Kali Audio SM-5 (C) monitor

[Sacha]

These are clearly intended for full-time recording pros -- or seriously dedicated amateurs -- rather than for folks' home listening spaces, where visual aesthetics are often a major consideration.

I'm a recording pro, I don't like staring at ugly things all day either. Utilitarian is fine, I don't need fancy wood finishes etc., but this is something different. Heck I had the ****-like Genelecs for a long time but at least they looked cool and futuristic (to me).

 

[dfuller]

What's behind the conclusion that it uses a single-channel amp? That seems like a very odd design decision for a relatively upscale three-way monitor given that the much less expensive -- and very popular -- IN-x models have separate amps for each driver.

Well, first off - they called it powered, not active. They absolutely know the difference. Second, they mention that it has "a 225w class d amplifier" rather than what it would be per-driver.

 

[ooheadsoo]

It does seem like they are powered vs. active, which is unfortunate from a marketing perspective. Perhaps they felt it made the DSP too cumbersome to deal with, and that it wasn't worth it for the minimal gains. At the end of the day though, I don't if it would be a make or break factor for most. The measurements and listening should dominate.

Are there other active coincident high spl monitors in this price range?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

I'm a recording pro, I don't like staring at ugly things all day either. Utilitarian is fine, I don't need fancy wood finishes etc., but this is something different. Heck I had the ****-like Genelecs for a long time but at least they looked cool and futuristic (to me).

They've apparently decided that yours is a minority perspective. Having done a little session work circa 50 years ago in a major label's own studio, I can testify the control room aesthetics were not a priority at all -- it was all about utility, not looks. Haven't frequented those sort of places for a long time, so maybe the pro consensus about that has changed...

 

[songOVERsound]

Maybe their bigger SM speakers will be true active

 

[abrxxx]

Maybe their bigger SM speakers will be true active

Nate did mention both other sizes and other models, implying size difference won't be the only difference perhaps?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Interesting that the passive SM-5C can be wired with either "bi-amplified" or "single wire" amp connections, with the former recommended due to a minor low-end (from 700 Hz on down) distortion penalty incurred by the latter -- yet the SM-5 seemingly uses the equivalent of the "single wire" option. Hmm....

 

[dfuller]

Apparently they are triamped, but they don't specify how that power is broken out between drivers. Which is frustrating.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Apparently they are triamped, but they don't specify how that power is broken out between drivers. Which is frustrating.

That makes sense -- can't imagine why those specifics were left off the product page, leaving folks with the "Apparently" mistaken impression that there's only one channel of amplification.

Addendum: It's not in the manual either.

 

[abrxxx]

That makes sense -- can't imagine why those specifics were left off the product page, leaving folks with the "Apparently" mistaken impression that there's only one channel of amplification.

Addendum: It's not in the manual either.

I was super excited about the speakers having their own PEQ until I realized this isn't going to work with subs! I am hoping @KaliAudio_Official have a plan for a setup including subs. Will they be releasing a new sub to pair with these that also has EQ? Or am I missing something here.

 

[jean-benoit]

I was super excited about the speakers having their own PEQ until I realized this isn't going to work with subs! I am hoping @KaliAudio_Official have a plan for a setup including subs. Will they be releasing a new sub to pair with these that also has EQ? Or am I missing something here.

i read or heard from a kali video, that there is maybe going to be a "high-end" sub aswell, but they didnt confirm anything.
so i guess at the moment not, which is indeed a bit of a miss, also because they have some really good subs in their current line-up.

 

[jean-benoit]

here is a review with some measurements and diagrams:

sound on sound

 

[Grotti]

Price seems to be 1699 Dollars at Kali Audio and 2099 Euro a piece at Thomann:

Kali Audio SM-5

Kali Audio SM-5; aktiver 3-Wege-Studiomonitor; 5-Zoll-Tieftöner, 4-Zoll-Mitteltöner und 1-Zoll-Metallkalotten-Hochtöner; 117 dB Max SPL; Frequenzbereich: 47 Hz - 21kHz (+/-3 dB); Verstärker: 150W, Klasse D; Frequenzweiche LF-zu-Mitteltöner: 280 Hz;...

www.thomann.de

At this price it's a pass for me....

 

[holdingpants01]

It's much easier for companies to start with high end products and then introduce cheaper ones than the other way around. Who is the target for 4200€ set of Kali speakers with 5" woofer is hard to tell. As for the brand recognition in the pro audio world people will prefer Barefoot Footprint 01/02/03 starting at half the cost. In terms of performance and brand name you can get Genelec 8350 with GLM kit and you'll still have some change left for speaker stands. Then there are Neumanns KH310 or KH150+KH750, all cheaper than Kali. The only way it makes any sense is them trying to compete with Genelec 8331, hence the price and features, but I just don't see that on a few levels

 

[Bruce Morgen]

This seems to be a very good monitor, but the fact that it costs over four times as much as the IN-8v2 -- their previous top of the line model -- is a pretty clear indication of where the point of diminishing returns is located when it comes to powered/active monitors. In terms of the traditional criterion of "bang for the buck," it's basically somewhat more performance "bang" for a fuktonne of "buck(s)." IMO, the IN-x models pretty much hit the "value optimization" sweet spot, and those of us with deeper pockets have plenty of other options.

 

[dfuller]

This seems to be a very good monitor, but the fact that it costs over four times as much as the IN-8v2 -- their previous top of the line model -- is a pretty clear indication of where the point of diminishing returns is located when it comes to powered/active monitors. In terms of the traditional criterion of "bang for the buck," it's basically somewhat more performance "bang" for a fuktonne of "buck(s)." IMO, the IN-x models pretty much hit the "value optimization" sweet spot, and those of us with deeper pockets have plenty of other options.

This isn't competing with the IN series at all. That said, an F3 of 47hz at $3500 a pair is pretty mediocre for a 3-way. I'm not sure why they went with a 5" woofer here...

 

[kharan]

This isn't competing with the IN series at all. That said, an F3 of 47hz at $3500 a pair is pretty mediocre for a 3-way. I'm not sure why they went with a 5" woofer here...

So that they can charge more when they release the 6 and 8 inches versions.

TBH, 2000 usd is a reasonable amount to change for the passives, I just don't know how they thought the actives should cost almost twice as much.

 

[dfuller]

So that they can charge more when they release the 6 and 8 inches versions.

TBH, 2000 usd is a reasonable amount to change for the passives, I just don't know how they thought the actives should cost almost twice as much.

Well, it's 225w of amp per speaker, plus DSP built in. Remember that the passives they recommended LEA amps with DSP built in, which are very much not cheap.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

This isn't competing with the IN series at all. That said, an F3 of 47hz at $3500 a pair is pretty mediocre for a 3-way. I'm not sure why they went with a 5" woofer here...

I don't think they really have two-speaker installations in mind for this model. As Kharan pointed out, they probably have models with bigger woofers in the pipeline for folks who want lower F3 without resorting to a sub. IIRC, the first "2nd Wave" IN model to come out was the IN-5, followed by the IN-8v2, so there may well be a marketing/development pattern here.

 

[kharan]

Well, it's 225w of amp per speaker, plus DSP built in. Remember that the passives they recommended LEA amps with DSP built in, which are very much not cheap.

I would counter that the cost of amplification, especially if you are dealing with multiple low-medium power amps rather than a single high power amp are very contained today. So is the cost of a chip capable of the DSP needed to run the SM5.

And the kicker is that the R&D for the DSP's setting was already done for the passive version.