• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Kali Audio IN-8 Studio Monitor Review

amirm said:
At least 12 to 15 times. The system was provided with a sample speaker (JBL no less) and Klippel's measurements and my measurements have very high correlation with theirs. It was only then that I started to test real speaker available for review.

I take it that you have zero experience with Klippel system so you have no basis to complain about the data as presented. I suggest going to some of your old employers, two of which have Klippel systems and ask what they know about it. I did that during my due diligence before buying the system.

Forgive me for being blunt: unless you have computational acoustics and mathematics experience, you have no qualifications to understand how the Klippel system works. My signal processing experience helps me a ton in this regard. This is a comment that came from Klippel when I last reported a bug to them:

"If it is any consolation (and this is a compliment), you’ve been faster and better than anyone who has purchased an NFS. And I’m talking about the [major company names redacted]… we usually get a call while they’re building the system and spend hours helping them get it together, and then hours and hours with people getting their first measurement done. Impressive!"

Doesn't make me God. I still have things I am learning about the system (mostly on how to get it configured faster and better). And there can be deficiencies in measurements still. But please, please don't assume you are dealing with some newbie who doesn't understand this system, acoustic measurements, etc. So one look at the set up and you can say, "aha! that is what is wrong with your setup." The mere question of asking me that is casting poor light on your knowledge of this system.

You can prove me wrong. It is just that the bar is quite high. Please come back with data and measurements of this speaker. That would help. None of this does.
Click to expand...
I'm working on that now.
 
"You can prove me wrong. It is just that the bar is quite high. Please come back with data and measurements of this speaker. That would help. None of this does."

You seem to think this is a competition. When I just want to get to the bottom of this, acoustically. I am in no competition with you. Nor do I have anything to prove other than the actual performance of this product.
 
Jaxx1138 said:
"You can prove me wrong. It is just that the bar is quite high. Please come back with data and measurements of this speaker. That would help. None of this does."

You seem to think this is a competition. When I just want to get to the bottom of this, acoustically. I am in no competition with you. Nor do I have anything to prove other than the actual performance of this product.
Click to expand...
And you seem to think my goal is any different. So we are even.
 
amirm said:
And you seem to think my goal is any different. So we are even.
Click to expand...
If you guys can sort out your differences, then I think @Jaxx1138 might be a valuable asset and contributor to this forum. I can understand why you, Amir, can be testy, considering the barrage of repeat questions, but that should sort itself out, especially with a sticky thread. However, no need to take offense where none is intended.

Amir, I am amazed at how quickly you come up to speed with anything you set your mind to. I was fully expecting you to be still tweaking your measurement technique at his juncture, and maybe have one or only two speakers in the bag. Here you are well beyond that. This is why I suggested that you limit yourself initially to speakers that you own or can get back for retest, as I anticipated lots of questions, useful feedback, and frankly a bunch of us trying to wrap our feeble brains around all this data.
 
New here. I'm interested since I know Charles well and have a high opinion. Same for John. It is certainly possible that that unit was defective. I'm wondering if the dip switch was maybe defective. If the actual response was set for one of the boundary setups, instead of the assumed no-boundary setting, that could shave off 2 dB at the bottom, which kind of matches the deficit in the measurements. I'm not sure the exact filter cutoff for those boundary correction filters, but it should be a few hundred Hz.
I am also familiar with the Klippel system, though I have not used it. I did take the Klippel seminar, it was like drinking from a fire hose! The NFS does have diagnostics to check fitting error, and maybe suggest more data points or higher order wave expansion if needed. One thing is the selection of the acoustic center (expansion point). My Klippel manual says it should be the center of the tweeter, but the accompanying picture shows it between the tweet and woofer, like many people use for normal chamber measurements. Could that have any bearing? I assume the ugliness at 8-10 kHz has to do with the coaxial design of the mid/tweet? Diffraction.
 
twelti said:
One thing is the selection of the acoustic center (expansion point). My Klippel manual says it should be the center of the tweeter, but the accompanying picture shows it between the tweet and woofer, like many people use for normal chamber measurements. Could that have any bearing?
Click to expand...

1st post and here you are at the middle of the storm, wellcome! :D

You may want to check a thread where Neuman KH80 was measured as there is a hot discussion there related to that same subject. You sound like a pro so your thoughts would be very much appreciated. :)
 
twelti said:
The NFS does have diagnostics to check fitting error, and maybe suggest more data points or higher order wave expansion if needed.
Click to expand...
I always check that post measurements and I have ample margin. Here it is for IN-8:
1579987972047.png


Above 1 kHz gated measurements are used (where I drew the red vertical line). The horizontal dashed red-line shows the threshold for good measurements (1 dB accuracy). As we see, from 30 Hz to 1 kHz we are below that limit. The reason for the rise in low frequency is lack of bass output and higher ambient noise. For most of the measurement range, we have an extra 15 to 20 dB of margin beyond what Klippel recommends.

