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

[Slyman]

Note: Rating meant for far-field listening.

Preference Rating
SCORE: 5.3
SCORE w/ sub: 7.1

Frequency response: +/- 6.1dB 45Hz-20kHz

View attachment 137928
View attachment 137929
View attachment 137930
View attachment 137931
View attachment 137932View attachment 137933​

Anyone has any idea what the preference rating would be for this speaker for nearfield mixing/mastering?

I mean 5,2 is quite low compared to the praise the speaker get from Erin. This means the LP-6 (2nd wave too) and JBL 306/308 mk2 has better scores and therefore better?

 

[MZKM]

The main reason it’s not that high is the dips on axis in the treble. I doubt it’s be that audible, especially near-field.

And no, can’t do a different score as there simply is no similar research for near-field.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

The main reason it’s not that high is the dips on axis in the treble. I doubt it’s be that audible, especially near-field.

And no, can’t do a different score as there simply is no similar research for near-field.

FWIW, the overwhelming consensus is that the 2nd Wave IN models are considerably better than their counterparts in the LP series. Just don't toe them in too much in a near field application -- Kali says 10 degrees off-axis is enough, IIRC Erin recommended trying 20 degrees.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

Given the limiter's effect at higher output experienced by Erin I wonder how much of this is related to limiting low frequency response and how this might be affected if not running full range but crossing to a subwoofer at 80Hz, i.e. would the IN-8v2 be able to produce somewhat higher output before the limiter kicked in if relieved of lower bass extension?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Given the limiter's effect at higher output experienced by Erin I wonder how much of this is related to limiting low frequency response and how this might be affected if not running full range but crossing to a subwoofer at 80Hz, i.e. would the IN-8v2 be able to produce somewhat higher output before the limiter kicked in if relieved of lower bass extension?

I noticed in a U-Toob comment that Kali recommends 80Hz for a subwoofer low-pass setting -- but it's hard to imagine this working well when the IN-8 limiter isn't engaged, e.g. at low-to-medium levels when both the sub and the IN-8s are putting out the 50-80Hz segment of the spectrum. The high-pass function of their (wonderful, but massive) WS-12 sub would remedy that by eliminating that 30Hz worth of overlap.

FWIW, in my own near field setup, I low-pass my ancient Infinity sub @ 50Hz with a very steep slope -- the sub's built-in 24dB/octave filter plus an extra in-line first-order filter -- that extends the usable low end from the IN-8's nominal 50Hz down to just under 30Hz without the slightly "boomy" bump around 50Hz that was audible with the sub's filter alone.

 

[Slyman]

The main reason it’s not that high is the dips on axis in the treble. I doubt it’s be that audible, especially near-field.

And no, can’t do a different score as there simply is no similar research for near-field.

OK. Sorry i'm just a little confused. So even though the speaker got a 5,3 score for mid-field listening, its still a better speaker than the LP-6 2nd wave with 5.8 for example? A lower score doesn't mean its a worse speaker?

 

[Chromatischism]

Don't rely on the score.

 

[Newman]

He’s asking for an explanation, not a dictum.

 

[MZKM]

OK. Sorry i'm just a little confused. So even though the speaker got a 5,3 score for mid-field listening, its still a better speaker than the LP-6 2nd wave with 5.8 for example? A lower score doesn't mean its a worse speaker?

The rating is for far-field listening. So while it likely is a useful metric for studio monitors to get a ballpark figure for near-field preference, it could very well be that a speaker that scored a 6.0 sounds worse near-field than a speaker that scored a 5.0.

So for near-field, I’d consider anything within maybe +/-0.75 a tossup.

However, you can still look at the Spinorama and look for smooth and controlled graphs.

 

[Trif]

Nearfield, the first consideration is 'focus'. I just sent back a pair of JBL 705s and kept the Kali IN-8s. Four feet is too close for the JBL drivers to create a coherent image. And I could easily be convinced you simply should not listen to compression drivers at that range in any situation. As coaxial drivers, the Kalis have uncanny imaging at any distance, from anywhere.

Undeniably, the JBLs are better speakers. But for a small studio, monitoring and mixing, I'd go with the Kali IN-8 / Watts option. If I was building a home theatre, the 705s would be absolutely perfect rear speakers for the M1s. And definitely, the JBLs are what More Dynamics Please is looking for.

Speakers have many qualities, and while you can rank them, you really can't have one number reflect if it's the right tool for the job.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Undeniably, the JBLs are better speakers.

As they ought to be given the immense price differential.

 

[Pearljam5000]

How close are they to Genelec Ones?

 

[sweetchaos]

How close are they to Genelec Ones?

Let's compare:
Genelec 8341A is US$5900/pair (cheapest Ones model we have full spinorama).
Kali IN-8v2 is US$800/pair

Spoiler

Horizontal and vertical directivity? Genelec wins. Kali's come close though, since it's much better than most 2-way non-coaxial designs.
Bass extension? 35Hz at -6dB for Genelecs and 39Hz at -6dB for Kali's. Genelec wins, but not my much, since 4hz will not be noticeable. A tie.
Frequency response? Genelec wins, but Kali's are very close behind (ignoring 10khz-20khz region).
Price? Kali's are 86% cheaper. Big win.

