• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily 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-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review

andymarks

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
19
Likes
5
Was just looking into phase aligning subs, but I found you probably also need to add delay to the closer speakers to compensate for the distance of the sound sources .88 ms per foot. as is pointed out in this thread https://gearspace.com/board/high-end/1276396-phase-align-2-subs-then-subs-main.html In the case of putting a sub under my desk most of the pressure first goes to my backwall to then reflect back, I could even pick up more when it then reflects off my front wall which is untreated at this spot and which adds more distance, maybe this is why my sub bass sounds less direct from my sub under the desk versus directly from my monitors.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
2,446
Since I started treating my room I am now totally convinced that looking for any speaker upgrade is pointless without some 30cm or more of absorption in some spots of your room and the more you can cover the better. Such depths especially on the sides next to your speakers will lower the mids and high reflections to where suddenly your speakers will start to sound much clearer. The smearing of delayed bass is to some extend inevitable in my small room, it is like that in most rooms I believe as you need 50cm plus 50cm airgap to take away those lows. As soon as you approach such amounts of absorption you are gonna be in an semi-anechoic chamber for your mid and high frequencies which is probably also not what you want.
Don't try to treat below 80 Hz with porous absorption. That is the domain of subwoofers and equalization.

6" is the thickest you should need for 100 Hz and up.
 

andymarks

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
19
Likes
5
Don't try to treat below 80 Hz with porous absorption. That is the domain of subwoofers and equalization.

6" is the thickest you should need for 100 Hz and up.
It clearly depends on a lot of factors as the porous absorber calculators show, but yeah in any case you are not taking off too much below 100hz.
My point was that you need to treat at least some of your room if you are looking to upgrade monitor speakers else you are not getting the upgrade you are paying for.
 

Phosphenetre

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
8
Likes
0
Anyone heard or compared the IN-8 and IN-5 side by side? In terms of low-end reach, they should be quite similar, as one can see from @hardisj's Klippel measurements. I'm more concerned with accuracy and linearity above the bass region, in the mids and highs.
 

cata02

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
45
Likes
17
It clearly depends on a lot of factors as the porous absorber calculators show, but yeah in any case you are not taking off too much below 100hz.
My point was that you need to treat at least some of your room if you are looking to upgrade monitor speakers else you are not getting the upgrade you are paying for.
That is exactly what I was thinking; that in a regular home living room, where I have the Genelecs, there might be little difference between them and the Kali, while I suspect that the Kali deliver a more punchy & complete sound.
 

nicolasG

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2021
Messages
13
Likes
5
En attendant, si quelqu'un avec ces haut-parleurs ont pu essayer d'étendre les basses, j'aimerais savoir comment les haut-parleurs fonctionnent dans cette situation.

Quelqu'un at-il entendu ou comparé les IN-8 et IN-5 côte à côte ? En termes de portée bas de gamme, ils devraient être assez similaires, comme le @montrent les mesures Klippel de @@hardisj . Je suis plus préoccupant par la précision et la linéarité au-dessus de la région des basses, dans les médiums et les aigus.


On the video the bass of the IN-5 seems more drier, I'm careful, it's not the same microphone and environement on both videos.
 

andymarks

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
19
Likes
5
Yeah I heard these videos before. Too little treatment in that room :) That jazz con cajon is totally washed out with mid to low reverberation. Still IN-8 and HS-8 sound so close you could pick either, the differences could probably be heard up close in a well treated room. The IN-5's don't go deep enough. Quite the opposite I think full frequency response for music is straight until 36hz or 38hz, most of these smaller monitors roll off way before 40hz. For techno at least you have to balance the bass properly and for that you need more than most smaller monitors produce.

