• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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

D

Deleted member 2944

Guest
I suspect the panther cut off head bar is being set quite high here.
I predict many more headless panthers in the speaker review category if the bar is not lowered. (You're going to find many speakers that measure a lot 'worse' than these.) :)
Speakers are notoriously hard to measure 'consistently' across many testing schemes, environments, conditions.

I would suggest to not apply a panther rating on any speakers until a good database of speakers has been tested and the setup is fully characterized.

Dave.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

phoenixdogfan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
3,359
Likes
5,327
Location
Nashville
Thanks a lot, that is awesome and would be really useful. I also agree the ERDI isn't that bad but it would take quite a bit of EQ to fix all of it's issues, that's a speaker I would pass on personally. Many speakers have a few resonances that could be fixed and made to be much better, a good example is the LS50 that I currently use, here's a "Spin" I found in a study that doesn't name the speaker but calls it a "2-way Coaxial with an MSRP of $1499", so I'm pretty sure it's the LS50.

View attachment 45871

You can see that fixing the listening window with a few filters at 750Hz and 2k would make this a much smoother speaker, which I have done and can confirm. This is a good example of a speaker with a few problems that can be made even better with just a few filters
I have LS 50s and would be most interested in learning about your filters.
 

folzag

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
99
Likes
132
For these monitors, yes. They are typically used this way. For stand-alone speakers I will use a different setup.

I believe it's common enough for apartment dwellers to use monitors for far-field listening, that it would be useful to know if any might be well suited for that use. Also, it can help validate how true the predicted in-room response graph is.

(Note: I agree with the graph, but I'm not sure we know how close or far a speaker is allowed to be from ideal before it subjectively suffers.)
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2020
Messages
12
Likes
16
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Kali Audio IN-8, 3-way powered studio monitor (speaker). It was kindly purchased new by a member and drop shipped to me. The IN-8 costs US $399 each.

Despite its rather low price, the IN-8 comes in a rather large enclosure and with good visual fit and finish:

The tweeter is located in the center of the midrange driver ("coaxial").

Here is the back panel connectivity and EQ settings:


I tested the unit as shipped with all the dip switches low (EQ defeated). For listening tests, I used the RCA input so had to enable that using dip switch 8. Gain control was set to middle (0 dB) as you see. I think the drive level was 0.7 volts through XLR input. I used a microphone position that was a bit farther away from the speaker. To compensate, I had to boost the levels. They were somewhat uncomfortable to listen to from 6 to 7 feet away. I was hoping to have my microphone calibrator in today but got delayed. So can't tell you the exact SPL.

I put my ear next to the coaxial driver and there is hiss there, maybe a bit higher than my JBL 305P Mark ii monitor. It was a bit lower in tone which indicates the mid-range and tweeter may both be hissing at the same time.

Speaker Acoustic Measurements
Unless I say otherwise, the measurements are produced by the Klippel Near-field Scanner which measures the speaker at close distance and then uses math to compute the far-field response. Room reflections are computed out so there are anechoic chamber equivalent data. I suggest reading my JBL 305p Mark ii review for more information on what these graphs mean.

As usual we start with our CEA/CTA-2034 "spinorama" measurements:
View attachment 45829

Our on-axis and listening window graphs (black and dashed green lines) immediately tell us there are serious problems with this speaker. The addition of mid-range is causing a substantial boost in a large range of frequencies reading up to 3000 Hz and beyond. Inverted, we are going to get less presence, upper mid-range warmth and detail from 200 to 400 Hz.

We also have some kind of cancellation (?) happening post tweeter taking over starting at 8 kHz.

Off-axis response as represented by the dashed blue line is actually smoother so you probably don't want to point the speakers at you. That said, it still shows the same step function boost from midrange driver.

If you were to use this in a situation where reflections do occur and reach your ears in a more far-field situation, you would get this response:
View attachment 45831

Smoothness of this "PIR" curve (predicted in room response) and lack of variation is a major predictor of listener preference. As you see, there is quite a bit of deviation from the imaginary line I have drawn in there. This would say that subjective performance is not going to rank high.

Story is told already. The rest is for advanced readers who want to dig in.