I use a lot of measurement points despite the simplicity of the soundfield. And order expansion is allowed to climb to 10 which helps.
 
amirm said:
I always check that post measurements and I have ample margin. Here it is for IN-8:
View attachment 47407

Above 1 kHz gated measurements are used (where I drew the red vertical line). The horizontal dashed red-line shows the threshold for good measurements (1 dB accuracy). As we see, from 30 Hz to 1 kHz we are below that limit. The reason for the rise in low frequency is lack of bass output and higher ambient noise. For most of the measurement range, we have an extra 15 to 20 dB of margin beyond what Klippel recommends.

I use a lot of measurement points despite the simplicity of the soundfield. And order expansion is allowed to climb to 10 which helps.
Click to expand...
It certainly looks legit.
amirm said:
I always check that post measurements and I have ample margin. Here it is for IN-8:
View attachment 47407

Above 1 kHz gated measurements are used (where I drew the red vertical line). The horizontal dashed red-line shows the threshold for good measurements (1 dB accuracy). As we see, from 30 Hz to 1 kHz we are below that limit. The reason for the rise in low frequency is lack of bass output and higher ambient noise. For most of the measurement range, we have an extra 15 to 20 dB of margin beyond what Klippel recommends.

I use a lot of measurement points despite the simplicity of the soundfield. And order expansion is allowed to climb to 10 which helps.
Click to expand...

Certainly looks legit.
 
twelti said:
My Klippel manual says it should be the center of the tweeter, but the accompanying picture shows it between the tweet and woofer, like many people use for normal chamber measurements. Could that have any bearing? I assume the ugliness at 8-10 kHz has to do with the coaxial design of the mid/tweet? Diffraction.
Click to expand...

Welcome sir, I've enjoyed many of your studies posted on the AES journals. Do you have any thoughts on this reference axis debate? Specifically do you believe all speakers should be measured identically on the tweeter axis, midway between the midrange/tweeter axis or just allow manufacturers to specify? I kind of feel that all speakers should be measured as close as possible to how they will be placed in actual use and not just what happens to produce the best graph. As long as it's on the tweeter axis or halfway between the midrange/tweeter, I don't think it will change a whole lot but in the case of the M126 be, I find it odd that they specify 7" above the tweeter as the reference axis in the Soundstage measurements.
 
aarons915 said:
Welcome sir, I've enjoyed many of your studies posted on the AES journals. Do you have any thoughts on this reference axis debate? Specifically do you believe all speakers should be measured identically on the tweeter axis, midway between the midrange/tweeter axis or just allow manufacturers to specify? I kind of feel that all speakers should be measured as close as possible to how they will be placed in actual use and not just what happens to produce the best graph. As long as it's on the tweeter axis or halfway between the midrange/tweeter, I don't think it will change a whole lot but in the case of the M126 be, I find it odd that they specify 7" above the tweeter as the reference axis in the Soundstage measurements.
Click to expand...
It does seem to me that if you are using the speaker as a monitor and precisely setting it up so that you are directly on axis to the tweeter, then a measurement made that way would be most accurate. I'm not familiar with the Soundstage measurements you mention.
 
aarons915 said:
Soundstage is a website that uses Canada's NRC anechoic chamber for measurements. Here they are for the M126be:
https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153
Click to expand...

The speaker is lobing upwards and sums properly at 7” above tweeter. This is where the measurements are flattest. Bellow this you’ll have a dip at the crossover point. One can certainly listen at tweeter lever, woofer level, or whatever, but they’ll sound like shit. This type of lobing is an issue in a primitive passive loudspeakers. With DSP, in active speakers, engineers can point the lobe any which way they want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Kali IN-8 v2 in room response
Replies
2
Views
1K
starfly
S
S
I need help with new speakers for a nearfield environment.
Replies
17
Views
2K
Peterinvan
Peterinvan
S
In a near field setup: KH80+KH750 or KH120+KH750?
Replies
7
Views
958
unpluggged
unpluggged
amirm
  • Poll Poll
HEDD TYPE 05 A-CORE Monitor Review
2 3
Replies
59
Views
17K
NomC
N
S
Advice needed. Kali in-8 v2 vs Genelec 8030c vs Neumann KH 120 II
Replies
19
Views
5K
AnalogSteph
AnalogSteph
Back
Top Bottom