I watched Erin's review again, I am kind of impressed what he says about the IN8's when he has compared the Kii 3 's and the Dutch&dutch (the speakers I would buy if price didn't matter). Somebody else somewhere wrote they come 80% or more close to the Genelec coaxials. That makes me think I could mess up the woofer like I do right now with the +16db on the Behringers and still get BETTER mids and highs :)
 

nicolasG

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2021
Messages
13
Likes
5
Yeah I heard these videos before. Too little treatment in that room :) That jazz con cajon is totally washed out with mid to low reverberation. Still IN-8 and HS-8 sound so close you could pick either, the differences could probably be heard up close in a well treated room. The IN-5's don't go deep enough. Quite the opposite I think full frequency response for music is straight until 36hz or 38hz, most of these smaller monitors roll off way before 40hz. For techno at least you have to balance the bass properly and for that you need more than most smaller monitors produce.

I watched Erin's review again, I am kind of impressed what he says about the IN8's when he has compared the Kii 3 's and the Dutch&dutch (the speakers I would buy if price didn't matter). Somebody else somewhere wrote they come 80% or more close to the Genelec coaxials. That makes me think I could mess up the woofer like I do right now with the +16db on the Behringers and still get BETTER mids and highs :)

on the video, yamaha are brighter in the hight frequency, this is from a faster response from twitter, I noticed when comparing the in-8s with my hs50m.
The IN-8 sub are audible up to 28hz (not linear) I tested with a sin osc. linearly by ear up to 36hz, where I have a modal resonance of my room...
 

andymarks

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
19
Likes
5
Yeah I heard these videos before. Too little treatment in that room :) That jazz con cajon is totally washed out with mid to low reverberation. Still IN-8 and HS-8 sound so close you could pick either, the differences could probably be heard up close in a well treated room. The IN-5's don't go deep enough. Quite the opposite I think full frequency response for music is straight until 36hz or 38hz, most of these smaller monitors roll off way before 40hz. For techno at least you have to balance the bass properly and for that you need more than most smaller monitors produce.

I watched Erin's review again, I am kind of impressed what he says about the IN8's when he has compared the Kii 3 's and the Dutch&dutch (the speakers I would buy if price didn't matter). Somebody else somewhere wrote they come 80% or more close to the Genelec coaxials. That makes me think I could mess up the woofer like I do right now with the +16db on the Behringers and still get BETTER mids and highs :)
Fun fact I also boost my Beyer DT 770 80ohms with 15db on 30hz... speakers and headphones now sound similar in bass @cata02 you could also try some Equalizer APO with Peace to lift the subs on your Genelecs
 

cata02

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
45
Likes
17
Fun fact I also boost my Beyer DT 770 80ohms with 15db on 30hz... speakers and headphones now sound similar in bass @cata02 you could also try some Equalizer APO with Peace to lift the subs on your Genelecs
don't have a dsp :(
running them from an android tv though a d30 pro.
 

Phosphenetre

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
8
Likes
0

On the video the bass of the IN-5 seems more drier, I'm careful, it's not the same microphone and environement on both videos.
Yeah I heard these videos before. Too little treatment in that room :) That jazz con cajon is totally washed out with mid to low reverberation. Still IN-8 and HS-8 sound so close you could pick either, the differences could probably be heard up close in a well treated room. The IN-5's don't go deep enough. Quite the opposite I think full frequency response for music is straight until 36hz or 38hz, most of these smaller monitors roll off way before 40hz. For techno at least you have to balance the bass properly and for that you need more than most smaller monitors produce.

I watched Erin's review again, I am kind of impressed what he says about the IN8's when he has compared the Kii 3 's and the Dutch&dutch (the speakers I would buy if price didn't matter). Somebody else somewhere wrote they come 80% or more close to the Genelec coaxials. That makes me think I could mess up the woofer like I do right now with the +16db on the Behringers and still get BETTER mids and highs :)

Yeah, I'm not sure I like that guy's methodology. As pointed by others in the comments, the mic is not aimed at the same point (eg. tweeter height) for both speakers, which makes a comparison like this quite unreliable.

Going over the pro reviews (I'm not sure how seriously I can take the YouTube influencer reviews, they might not be very transparent and may hold back for the sake of brand relationships) as well as measurements like the ones by Amir and Erin, I've come away mainly concerned with the 8 - 10 kHz on-axis dip, which I know is supposed to even out a bit in the room, but I need to feel more confident about them being linear enough in the highs, before I put down that (for me) considerable investment, as a semi-pro mix engineer.