Advanced Acoustic Measurements
Not enough spare time to find a better way to present this data although I am working on it. For now, please don't complain about them. :)

View attachment 45832

Company says you can put these horizontal and vertical and that would be OK. Well, maybe compared to some other speakers but horizontal positioning does degrade performance even more:

View attachment 45833

View attachment 45834

The hot spots show in dark red span many frequencies which indicates acoustic design issues, not simple electro-mechanical resonances (they would have a narrow frequency impact).

These graphs are far from ideal with lack of smoothness to the sides, and changes in amplitude based on frequency (which we already know from spinorama measurements).

Finally there is the distortion measurements:

View attachment 45835

These are ordinary near-field measurements so the room is impacting the measurements. I am working on getting equivalent anechoic data. Not sure if it is possible but I am working toward it.

I tested the NHT Pro M-00 the same way and saw the same peak at 50 Hz. So I am thinking that is a room mode. Using that speaker, I did notice that raising SPL proportionally raised that peak until it reached the fundamental frequency. So I think it is somewhat reliable indicator of distortion. But who knows at this point. So please don't run with these distortion measurements.

Informal Listening Tests
The Kali IN-8 gave an imposing impression once put on my desk. It is huge for any kind of computer desk. As I noted, fit and finish is good so I thought for sure it would give some kind of competition to the JBL 305P Mark ii that I was comparing it to. Well, 2 seconds of listening showed that was not the case whatsoever. This thing sounds bad! All you hear is mid-range. All other frequencies are attenuated heavily. The highs are also grungy or strange. The 305P Mark ii sounded hugely more satisfying in comparison. Tons of detail where you could hear every instrument equally and properly. It had great warmth. It did justice to my audiophile track I was using.

To put it strongly, the Kali Audio IN-8 sounded like a big clock radio for those of you old enough to know what these things are! It had some good low bass that is not in JBL 305 but otherwise, it just sounds flat and uninteresting. The highs were bothering my ears as well.

As usual, I could be accused of bias so once again I dragged my wife in for a second opinion. Without saying a word she just about replicated my impressions. She commented on how she could better hear all the instruments. On a slight positive she did say some notes came across louder from IN-8 but quickly followed with that could be tiring.

It is easy to dismiss the graphs as showing "just a few dB" peaks. Visually they don't look that bad in grand scheme of things. Audibly however, those differences are quite a bit larger pointing and correctly predicting the listening impressions so far.

As I noted, hiss and buzzing is there just as well as JBL 305P Mark II so no issue there. I did not however hear either one over faint fan noise of my PC. In my prior testing of 305 P I have them in a different spot away from the computer so could hear the hiss better.

Conclusions
Hard to imagine if proper measurements or comparative listening tests were performed in the design of the Kali Audio IN-8. Their marketing story is all about "imaging" and such. Well, if you don't produce the right timbre, it doesn't matter what else you do. I can't emphasize enough how "lo-fi" this speaker sounds in use. I have no idea who all these people online are that are praising it for studio use. I shutter to think of what kind of mix they produce with a speaker like this.

Now I am wondering how the lower end 2-way models perform.

As it stands, pretty soon I have to upgrade the status of the JBL 305P Mark ii to top of the class with the golfing pink panther! It is remarkable how much higher in fidelity it is playing at relative to these other monitors.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

You honestly want to read another lame joke to be motivate to donate??? I hope not. Just go here and give me some money and get it done: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Kali Audio IN-8, 3-way powered studio monitor (speaker). It was kindly purchased new by a member and drop shipped to me. The IN-8 costs US $399 each.

Despite its rather low price, the IN-8 comes in a rather large enclosure and with good visual fit and finish:

The tweeter is located in the center of the midrange driver ("coaxial").

Here is the back panel connectivity and EQ settings:


I tested the unit as shipped with all the dip switches low (EQ defeated). For listening tests, I used the RCA input so had to enable that using dip switch 8. Gain control was set to middle (0 dB) as you see. I think the drive level was 0.7 volts through XLR input. I used a microphone position that was a bit farther away from the speaker. To compensate, I had to boost the levels. They were somewhat uncomfortable to listen to from 6 to 7 feet away. I was hoping to have my microphone calibrator in today but got delayed. So can't tell you the exact SPL.