Overall, if you want maximum value for your $, get Kali's. If perfection is your end-goal and you have $$, get Genelecs.

I think I've said it before...Kali IN-series crushes a lot of studio monitors below it's price point and certainly goes head-to-head with the big boys.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

Nearfield, the first consideration is 'focus'. I just sent back a pair of JBL 705s and kept the Kali IN-8s. Four feet is too close for the JBL drivers to create a coherent image. And I could easily be convinced you simply should not listen to compression drivers at that range in any situation. As coaxial drivers, the Kalis have uncanny imaging at any distance, from anywhere.

Undeniably, the JBLs are better speakers. But for a small studio, monitoring and mixing, I'd go with the Kali IN-8 / Watts option. If I was building a home theatre, the 705s would be absolutely perfect rear speakers for the M1s. And definitely, the JBLs are what More Dynamics Please is looking for.

Speakers have many qualities, and while you can rank them, you really can't have one number reflect if it's the right tool for the job.

If cost were no object I can think of a number of speakers I'd be looking for. At the IN-8v2's $400 price point the options are a little more limited. My specific question was whether or not crossing to a sub at 80Hz and reducing the IN-8v2's low bass duties would allow it to play a little louder before the limiter is triggered.

As a more general question that might apply to all active speakers with limiters, at higher SPL is reproduction of the low bass the primary trigger for the limiter and does reducing the low bass requirement from the speaker allow it to reproduce the remaining frequency range at higher SPL before the limiter kicks in? I would think this could be tested by measuring at increasingly higher SPL with and without an 80Hz high-pass filter.

 

[More Dynamics Please]

^ Since there was no response to my questions in the post immediately above I'm going to call on @KaliAudio_Official for an official response. Specifically as it pertains to the limiter on the second wave IN-8, does crossing to a sub at 80Hz and reducing the speaker's low bass output allow it to play a little louder before the limiter engages? Generally speaking little has been stated anywhere by Kali Audio or in any of the reviews of any of the Kali monitors how their performance is affected when applying an 80Hz crossover to combine with a sub.

 

[Tellus]

Lets start my first post with a perhaps silly question, would it be a stupid idea to run three IN8 v2's as RCL in home cinema application? The room is not a large one and the listening distance would be around 2-2,5m away with room dimension about 3,5x3m, I have been eyeing Elac debut reference DBR62's but since i have such short distance from speaker to listening position I have been pondering the idea of using near/midfield monitors instead and these Kali caught my eye, i do have an older upper midrange Onkyo receiver (TX-NR 809) with 7.1 pre amp out and i also have a rather large sub to accompany the Kali's. The receiver only has the older Audyssey DSX in terms of active eq.

I have been running sizeable floor standers from an old room but they do not sound great with the distance limitations so I am in need of something more adept at smaller rooms.

Am I daft for considering this or should i just go for it?

 

[Chromatischism]

Am I daft for considering this or should i just go for it

I think it's a great idea. I've been trying to figure out how to fit one as a center speaker in here.

The bonus is you'll never be tempted to buy amps for your front stage. The AVR can handle the rest.

On that, I would consider an AVR upgrade soon.

 

[Tellus]

I think it's a great idea. I've been trying to figure out how to fit one as a center speaker in here.

The bonus is you'll never be tempted to buy amps for your front stage. The AVR can handle the rest.

On that, I would consider an AVR upgrade soon.

Yeah i did actually already think of amp addition or just upgraded receiver/preamp and especially if I would go with the Elac Uni-Fi Reference UBR62, the cost there would run away a tad compared to dbr62 & the Kali IN8 v2 kind of makes sense in regard to not having to bother with extra amps. If I go with all active speakers I could technically just get a solid processor/preamp and not have to bother with power amp at all. It's hard to find a god pre amp option though with support for latest hdmi with VRR/ALL/HDR, hence my old one not being upgraded. I simply use an E-Arc adapter & use the receiver as sound only so newer HDMI standards are less of an issue then.

In regards to Kali IN8 v2 the only snag is what to do with surrounds, i mean i could perhaps do a Kali IN8 all round for perfect matching but for me the most important matching is RCL so surrounds could be a tad smaller, then again the IN8's aren't terribly expensive comparatively. Would anyone perhaps know of a solid matching (to the IN8 v2's) smaller Kali for use as surround?

 

[sweetchaos]

Would anyone perhaps know of a solid matching (to the IN8 v2's) smaller Kali for use as surround?

See my size comparison:

All 4 speakers compared in size:

Kali LP6v2 vs Kali LP8v2 vs Kali IN5 vs Kali IN8v2

comparesizes.com

Spoiler

View attachment 164022
View attachment 164023

IMO, IN-5 would be fine.

 

[Chromatischism]

I would choose the Kali over the ELAC due to power handling for HT, however the ELAC wins in dispersion width which may be more enveloping.

Surrounds that work for me are lower-profile (so no one runs into them) yet still powerful. I find the Polk LSiM 702 excellent. See if they can still be found.