I'm going to watch Erin/@hardisj's review again to boost my confidence in the IN-8. I may have missed this in his review, did he compare the IN-8 to the Kii 3/Dutch & Dutch? Or am I misunderstanding what you meant?
 

ernestcarl

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
2,045
Likes
1,425
Location
Canada
I need to feel more confident about them being linear enough in the highs, before I put down that (for me) considerable investment, as a semi-pro mix engineer.

The lab-grade anechoic data is already available here to review and download for free. I’m not certain how it costs to get a speaker like this measured professionally, but let’s assume maybe north of $1,000. So I’m not sure what else is missing to consider, other than personal aesthetics and an actual audition of the speakers at your own studio.

To figure out how much of a toe-in is required in your space to get the most linear HF response while working, why not measure the speakers at your actual MLP.
 

Pearljam5000

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
2,194
Likes
2,325
Yeah I heard these videos before. Too little treatment in that room :) That jazz con cajon is totally washed out with mid to low reverberation. Still IN-8 and HS-8 sound so close you could pick either, the differences could probably be heard up close in a well treated room. The IN-5's don't go deep enough. Quite the opposite I think full frequency response for music is straight until 36hz or 38hz, most of these smaller monitors roll off way before 40hz. For techno at least you have to balance the bass properly and for that you need more than most smaller monitors produce.

I watched Erin's review again, I am kind of impressed what he says about the IN8's when he has compared the Kii 3 's and the Dutch&dutch (the speakers I would buy if price didn't matter). Somebody else somewhere wrote they come 80% or more close to the Genelec coaxials. That makes me think I could mess up the woofer like I do right now with the +16db on the Behringers and still get BETTER mids and highs :)
I doubt they sound anywhere close to Genelec Ones and 8C
 

ernestcarl

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
2,045
Likes
1,425
Location
Canada
I doubt they sound anywhere close to Genelec Ones and 8C

Possible, but have you ever heard of the aphorism “perfect is the enemy of the good”? One is better served getting the best speakers one can attain and work with now in their current space than pining on forevermore without resolve. I mean, it’s not as if one could do % much better work if they only had Genelec speakers available to them. That, I highly doubt.
 

Phosphenetre

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
8
Likes
0
The lab-grade anechoic data is already available here to review and download for free. I’m not certain how it costs to get a speaker like this measured professionally, but let’s assume maybe north of $1,000. So I’m not sure what else is missing to consider, other than personal aesthetics and an actual audition of the speakers at your own studio.

To figure out how much of a toe-in is required in your space to get the most linear HF response while working, why not measure the speakers at your actual MLP.

You're right, the lab-grade data is there, between Erin and Amir's Klippel measurements. I think part of my lack of confidence here is my newness to interpreting and extrapolating from loudspeaker frequency response measurements (unlike IEM and headphone measurements, which I'm a veteran of) and gleaning effective frequency response from it.

Just to be clear, in the case of the IN-8s (and in general), I should mainly be concerned with the 'listening window' measurement, when it comes to perceived frequency response in a typical nearfield studio monitor listening position? Or have I got this wrong?
 

audio2920

Active Member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
164
Likes
220
I should mainly be concerned with the 'listening window' measurement, when it comes to perceived frequency response in a typical nearfield studio monitor listening position?
I think that's the idea. However, in the rooms I've used IN8s in (varying from "no deliberate treatment" to "very well treated" and 1m to 4m listening distance) my over-riding *perception* is that the Horizontal Frequency Response is the graph I hear.

But, I think that's because I get used to the sound immediately (becuase they just sound "right" to me) and then what I hear are just the relative FR changes as I move on/off axis, not absolute values.