I put my ear next to the coaxial driver and there is hiss there, maybe a bit higher than my JBL 305P Mark ii monitor. It was a bit lower in tone which indicates the mid-range and tweeter may both be hissing at the same time.

Speaker Acoustic Measurements
Unless I say otherwise, the measurements are produced by the Klippel Near-field Scanner which measures the speaker at close distance and then uses math to compute the far-field response. Room reflections are computed out so there are anechoic chamber equivalent data. I suggest reading my JBL 305p Mark ii review for more information on what these graphs mean.

As usual we start with our CEA/CTA-2034 "spinorama" measurements:
View attachment 45829

Our on-axis and listening window graphs (black and dashed green lines) immediately tell us there are serious problems with this speaker. The addition of mid-range is causing a substantial boost in a large range of frequencies reading up to 3000 Hz and beyond. Inverted, we are going to get less presence, upper mid-range warmth and detail from 200 to 400 Hz.

We also have some kind of cancellation (?) happening post tweeter taking over starting at 8 kHz.

Off-axis response as represented by the dashed blue line is actually smoother so you probably don't want to point the speakers at you. That said, it still shows the same step function boost from midrange driver.

If you were to use this in a situation where reflections do occur and reach your ears in a more far-field situation, you would get this response:
View attachment 45831

Smoothness of this "PIR" curve (predicted in room response) and lack of variation is a major predictor of listener preference. As you see, there is quite a bit of deviation from the imaginary line I have drawn in there. This would say that subjective performance is not going to rank high.

Story is told already. The rest is for advanced readers who want to dig in.

Advanced Acoustic Measurements
Not enough spare time to find a better way to present this data although I am working on it. For now, please don't complain about them. :)

View attachment 45832

Company says you can put these horizontal and vertical and that would be OK. Well, maybe compared to some other speakers but horizontal positioning does degrade performance even more:

View attachment 45833

View attachment 45834

The hot spots show in dark red span many frequencies which indicates acoustic design issues, not simple electro-mechanical resonances (they would have a narrow frequency impact).

These graphs are far from ideal with lack of smoothness to the sides, and changes in amplitude based on frequency (which we already know from spinorama measurements).

Finally there is the distortion measurements:

View attachment 45835

These are ordinary near-field measurements so the room is impacting the measurements. I am working on getting equivalent anechoic data. Not sure if it is possible but I am working toward it.

I tested the NHT Pro M-00 the same way and saw the same peak at 50 Hz. So I am thinking that is a room mode. Using that speaker, I did notice that raising SPL proportionally raised that peak until it reached the fundamental frequency. So I think it is somewhat reliable indicator of distortion. But who knows at this point. So please don't run with these distortion measurements.

Informal Listening Tests
The Kali IN-8 gave an imposing impression once put on my desk. It is huge for any kind of computer desk. As I noted, fit and finish is good so I thought for sure it would give some kind of competition to the JBL 305P Mark ii that I was comparing it to. Well, 2 seconds of listening showed that was not the case whatsoever. This thing sounds bad! All you hear is mid-range. All other frequencies are attenuated heavily. The highs are also grungy or strange. The 305P Mark ii sounded hugely more satisfying in comparison. Tons of detail where you could hear every instrument equally and properly. It had great warmth. It did justice to my audiophile track I was using.

To put it strongly, the Kali Audio IN-8 sounded like a big clock radio for those of you old enough to know what these things are! It had some good low bass that is not in JBL 305 but otherwise, it just sounds flat and uninteresting. The highs were bothering my ears as well.

As usual, I could be accused of bias so once again I dragged my wife in for a second opinion. Without saying a word she just about replicated my impressions. She commented on how she could better hear all the instruments. On a slight positive she did say some notes came across louder from IN-8 but quickly followed with that could be tiring.

It is easy to dismiss the graphs as showing "just a few dB" peaks. Visually they don't look that bad in grand scheme of things. Audibly however, those differences are quite a bit larger pointing and correctly predicting the listening impressions so far.

As I noted, hiss and buzzing is there just as well as JBL 305P Mark II so no issue there. I did not however hear either one over faint fan noise of my PC. In my prior testing of 305 P I have them in a different spot away from the computer so could hear the hiss better.

