Kali Audio IN-8 Studio Monitor Review

[Thelo80]

I have read the 55 pages of discussion and very few owners have posted their impressions of these speakers or the kali in-5. How do they sound?

 

[stevenswall]

I have read the 55 pages of discussion and very few owners have posted their impressions of these speakers or the kali in-5. How do they sound?

More or less transparent from most angles, whether vertical or horizontal. Nothing offensive stands out. I don't notice anything lacking either. Compared to Genelec monitors, it's like saying what's the difference between an OLED TV with 90% color accuracy vs 100. The Genelec is 100. The 90% Kali IN-5/8 is still so good on average it's hard to identify anything other than placement and room issues wrong with it.

If I tried to put my finger on something it would be that the Kali has some extra crisp treble, not sure exactly what causes this but I noticed it before I saw the measurements, and it looks like there is some high frequency lift at the very uppermost treble. If that's an issue or you want more room correction go with Genelec. Describing a Genelec is like describing a clear, clean window. I couldn't really tell you what it looks like without having something notably better to compare it to, and at that point I might not be able to note the difference anyhow.

 

[Thelo80]

More or less transparent from most angles, whether vertical or horizontal. Nothing offensive stands out. I don't notice anything lacking either. Compared to Genelec monitors, it's like saying what's the difference between an OLED TV with 90% color accuracy vs 100. The Genelec is 100. The 90% Kali IN-5/8 is still so good on average it's hard to identify anything other than placement and room issues wrong with it.

If I tried to put my finger on something it would be that the Kali has some extra crisp treble, not sure exactly what causes this but I noticed it before I saw the measurements, and it looks like there is some high frequency lift at the very uppermost treble. If that's an issue or you want more room correction go with Genelec. Describing a Genelec is like describing a clear, clean window. I couldn't really tell you what it looks like without having something notably better to compare it to, and at that point I might not be able to note the difference anyhow.

Thanks for the note. I had the Genelec 8020 and 8040 and understand the point of clarity. I could not keep them because my left ear did not like it and got clogged.
Considering the room acoustics and lack of quality of my ears, I don't see the benefit in spending $3500 on pair Neumann KH-150.

 

[617]

Thanks for the note. I had the Genelec 8020 and 8040 and understand the point of clarity. I could not keep them because my left ear did not like it and got clogged.
Considering the room acoustics and lack of quality of my ears, I don't see the benefit in spending $3500 on pair Neumann KH-150.

I'm starting to feel the same way. The Genelecs and Neuman's have amazing performance but for non-professional use I feel like these inexpensive monitors make a lot more sense, especially if you add a sub.

 

[Electric_Haggis]

I have read the 55 pages of discussion and very few owners have posted their impressions of these speakers or the kali in-5. How do they sound?

Hi there.
If you look up my profile, you'll see quite a few posts regarding my experiences with the IN-8's.

They are INCREDIBLY good - especially for the money.
Very high-end professional applications are A-OK with these.
I also want to add that they're FRONT-ported - A very underrated advantage over rear-ported monitors (like the Genelecs), depending on your room.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

The Genelecs and Neuman's have amazing performance but for non-professional use I feel like these inexpensive monitors make a lot more sense, especially if you add a sub.

That reflects what Charles and Nate say about the design philosophy behind them: "value optimization." They seem to have precisely located where the dreaded "point of diminishing returns" is when it comes to active speakers -- and yes, the addition of a relatively modest sub low-passed at about 75-80Hz completes the sonic picture very nicely in pretty much any near- or mid-field music playback application.

The fact that their performance is noted in the same sentence with Genelec and Neumann should tell you pretty much all you need to know. I own both a pair of "2nd Wave" IN-8s and an IN-5 oriented horizontally just above my monitor, the latter just for watching the occasional Dolby-encoded movie or TV show -- and I couldn't be happier with them. If I had the room for it, I would have also chosen Kali's formidable WS-12 sub, but I had to resort to a considerably smaller 12-inch sealed-box SVS that seems to be doing its job admirably.

