Kali Audio IN-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review

[tw 2022]

Hey, if you have better neutral speakers for the price, do tell~ I'm looking for new monitoring speakers. At least in the studio monitor space, I've had a hard time finding anything that beats the distortion measurements on these kalis. So if you've got a neutral 3-way contender that doesn't require me to spend extra on an amplifier, do tell. (I was considering a kef speaker but again, needs amplification and still needed EQ. Kali's were a better value proposition. )

Also... they measure at <= 0.5% THD over 400hz at 86db @ 1 meter... That's really not bad. (I don't mean to evangelize these things, I'm genuinely just trying to find the best I can for 1k USD or less. )

have you looked at philharmonic true mini's then add a wiim (or other) small class d amp?... I'd bet you might like them as much down to about 55 hz , the ceramic mini and the pio aa's *both* designed by Dennis Murphy have very low distortion in the mids and treble.. the true mini hasn't been on a Klippel afaik but I'd bet the same rings true with them, I know the b1 mods are very low distortion , even before the mod , but i'd bet they measure better now ....

 

[Ultrasonic]

Hey, if you have better neutral speakers for the price, do tell~ I'm looking for new monitoring speakers. At least in the studio monitor space, I've had a hard time finding anything that beats the distortion measurements on these kalis. So if you've got a neutral 3-way contender that doesn't require me to spend extra on an amplifier, do tell. (I was considering a kef speaker but again, needs amplification and still needed EQ. Kali's were a better value proposition. )

Also... they measure at <= 0.5% THD over 400hz at 86db @ 1 meter... That's really not bad. (I don't mean to evangelize these things, I'm genuinely just trying to find the best I can for 1k USD or less. )

Genelec and Neuman models both have lower distortion but cost more too. I suspect the same is probably true for Adam/Hedd models but I've not looked into these in ages.

Note I did say the Kali's are good for what they cost but some of the discussion above seemed to be straying into suggesting that paying more didn't get improvements, which is not the case.

 

[tw 2022]

Genelec and Neuman models both have lower distortion but cost more too. I suspect the same it probably true for Adam/Hedd models but I've not looked into these in ages.

Note I did say the Kali's are good for what they cost but some of the discussion above seemed to be straying into suggesting that paying more didn't get improvements, which is not the case.

this echos my thought...

 

[TheDichotomist]

Genelec and Neuman models both have lower distortion but cost more too. I suspect the same it probably true for Adam/Hedd models but I've not looked into these in ages.

Note I did say the Kali's are good for what they cost but some of the discussion above seemed to be straying into suggesting that paying more didn't get improvements, which is not the case.

It's also not what anybody, including myself, said. Just diminishing returns for practical applications, in this case, a relatively modest bedroom studio. If I did paint a picture suggesting I didn't think you could do better even at greater cost, My intention was (likely) only to clarify what it is people mean when they say x,y,z is better. Specifically the audiophile terms like transient response and resolution. I'm always uncertain of what people mean by those, because there isn't a clear consensus on what those mean. (so I'm left to point to directivity plots, in room response, frequency response, and THD; applying my layman's psychoacoustics knowledge to guess what's masking details and making transients feel "slow" )

 

[TheDichotomist]

have you looked at philharmonic true mini's then add a wiim (or other) small class d amp?... I'd bet you might like them as much down to about 55 hz , the ceramic mini and the pio aa's *both* designed by Dennis Murphy have very low distortion in the mids and treble.. the true mini hasn't been on a Klippel afaik but I'd bet the same rings true with them, I know the b1 mods are very low distortion , even before the mod , but i'd bet they measure better now ....

.... Caveman want big driver. Speaker is small. Cave man want big :O ... Only slightly kidding. I do actually care about SPL and dynamic range a bit, because one of my passions in audio is dynamics control -- compressors, limiters, nonlinear distortion of all kinds... So I want speakers that are neutral, and can show me distortion/compression character under a magnifying glass. This is something I've heard a few mix engineers praise the Kali's in particular for; being very good at revealing even subtle distortion/coloration. Since that's the kind of thing I work with for fun (and a synthesizer which is itself pretty darn nonlinear by design ) I really just want the speakers to do that in a way I can feel in me chest should I want to.