Conclusions
Hard to imagine if proper measurements or comparative listening tests were performed in the design of the Kali Audio IN-8. Their marketing story is all about "imaging" and such. Well, if you don't produce the right timbre, it doesn't matter what else you do. I can't emphasize enough how "lo-fi" this speaker sounds in use. I have no idea who all these people online are that are praising it for studio use. I shutter to think of what kind of mix they produce with a speaker like this.

Now I am wondering how the lower end 2-way models perform.

As it stands, pretty soon I have to upgrade the status of the JBL 305P Mark ii to top of the class with the golfing pink panther! It is remarkable how much higher in fidelity it is playing at relative to these other monitors.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

You honestly want to read another lame joke to be motivate to donate??? I hope not. Just go here and give me some money and get it done: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Kali Audio IN-8, 3-way powered studio monitor (speaker). It was kindly purchased new by a member and drop shipped to me. The IN-8 costs US $399 each.

Despite its rather low price, the IN-8 comes in a rather large enclosure and with good visual fit and finish:

The tweeter is located in the center of the midrange driver ("coaxial").

Here is the back panel connectivity and EQ settings:


I tested the unit as shipped with all the dip switches low (EQ defeated). For listening tests, I used the RCA input so had to enable that using dip switch 8. Gain control was set to middle (0 dB) as you see. I think the drive level was 0.7 volts through XLR input. I used a microphone position that was a bit farther away from the speaker. To compensate, I had to boost the levels. They were somewhat uncomfortable to listen to from 6 to 7 feet away. I was hoping to have my microphone calibrator in today but got delayed. So can't tell you the exact SPL.

I put my ear next to the coaxial driver and there is hiss there, maybe a bit higher than my JBL 305P Mark ii monitor. It was a bit lower in tone which indicates the mid-range and tweeter may both be hissing at the same time.

Speaker Acoustic Measurements
Unless I say otherwise, the measurements are produced by the Klippel Near-field Scanner which measures the speaker at close distance and then uses math to compute the far-field response. Room reflections are computed out so there are anechoic chamber equivalent data. I suggest reading my JBL 305p Mark ii review for more information on what these graphs mean.

As usual we start with our CEA/CTA-2034 "spinorama" measurements:
View attachment 45829

Our on-axis and listening window graphs (black and dashed green lines) immediately tell us there are serious problems with this speaker. The addition of mid-range is causing a substantial boost in a large range of frequencies reading up to 3000 Hz and beyond. Inverted, we are going to get less presence, upper mid-range warmth and detail from 200 to 400 Hz.

We also have some kind of cancellation (?) happening post tweeter taking over starting at 8 kHz.

Off-axis response as represented by the dashed blue line is actually smoother so you probably don't want to point the speakers at you. That said, it still shows the same step function boost from midrange driver.

If you were to use this in a situation where reflections do occur and reach your ears in a more far-field situation, you would get this response:
View attachment 45831

Smoothness of this "PIR" curve (predicted in room response) and lack of variation is a major predictor of listener preference. As you see, there is quite a bit of deviation from the imaginary line I have drawn in there. This would say that subjective performance is not going to rank high.

Story is told already. The rest is for advanced readers who want to dig in.

Advanced Acoustic Measurements
Not enough spare time to find a better way to present this data although I am working on it. For now, please don't complain about them. :)

View attachment 45832

Company says you can put these horizontal and vertical and that would be OK. Well, maybe compared to some other speakers but horizontal positioning does degrade performance even more:

View attachment 45833

View attachment 45834

The hot spots show in dark red span many frequencies which indicates acoustic design issues, not simple electro-mechanical resonances (they would have a narrow frequency impact).

These graphs are far from ideal with lack of smoothness to the sides, and changes in amplitude based on frequency (which we already know from spinorama measurements).

Finally there is the distortion measurements:

View attachment 45835

These are ordinary near-field measurements so the room is impacting the measurements. I am working on getting equivalent anechoic data. Not sure if it is possible but I am working toward it.

I tested the NHT Pro M-00 the same way and saw the same peak at 50 Hz. So I am thinking that is a room mode. Using that speaker, I did notice that raising SPL proportionally raised that peak until it reached the fundamental frequency. So I think it is somewhat reliable indicator of distortion. But who knows at this point. So please don't run with these distortion measurements.

