me all the time. I am used to it. I simply do not understand your question especially since it is coming after two explanations. Please give some example answers to your questions so that I can see what you mean by them.

Your questions as I understand them go to how the Klippel NFS works. Something that I just answered and you say you already know. So I am at a loss as to what else to explain.

No, I am interested in your test configuration not Woflgang Klippels test system. I can see this here;
https://www.klippel.de/products/rd-system/modules/nfs-near-field-scanner.html

Do you have any pictures of your test set-up? I am very interested at this point in obtaining a Kali IN8 and the 305p and doing some measurements myself. I would like to see how they differ. I own the JBL 305p so that part is covered. I do not currently own the Kali IN8. At this point I believe that Kali might want to provide some metrics of their own and show their response curves from their testing facilities.

 

[Juhazi]

Jaxx, I get the feeling that you have not read through all these threads about Klippel system and other measurements.
Many of you questions have been asked and discussed for many times before!

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-i-get-into-speaker-testing-measurement.7904/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...mkii-and-control-1-pro-monitors-review.10811/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/nht-pro-m-00-powered-monitor-review.10859/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/.../kali-audio-in-8-studio-monitor-review.10897/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...el-c52-speaker-review-and-measurements.10934/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/yamaha-hs5-powered-monitor-review.10967/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/neumann-kh-80-dsp-monitor-review.11018/

 

[napilopez]

I appreciate the information. I am familiar with Klippel's NFS testing system. Your assumptions about my questions are without merit though. I am simply seeking to understand your particular application of acoustic metrics. I am mostly curious as to your metric and listening experience with this sample. I know you are the guru on this forum, but please do not be offended at my questions, as I am only attempting to understand what is happening in this evaluation. "The color of your wedges" comment is not productive to determining what is happening here. Perhaps you could seek to understand rather than condescend. I am not attempting to offend you. I am seeking understanding of your practices. Has no one ever questioned your work before? I am questioned constantly as an engineer and how I can substantiate my claims. I am required to prove what I know and even when textbook examples would support the metric. I thought that the intent of this forum was to learn and educate. Am I wrong in my assumptions?

No, I am interested in your test configuration not Woflgang Klippels test system. I can see this here;
https://www.klippel.de/products/rd-system/modules/nfs-near-field-scanner.html

Do you have any pictures of your test set-up? I am very interested at this point in obtaining a Kali IN8 and the 305p and doing some measurements myself. I would like to see how they differ. I own the JBL 305p so that part is covered. I do not currently own the Kali IN8. At this point I believe that Kali might want to provide some metrics of their own and show their response curves from their testing facilities.

@Jaxx1138 With all due respect, the broad accuracy of the setup has been already been discussed and established in dozens of pages across several threads. Every few days someone questions the accuracy of the system, so I can imagine that gets tiresome (I've probably contributed some to that). I also don't blame you for not reading every post, but Kali and Charles Sprinkle himself also responded earlier in this thread; Kali said they intend to provide Amir with another sample as well as provide measurements of their own, although that has not happened yet as far as I know.

 

[Manbeard]

Stop asking Amir questions that can easily be answered by reading the relevant threads in this section. Maybe his time would be better used testing speakers rather than answering the same mundane questions over and over.

 

[Thomas savage]

What are you wearing in that garage @amirm ? Maybe all those layers impact the measurements...

We need to know!

 

[Jaxx1138]

@Jaxx1138 With all due respect, the broad accuracy of the setup has been already been discussed and established in dozens of pages across several threads. Every few days someone questions the accuracy of the system, so I can imagine that gets tiresome (I've probably contributed some to that). I also don't blame you for not reading every post, but Kali and Charles Sprinkle himself also responded earlier in this thread; Kali said they intend to provide Amir with another sample as well as provide measurements of their own, although that has not happened yet as far as I know.

I feel you misunderstand my questions. I have never questioned the Klippel rig. Not once, not ever.
I worked directly with Floyd Toole for 10 years in the research group at Harman international. The physics on acoustics is not an exclusive set of data. Anyone can study it and/or work utilizing it. What you are doing is not "audio science" but "audio consensus". I simply wanted to know about Amirs test set-up. That is a reasonable question. It is not a challenge. It is simply a question. If you are treating people in this group in such a manner, then it is simply a cult like adherence to a guru and not the physics of acoustics and electronics. If asking questions is considered inappropriate in this forum then you are not in search of better sound or science. You are just am exclusive club that belittles all those that attempt to have any conversation with you about the process. I was simply curious.

 

[amirm]

It is none of that. As I said I have answered your question in detail with data, references and explanations. I can't keep repeating myself. What specifically you want to know and why. Please be explicit and give examples in context of NFS system.

 

[amirm]

Maybe this will help us. Please explain in your own words what the Klippel NFS does.