 

[617]

That reflects what Charles and Nate say about the design philosophy behind them: "value optimization." They seem to have precisely located where the dreaded "point of diminishing returns" is when comes to active speakers -- and yes, the addition of a relatively modest sub low-passed at about 75-80Hz completes the sonic picture very nicely in pretty much any near- or mid-field music playback application.

The fact that their performance is noted in the same sentence with Genelec and Neumann should tell you pretty much all you need to know. I own both a pair of "2nd Wave" IN-8s and an IN-5 oriented horizontally just above my monitor, the latter just for watching the occasional Dolby-encoded movie or TV show -- and I couldn't be happier with them. If I had the room for it, I would have also chosen Kali's formidable WS-12 sub, but I had to resort to a considerably smaller 12-inch sealed-box SVS that seems to be doing its job admirably.

I'm thinking of getting in-5 or 8 for use on my desk. You think the 5's have enough bass without a sub for low listening levels or do the 8's sound more solid?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

I'm thinking of getting in-5 or 8 for use on my desk. You think the 5's have enough bass without a sub for low listening levels or do the 8's sound more solid?

Because of the very limited role of the one IN-5 in my setup, I can't say for sure -- but if you look at their respective spec sheets, there's only a 2(!)Hz difference between the published low end limits of the two models. For a strictly "ultra-nearfield" desktop application, you also might want to consider their new IN-UNF 2.1 product, which they claim matches the performance of a pair of IN-8s and takes up even less real estate than a pair of IN-5s: Kali Audio IN-UNF

 

[Electric_Haggis]

I'm thinking of getting in-5 or 8 for use on my desk. You think the 5's have enough bass without a sub for low listening levels or do the 8's sound more solid?

Strictly speaking, even the IN-8's don't technically have enough bass, in that they don't hit the lowest registers.
I've also compared them to the KRK 10-3, and the difference in bass depth is unmissable.
(The KRK 10-3 is also fantastic and underrated - but the IN-8 simply has more transparent mid-range / high end.)

Pretty much every time I've A-B-compared a quality 8-inch monitor to its 5-inch counterpart, the 8 won for presence and depth.
There's just no getting around diaphragm size VS listening distance. Period.

That said - If only the IN-5's suit your room, get a sub and you'll be better off in any case.
I haven't tried the Kali WS12 yet, but I have a Presonus Temblor T10 and can definitely vouch for that. It's excellent.

 

[617]

Strictly speaking, even the IN-8's don't technically have enough bass, in that they don't hit the lowest registers.
I've also compared them to the KRK 10-3, and the difference in bass depth is unmissable.
(The KRK 10-3 is also fantastic and underrated - but the IN-8 simply has more transparent mid-range / high end.)

Pretty much every time I've A-B-compared a quality 8-inch monitor to its 5-inch counterpart, the 8 won for presence and depth.
There's just no getting around diaphragm size VS listening distance. Period.

That said - If only the IN-5's suit your room, get a sub and you'll be better off in any case.
I haven't tried the Kali WS12 yet, but I have a Presonus Temblor T10 and can definitely vouch for that. It's excellent.

Man, I really wish the Presonus monitors were more performant, from what I've seen they aren't that good, but I like the design and the price point as well.

 

[Slyman]

Man, I really wish the Presonus monitors were more performant, from what I've seen they aren't that good, but I like the design and the price point as well.

True. But maybe if the measured it would be too good to be true. Mine meassures against the kali lp6 like this:

you can hear the difference in highs. However, from a technical standpoint everything is kinda within +-3 of eachother and they're still useable for sure.

 

[dominikz]

True. But maybe if the measured it would be too good to be true. Mine meassures against the kali lp6 like this:View attachment 256725
you can hear the difference in highs. However, from a technical standpoint everything is kinda within +-3 of eachother and they're still useable for sure.

Thanks for the comparison, but the very large ~120dB vertical scale makes them seem more similar.
If you limit the vertical scale from e.g. 40dB SPL to 90dB SPL (50dB vertical scale) it will be more comparable to other measurements on this forum, and it would also show the differences more clearly.