But I will still consider these. Like I said, if I find speakers that are 3-way (coaxial preferably) and measure just SUBSTANTIALLY better, I'll go for em. But I'm already topping out my comfort spending a grand on speakers.

 

[tw 2022]

But I will still consider these. Like I said, if I find speakers that are 3-way (coaxial preferably) and measure just SUBSTANTIALLY better, I'll go for em. But I'm already topping out my comfort spending a grand on speakers.

maybe look into ascend cmt340 v2's.. that and an amp for under $1000 (ish), they'll get loud and be plenty neutral...just a thought... they are 2 way though...

 

[Pearljam5000]

Wow never realized there was such a big price difference
How close is the IN-8v2 to SM-8?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Wow never realized there was such a big price difference
How close is the IN-8v2 to SM-8?

If what appears to be the consensus on IN-5 vs. SM-5 is any indication, it seems that the biggest difference is the slick and powerful DSP/EQ capability of the SM models, with any overall SQ improvement (aside from listening room adaptability) being there, but pretty subtle in the context of the huge bump in price. IMO the IN series remains, to use Kali's own phrase, by far the "value optimization" (AKA "bang for the buck") champion between the two -- YMMV.

 

[TheDichotomist]

Yeah, the SM series...In this age of measurements, its a bit too easy to look at it and go "marginal improvement" ... Supposedly this speaker is a great deal cleaner (Less THD) and mitigates the on axis problem with the coaxial design)... I forget if Erin said it improves directivity substantially -- it looks like a flatter line if memory serves me... At that point, its trying to compete with genelecs and neumanns, and I'm not convinced it actually does that. Not yet. But I've never heard it. I'd have to hear it in a blind test to know for sure.

 

[Tito]

35min lecture from the mix/mastering engineer about superiority of sm8 vs studio monitor from lower budget tier. and of course why sometimes worse is better in certain context.

 

[TheDichotomist]

Ack! :U I did watch this video a few times, and it's great... But in it he also mentions things like transient response, which... Gah! :O ... Looking at Erin's comparison between the Sm-5 and In-5 (well, comparing his reviews and data, that is) the big improvement in this monitor to me, is directivity/listening window, and mitigating the response error in the top end. Bringing these a decent bit closer to the performance of the "big boys" in studio monitor space. Dynamic range and distortion are, IMO, super similar, given the IN-8 is already well below problematic levels of distortion compared to other studio monitors (It holds its own with the other brands, considering the price difference. ) ... So, those improvements in directivity and listening window linearity MAY be more important than basic on axis response linearity and dynamic range/distortion specs, based on comments from others.... Those two things alone (I would guess) contribute more to transient masking effects **in room** than "transducer speed" or its "driver settling time" (impulse response?) or anything else that's literally on the order of < 10 milliseconds -- individual waveform oscillations that would register as a slightly colored click to us. (probably very subtle, as it would be masked by the impulse/signal that initiated the driver movement)

This would back up Justin's (lad in the video) assertion that he would rather use cheaper speakers in a well treated room, than expensive speakers in an untreated/poorly treated room. And some of Erin's more recent assertions that a speaker's in room performance is arguably going to have a larger impact on sound than just looking at its on axis near field response.... This is all me speculating and learning as I go. Like, am I making sense? does that sound plausible to anyone else? am I crackers? (the more I have to ask that, the more certain I am the answer is "yes, and that doesn't really matter" )

 

[TheDichotomist]

By the way... transient response isn't necessarily a linear problem... It would seem to me that you could actually get more out of your system in terms of transients by A: monitoring closer, and B: monitoring softer... This is already what I do on my inexpensive bookshelf speakers to feel the difference between compressor attack/release settings. Still takes listening work, but... something else to consider.

 

[Tito]

very interesting vid from Paul. he explains why he preffers kali in unf more than in 8 , even tho erin and joe n tell did not really found it to be hmm.. functional.

But Erin did say there are certain cases or instances in which they probaly work great .. and Paul certainly looks to be the case.

Edifiers apperently have more details and faster, they seem to be best spekers under 1000 euos (both) according to him.. i mean studio monitors.

ps sometimes lack of accuracy, microdetails, mushiness.. smudginess brings more gusto while listening. and it makes one look at the big picture.

you can look few days ago vid from andrew chapman on working with adam a7v why sometimes ricness of microdetails can be an obstacle.

i presume he prefers kali in 8 more to work with than adam a7v to work with. he did say he preffers kali lp6v2 than adam t7v for micx trasnlation.