I doubt they sound anywhere close to Genelec Ones and 8C

I doubt it too, depending on the definition of close. I've heard the Ones & IN8s, but not the 8C. If 8361s are in budget, then sure, knock yourself out. They are better. But I'd add that by (a) the law of diminishing returns and (b) incredible "value optimisation" on Kali's part, the gap between these budget monitors and a higher end studio monitor has been reduced compared to similar price points 10 years ago.
 

ernestcarl

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
2,045
Likes
1,425
Location
Canada
I should mainly be concerned with the 'listening window' measurement, when it comes to perceived frequency response in a typical nearfield studio monitor listening position? Or have I got this wrong?

The listening window is the average of several on- and off-axis curves which is useful to see for creating a universal generalized speaker EQ. However, this has to be also directly compared to the actual angle(s) you are going to be mostly positioned in for your actual reference.

I don't have the IN-8s, but the for the Sceptre S8 which I have here, force-equalizing any of my "rough" LW averages to an "ultra-flat" reference curve is a tad bit problematic as it actually makes some of the other off-axis curves worse, esp. beyond 40 degrees or so... perhaps not so problematic if one is absorbing all that with acoustic panels. Completely linearizing the on-axis or any of the off-axis curves is also not ideal as it would compromise some of of the other off-axis curves. I've learned that one simply cannot "normalize" all other curves completely according to a single-curve derived formula which is part of the reason why speaker EQ above 1kHz can be awfully tricky.

As mentioned by others, and very early on in the thread, there is very little to no speaker correction EQ (not talking room correction) needed for the IN-8 v2 other than maybe changing the toe-in so that you are slightly off-axis in your MLP thus getting the most linear very HF response.
 
Last edited:

pisikak

New Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2022
Messages
2
Likes
1
The listening window is the average of several on- and off-axis curves which is useful to see for creating a universal generalized speaker EQ. However, this has to be also directly compared to the actual angle(s) you are going to be mostly positioned in for your actual reference.

I don't have the IN-8s, but the for the Sceptre S8 which I have here, force-equalizing any of my "rough" LW averages to an "ultra-flat" reference curve is a tad bit problematic as it actually makes some of the other off-axis curves worse, esp. beyond 40 degrees or so... perhaps not so problematic if one is absorbing all that with acoustic panels. Completely linearizing the on-axis or any of the off-axis curves is also not ideal as it would compromise some of of the other off-axis curves. I've learned that one simply cannot "normalize" all other curves completely according to a single-curve derived formula which is part of the reason why speaker EQ above 1kHz can be awfully tricky.

As mentioned by others, and very early on in the thread, there is very little to no speaker correction EQ (not talking room correction) needed for the IN-8 v2 other than maybe changing the toe-in so that you are slightly off-axis in your MLP thus getting the most linear very HF response.
So in this case are the IN-8s better choice than the IN-5s because of flatter off-axis response? 10k dip almost disappears on the off-axis curves, while the IN-5s are only getting worse in this range. Can´t decide between those two, but what are you saying makes more sense to get the IN-8 monitors. On the other side Erin reported about noticeable resonance in the lows, which the IN-5 monitors don´t have.
 

audio2920

Active Member
Joined
May 21, 2021
Messages
164
Likes
220
10k dip almost disappears on the off-axis curves, while the IN-5s are only getting worse in this range
Huh.. yeah that's strange given the explanation for this dip is diffraction from the MF unit. Maybe the larger cabinet helps somehow...? No idea. But yes, based on the data, it does look like the IN8 does better in that regard.

I can't say I noticed, but like I say, I've only ever used the in5 as a surround on-axis, so I probably wasn't being so critical.

For sure though, on the IN8 it's a non-issue if your setup allows a bit of a twist to off axis.
 

jmillar

Active Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
103
Likes
58
Thanks for the review, this might be what finally pushes me purchase them. I've been eyeing them and the UBR62 for a while now - if only to test what coaxial speakers would sound like in my room and well, of the two this looks more attractive performance wise.

It's unfortunate that that they can't play louder, but perhaps when crossed to a sub the limited tweeter output isn't much of an issue in practice?
Also considering Kali for the listening room. But UBR give you broader horizontal dispersion, don't they?
 
Top Bottom