 

[617]

True. But maybe if the measured it would be too good to be true. Mine meassures against the kali lp6 like this:View attachment 256725
you can hear the difference in highs. However, from a technical standpoint everything is kinda within +-3 of eachother and they're still useable for sure.

Which ones are these? Eris or the r80/65?

 

[Electric_Haggis]

Which ones are these? Eris or the r80/65?

Um, yes... Which ones?

Anyway, measurement graphs aside - I can say I've done extensive direct A-B comparisons between the brilliant Presonus Sceptre S8 (2-way coaxial), the Kali IN-8 (3-way semi-coaxial) and the KRK 10-3 (3-way non-coaxial), among others. Distance was at 1.5 metres in a well-controlled room, across a wide range of material.

I already mentioned the KRK 10-3 above, but I can say that the IN-8 and Presonus Sceptre S8 were both similiarly accurate, with the IN-8 having a slight edge in mid-range detail, albeit with a noticeable noise floor (overrated by many, not an issue for me).
Both monitors are excellent and reliable. The Presonus Sceptres have achieved classic status for very good reason.

 

[HooStat]

I'm starting to feel the same way. The Genelecs and Neuman's have amazing performance but for non-professional use I feel like these inexpensive monitors make a lot more sense, especially if you add a sub.

I totally agree. And for anyone interested in multichannel, it is an even easier decision to go with the Kali over something like Genelec from a value perspective. (I say this as a Genelec owner who is planning on selling his 8351A 8351B to get 5 Kali speakers and some subs.)

EDIT, mistyped 8351B

 

[Thelo80]

I totally agree. And for anyone interested in multichannel, it is an even easier decision to go with the Kali over something like Genelec from a value perspective. (I say this as a Genelec owner who is planning on selling his 8351A to get 5 Kali speakers and some subs.)

Have you compared A/B the Kali with 8351A?

 

[TurtlePaul]

Mine meassures against the kali lp6 like this...

So both speakers are flat because they produce SPLs which are of a similar magnitude when measured between a pin drop and a jet engine...

This graph from 10 dB to 140 dB is useless. ASR standard charts set the level so the midrange plays at 86 dB and then graphs from 45 dB to 95 dB. This 50 dB range will visually show about 2.5x the variation in speakers vs. your chart.

 

[HooStat]

Have you compared A/B the Kali with 8351A?

No. It doesn't seem worthwhile to go down that path because those comparisons are fraught with issues. And it isn't about "better" for me. It is about what is best fit for purpose. And Kali seems to be better for what I am hoping to do.

 

[Slyman]

Which ones are these? Eris or the r80/65?

Um, yes... Which ones?

Anyway, measurement graphs aside - I can say I've done extensive direct A-B comparisons between the brilliant Presonus Sceptre S8 (2-way coaxial), the Kali IN-8 (3-way semi-coaxial) and the KRK 10-3 (3-way non-coaxial), among others. Distance was at 1.5 metres in a well-controlled room, across a wide range of material.

I already mentioned the KRK 10-3 above, but I can say that the IN-8 and Presonus Sceptre S8 were both similiarly accurate, with the IN-8 having a slight edge in mid-range detail, albeit with a noticeable noise floor (overrated by many, not an issue for me).
Both monitors are excellent and reliable. The Presonus Sceptres have achieved classic status for very good reason.

Just the E5's basics. Bass roll-off from 60hz already.

 

[Slyman]

So both speakers are flat because they produce SPLs which are of a similar magnitude when measured between a pin drop and a jet engine...

This graph from 10 dB to 140 dB is useless. ASR standard charts set the level so the midrange plays at 86 dB and then graphs from 45 dB to 95 dB. This 50 dB range will visually show about 2.5x the variation in speakers vs. your chart.

Thats not how math works.

Ofcourse a zoomed chart reveals bigger visual representation between the speakers, but the numbers are absolute and the same. And this chart reveals a simple fact: that above 300hz there's rarely more than a 5 db difference except for a few dips.

Edit: For anyone interested (remember this is not a very good measurement context. Just my room, mic 20 cms in front of each speaker at tweeter level)