Informal Listening Tests
The Kali IN-8 gave an imposing impression once put on my desk. It is huge for any kind of computer desk. As I noted, fit and finish is good so I thought for sure it would give some kind of competition to the JBL 305P Mark ii that I was comparing it to. Well, 2 seconds of listening showed that was not the case whatsoever. This thing sounds bad! All you hear is mid-range. All other frequencies are attenuated heavily. The highs are also grungy or strange. The 305P Mark ii sounded hugely more satisfying in comparison. Tons of detail where you could hear every instrument equally and properly. It had great warmth. It did justice to my audiophile track I was using.

To put it strongly, the Kali Audio IN-8 sounded like a big clock radio for those of you old enough to know what these things are! It had some good low bass that is not in JBL 305 but otherwise, it just sounds flat and uninteresting. The highs were bothering my ears as well.

As usual, I could be accused of bias so once again I dragged my wife in for a second opinion. Without saying a word she just about replicated my impressions. She commented on how she could better hear all the instruments. On a slight positive she did say some notes came across louder from IN-8 but quickly followed with that could be tiring.

It is easy to dismiss the graphs as showing "just a few dB" peaks. Visually they don't look that bad in grand scheme of things. Audibly however, those differences are quite a bit larger pointing and correctly predicting the listening impressions so far.

As I noted, hiss and buzzing is there just as well as JBL 305P Mark II so no issue there. I did not however hear either one over faint fan noise of my PC. In my prior testing of 305 P I have them in a different spot away from the computer so could hear the hiss better.

Conclusions
Hard to imagine if proper measurements or comparative listening tests were performed in the design of the Kali Audio IN-8. Their marketing story is all about "imaging" and such. Well, if you don't produce the right timbre, it doesn't matter what else you do. I can't emphasize enough how "lo-fi" this speaker sounds in use. I have no idea who all these people online are that are praising it for studio use. I shutter to think of what kind of mix they produce with a speaker like this.

Now I am wondering how the lower end 2-way models perform.

As it stands, pretty soon I have to upgrade the status of the JBL 305P Mark ii to top of the class with the golfing pink panther! It is remarkable how much higher in fidelity it is playing at relative to these other monitors.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

You honestly want to read another lame joke to be motivate to donate??? I hope not. Just go here and give me some money and get it done: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Thanks for resorting the CEA2034 Horizontal Reflections and Vertical Reflection graphs to the review.
 

maxxevv

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
1,872
Likes
1,964
Just a thought though, is there an ideal / recommended listening distance / range for this particular speaker or most speakers?

Directivity does implore the issue of "sweet spots" and "hot spots" as far as ideal application goes.

It might go some way towards explaining some of the issues unearthed with the measurements done for this particular speaker.
 

napilopez

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
2,148
Likes
8,740
Location
NYC
Just a thought though, is there an ideal / recommended listening distance / range for this particular speaker or most speakers?

Directivity does implore the issue of "sweet spots" and "hot spots" as far as ideal application goes.

It might go some way towards explaining some of the issues unearthed with the measurements done for this particular speaker.

Well, since we're still interpreting these measurements based on educated guesses, it basically comes down to which curves you prioritize. In the nearfield, I pay more attention to the on-axis and listening window, whereas in the far field, I'll pay more attention to early reflections and don't pay attention to the on axis at all.
 

maxxevv

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
1,872
Likes
1,964
My question is how do we correlate the on-axis and reflections data to extrapolate into an idealised listening "zone". Where distortion is kept minimum and yet directivity is maintained to achieve good spatial reconstruction of a recording/audio source ?

The two charts show their axes relative to frequency but not distance from the speaker.

Or am I missing something obvious and important in this conversation ? :oops:
 

gvl

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
3,519
Likes
4,106
Location
SoCal
Good stuff, the wife argument notwithstanding.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,836
Likes
243,217
Location
Seattle Area
I suspect the panther cut off head bar is being set quite high here.
I predict many more headless panthers in the speaker review category if the bar is not lowered. (You're going to find many speakers that measure a lot 'worse' than these.) :)
Speakers are notoriously hard to measure 'consistently' across many testing schemes, environments, conditions.