PPS sometimes i think it is a matter of ego, you want perfection, details... but i like like mushiness and character and chromatic abberations, distortions, of my soviet helios 44 m2 lense on my camera more
than modern clinical lenses. frankly it is sometimes hideous to see all those details haha.

maybe this is why some people come back to their jbl 306 mk2 even though they have far better speakers.

jbl is like grandmas sunday meal and xxx is 5 star michhelinrestaurant meal.

WHAT KIND OF A PERSON LIKES A 5 STAR MICHELIN FOOD more than his grandmas cookin!!!!

 

[TheDichotomist]

WHAT KIND OF A PERSON LIKES A 5 STAR MICHELIN FOOD more than his grandmas cookin!!!!

Wise man... Not sure how it translates to audio, but in general, yes. There's a deep felt connection to that grandma made sunday meal... Even if it came from a can and all she did was add butter and cream.

 

[TheDichotomist]

I will say, I'm skeptical of Paul's edifier commentary... It's been pointed out before, on this very forum, that edifier speakers don't really measure all that well. They're colored by design. They're also prone to distortion at higher SPL, which may not be a problem for most people, but in a studio setting where you actually need dynamics, I struggle to imagine these will deliver significantly better performance than the already measured S2000... Which also has much poorer directivity than the kali's he doesn't seem to like all that much. . . I will say, this doesn't surprise me. Some of the engineers I know personally are big fans of speakers like ATC which... are also pretty colored on the whole. (although IIRC, don't have the distortion problems edifier monitors would have) ... I am curious about them though. I've been making due with edifier bookshelf speakers in a home setup for a long time. But that's only been in the context of developing DSP patches that sound good, relative to other expensive processors. Not mixing and mastering. It's one thing to use them to verify that your equipment is doing what it says it is, and another thing to use them as a neutral reference.

But here again, Paul brings up transient response! and I'm tempted to buy a pair of these JUST to suss out if that's something I give a damn about. I suspect it's just going to be code for "these things are bright in a somehow non irritating way. " ... Heck, maybe i'll have them shipped to Erin's for measurements and we can just return them to amazon if they measure poorly.

 

[audio2920]

I'm not sure I'm buying that SonicScoop explanation of transient response. Sounds like he's describing frequency response to me. I dunno. He does make some good points though elsewhere.

I think IN8s in some ways sound better than my JBL 708s did. Which were, in themselves not bad sounding speakers IMHO. So I'm relatively confident the SM range will suit my taste and they're cheaper than I thought they'd be. Very glad they've done an active version. But I wanna give it a coupla years, if I can, to see if the vibe is the reliability is OK.

 

[Tito]

seemed reasonable what he explained. he could have explained better tho.

ps

transient response

is not that hard to understand
"The response in time of a control system is usually divided into two parts: the transient response and the steady-state response. Let y (t) be the response of a system in continuous time, then:

where yt (t) is the transient response, while yss (t) is the steady state response.

The transient response of a control system is important since both its amplitude and its duration must be kept within tolerable or prescribed limits. It is defined as the part of the response in time that tends to zero when the time becomes very large. Thus,

All real stable control systems present a transient phenomenon before reaching the steady state response


....

In specifying the transient-response characteristics of a control system to a unit-step input, it is common to specify the following parameters associated with the underdamped response:

1. Delay time, Td
2. Rise time, Tr
3. Peak time, Tp
4. Percent overshoot (%OS) or Maximum overshoot (Mp)
5. Settling time, Ts

These specifications are defined as follows:

Delay time (Td): it is the time required for the response to reach half the final value the very first time.

Rise time (Tr): it is the time required for the response to rise from 10% to 90%. In other words, to go from 0.1 of the final value to 0.9 of the final value.

Peak time (Tp): it is the time required for the response to reach the first peak of the overshoot.

Maximum overshoot (Mp): it is the maximum peak value of the response curve measured from unity. It is also the amount that the waveform overshoots the final value, expressed as a percentage of the steady-state value.

Settling time (Ts): it is the time required for the transient damping oscillations to reach and stay within ±2% or ±5% of the final or steady-state value.
"







And here is my AI bro to explain why is it imporant:

--

Great transient response in studio monitors is crucial for mixing because it accurately reproduces the sudden, sharp attacks of sounds (like drum hits, guitar picks), revealing their true character, impact, and dynamics, which helps mixers make precise EQ, compression, and timing decisions for a mix that sounds clear, punchy, and professional on any system, preventing muddiness or loss of detail.

Why it matters for mixing:

• Accuracy in dynamics: It shows you if a snare hit is sharp or dull, or if a bass note has a tight, fast attack or a muddy, lingering tail.
• Reveals instrument character: The very first moments (the transient) define an instrument's timbre (e.g., a flute vs. a guitar), letting you hear its true voice.
• Effective processing: You can accurately set attack/release times on compressors and EQ to shape sounds without making them sound smeared or lifeless.
• Mix clarity & punch: Handles the "start and stop on a dime" nature of sounds, making rhythmic elements more dramatic, expressive, and giving the mix energy and perceived width.
• Identifies problems: Reveals if your mix sounds bloated or lacks definition on your monitors, indicating issues that need fixing before they translate poorly.

What happens with poor transient response:

• Muffled/Bloated Sound: Fast sounds get smeared, losing their initial impact, making the mix sound unclear and sluggish.
• Loss of Detail: You miss crucial information about performance and articulation, leading to less impactful mixing decisions.
• Inaccurate Processing: You might over-compress or EQ incorrectly because the monitors aren't accurately showing you the sound's true, quick changes.

In short, monitors with great transient response act like a high-speed camera for sound, letting mixers see and shape the essential details that make music feel alive and powerful.

 

[TheDichotomist]

^^ I commend you on your quoting control system's literature instead of resorting to metaphysical used car salesmen "trust me bro, this one's the supercar and that one's the VW hippie van in a wind tunnle" (no offense intended to Justin -- I totally understand what he meant by transient response, and what he says makes intuitive sense... The understanding of transients in control systems is how I typically assume speaker manufacturers (well, at least their engineering department) are using the term... Considering this is a transducer, a classic example of a control system output. (unless I'm full of it -- now'd be a good time to state I'm just a dude that read a book once and thought it was neato~ ) ) )

This isn't a closed loop system though. It's quite literally a damped mass with almost no feedback to the driving amplifier... So, a damped mass; aka, a lowpass filter. So in this case, the impulse response can essentially only mimic (as far as I am aware) a lowpass filtered spike, passing through a damped reverberator (or a guitar amp sim cabinet IR) ... That would be the ideal and strictly linear approximation. Transducers are NOT linear devices, and their behavior is, at least theoretically, quite complex. (Of this, I know nothing! :O ) But in the case of a speaker being within it's comfortable operating range (I'll say < 1% THD) this linear model should be fine... Erin's compression test actually demonstrates this level and frequency dependent behavior, how a driver can subtly compress or saturate a signal when the material itself is nearing its limit, but only when the signal is approaching the nonlinear part of the transducer's operating range. And a multitone distortion test should tell you any instantaneous bandwidth narrowing artifacts coming from each driver. In fact, it might be an enlightening exercise to try your own two tone test, to see how your speakers are distorting frequencies (if at all) that are shared between a single driver. Best if you can do this with a measurement mic and an audio workstation. (But I'm a nerd, I had fun messing with this, square waves, noise bursts, etc and just looking at the digital output and the measured response from my modest bookshelf speakers.... )

There was a Kali engineer in, if not this thread, a different thread. He seemed like a nice chap. Perhaps someone who knows of them could summon them for a crash course on when a damped mass is a sufficient approximation for a speaker transducer, and when delving into the complex hysteresis and material dependent nonlinearities come into play.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

There was a Kali engineer in, if not this thread, a different thread. He seemed like a nice chap.

That would be their "Director of Acoustics", Charles Sprinkle -- a very cordial and informative guy.

 

[Joeyd33]

I should have just listened to you guys a while back instead of cheaping out..

got the Fosi ZD3..no more sounds... just the tiniest bit of that white noise..non-bothersome unless your right on top of the speaker. Same with the JBL,it cut down the amp sound by a MASSIVE AMOUNT.