I would suggest to not apply a panther rating on any speakers until a good database of speakers has been tested and the setup is fully characterized.

Dave.
To be clear, the panther rating system included listening tests. :) But really, the JBL 305P Mark ii shouldn't be a high bar but we will find out....
 

Rockfella

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 16, 2019
Messages
228
Likes
126
Location
Gurgaon, India.
What a surprise! Waiting for the LP6 review. So happy to find this forum. Thankx @amirm.
 

napilopez

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
2,148
Likes
8,740
Location
NYC
To be clear, the panther rating system included listening tests. :) But really, the JBL 305P Mark ii shouldn't be a high bar but we will find out....

You're saying you actually listen to the speakers too? Whodda thunk it!
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
637
Likes
1,596
Location
Philadelphia area
But really, the JBL 305P Mark ii shouldn't be a high bar but we will find out....

First of all, thank you again for these reviews and your investment in the Klippel.

Second, I think things are going to get interesting.

I don't think there are too many speakers in the world that will outperform the 305P on these objective measurements. However, I think we also know that while the 305P are certainly enjoyable in most peoples' subjective opinions, there are many many speakers that are more enjoyable.

So ASR will find ourselves having lots of interesting discussions about that sort of thing.

Probably as soon as you publish the first measurements of a speaker that most people would prefer to the 305P, despite having a worse DI.

The 305P were a perfect choice for a first set of measurements, btw. Cheap, relatively ubiquitous, and extremely well-behaved. Sort of a "model citizen" as far as measurements go.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,954
Likes
38,087
To be clear, the panther rating system included listening tests. :) But really, the JBL 305P Mark ii shouldn't be a high bar but we will find out....
I think you'll find some speakers that can compare around $2k and above. ;)
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,954
Likes
38,087
First of all, thank you again for these reviews and your investment in the Klippel.

Second, I think things are going to get interesting.

I don't think there are too many speakers in the world that will outperform the 305P on these objective measurements. However, I think we also know that while the 305P are certainly enjoyable in most peoples' subjective opinions, there are many many speakers that are more enjoyable.

So ASR will find ourselves having lots of interesting discussions about that sort of thing.

Probably as soon as you publish the first measurements of a speaker that most people would prefer to the 305P, despite having a worse DI.

The 305P were a perfect choice for a first set of measurements, btw. Cheap, relatively ubiquitous, and extremely well-behaved. Sort of a "model citizen" as far as measurements go.

Interesting discussions? Like if a $5k/pr speaker isn't too bad, but not really equal on sound alone to a $300/pr speaker, but the story, mystique, appearance etc. make it sound better to your sighted then is it really better? Is your musical enjoyment actually real? Even if it isn't and you like it better then it is as real as it can get?

Or maybe the important mods to an LSR305 is to put really fancy veneer on it, give it a different name, and invent a story so it can be enjoyed to the full extent the sound quality really deserves?
 

Rockfella

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 16, 2019
Messages
228
Likes
126
Location
Gurgaon, India.
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,836
Likes
243,217
Location
Seattle Area
So I am on Kali website and looking at LP-6 measurements, it has the same signature that I measured:

1579062961522.png


The drip around 8 to 10 kHz is what I measured. Their graph is very low resolution so doesn't show that in detail. Using CLF viewer, we see more detail:

1579063095014.png


Compare that to my measurements of IN-8:
index.php


The correlation is very good to their measurements. The only difference may be that the new mid-range driver is boosting that mid-range more.

All of this points to our measurements being accurate.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,836
Likes
243,217
Location
Seattle Area
@amirm : The MTM speakers are very rare and they have my attention now.. I hope you get your hands on them soon. Very few negative user reviews all over unless one goes kaput.

https://www.presonus.com/products/eris-e66

Thx again :)
Horizontal MTM with no mid-range driver? Hmmm. Likely will have a dip in mid-range frequencies. I can't find any measurements. Do they have any?
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,836
Likes
243,217
Location
Seattle Area
Haha I love "the person from Kali there" like it was just a random employee! It's Charles Sprinkle, instrumental in the JBL 3-series, 7-series, and M2 who was hired away by Kali. :)
BTW, the person from Kali is Nate, not Charles.
 
Top Bottom