• 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 SM-5 (C) monitor

We got one pair in and now they are back ordered. I really liked them and wanted to get more time with them as well as do some comparison with Genelec/Neumann. My initial impression was these are going to compete with the Ones from Genelec. The Ones are my favorite speakers to work with, so that says a lot.

I'd add that they seem to play louder than the 8331 so I'll be curious to see what the measurements show, as the active versions would likely have been my choice for my 5.1 system had they existed prior to me building it out with Genelec coaxial monitors.

Vs an 8341, the Kali SM5 seems like it would beat it SPL and price, and I didn't notice any audible issues with the SM5.

Someone else mentioned a center channel: the beauty of coaxial monitors like these are that they are all center channel speakers, and Atmos speakers, and surround speakers, and decent if you have to tilt them from the ceiling, and not terrible with reflections in any direction like any other speaker that isn't coaxial.

Ever since 2010 and the 8260 there has been no inherent drawback to coaxial monitors besides SPL. Ever since 2023 with the 8381 SPL is also not a concern as that speaker seems to beat the M2 by every metric.

You could argue wide dispersion is a disadvantage, but I don't think that is inherent to a coaxial driver per sey, as you can make things whatever shape is desired and limit excursion on a three way.

(I'm taking the photo, this is at the LP UNF release party in northern LA. They have an immersive room that my friend shown here and I spent a good bit of time in.)
1000001133.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'd add that they seem to play louder than the 8331 so I'll be curious to see what the measurements show, as the active versions would likely have been my choice for my 5.1 system had they existed prior to me building it out with Genelec coaxial monitors.

Vs an 8341, the Kali may just beat it.

Someone else mentioned a center channel: the beauty of coaxial monitors like these are that they are all center channel speakers, and Atmos speakers, and surround speakers, and decent if you have to tilt them from the ceiling, and not terrible with reflections in any direction like any other speaker that isn't coaxial.

Ever since 2010 and the 8260 there has been no inherent drawback to coaxial monitors besides SPL. Ever since 2023 with the 8381 SPL is also not a concern as that speaker seems to beat the M2 by every metric.

You could argue wide dispersion is a disadvantage, but I don't think that is inherent to a coaxial driver per sey, as you can make things whatever shape is desired and limit excursion on a three way.

(I'm taking the photo, this is at the LP UNF release party in northern LA. They have an immersive room that my friend shown here and I spent a good bit of time in.)
View attachment 349424
How is it better than 8341?
 
How is it better than 8341?
SPL and price wise. 117dB vs 110dB, and significantly cheaper. Sorry, didn't clarify that was following up from the prior paragraph on loudness.

Curious to see measurements though to see which is more accurate.
 
5 inch woofers aren’t ideal. 6.5 inch to 8 inch required. Also passive crossovers at different volumes mean external dsp might not translate well for frequency response Settings. Subwoofer required.
 
5 inch woofers aren’t ideal. 6.5 inch to 8 inch required. Also passive crossovers at different volumes mean external dsp might not translate well for frequency response Settings. Subwoofer required.
Opinion based on zero measurements of this speaker?
 
I don't think this speaker has a passive crossover. There are 4 conductors going to the second speaker. To me that means active but the amps are on the first speaker for both speakers. Also states they are bi-amped.
 
I don't think this speaker has a passive crossover. There are 4 conductors going to the second speaker. To me that means active but the amps are on the first speaker for both speakers. Also states they are bi-amped.
I think there is a passive crossover for the midrange and tweeter. As it is a 3 way but only 2 pairs of speaker connectors…
 
What speaker are we talking about here? The Kali SM5C is a fully passive speaker.
 
What speaker are we talking about here? The Kali SM5C is a fully passive speaker.

There's a picture of the crossovers in their own website. It's actually quite nice that they even give you the option of having "single wire" vs bi-amp.

1707981156973.jpeg


Single Wire vs. Bi-Amped

While Kali recommends bi-amplifying the speakers, single wire use is more convenient and economical. Single wire mode adds a small amount of distortion on from the lower frequency cutoff of the system through 700 Hz vs. Bi-Amped at comparable playback levels. The single wire tuning also introduces a frequency response anomaly at the high end of the loudspeaker’s response, although this may be corrected with full-range room calibration.
 
passive crossovers of course. But is there wire connections to allow bypass for external crossover of choice.
 
I think there is a passive crossover for the midrange and tweeter. As it is a 3 way but only 2 pairs of speaker connectors…
You are correct! Oops, I was thinking I was on the new LP-UNF thread. I did get a chance to test these. I would definitely recommend the Lea amp with them. I did try it with a Parasound amp as well in full passive mode and it is not bad but the DSP settings in the Lea did give it that little extra refinement. What I didn't get a chance to test is using the passive with some kind of room correction in a processor. If I get another chance I can connect them to my Anthem 1140 and run it's ARC room correction and then do another version with Lea amp
 
Still I'd like to see an active version. Kali hinted at them being a thing but there's been little information.
 
Thanks.

So the passives are currently selling for US$1000/each.

And the actives will be US$1700/each, coming in May 2024, as per video.
 
They were announced almost a year ago:

 
The active version is supposed to be coming in May/June. The passive version should be used with their recommended amp and you use two channels of amplification for each speaker. One channel for the woofer and the other for the coaxial midrange/tweeter. You can use it in full passive mode but it is still recommended to use their DSP settings. I have tried it three ways withe the same amp, no EQ passive, EQ passive and bi-amped with EQ which was definitely best of the three. I don't know if the active version will be tri-amplified but its MSRP is supposed to be less than the passive version when you use the recommended Lea amp.
 
The active version is supposed to be coming in May/June. The passive version should be used with their recommended amp and you use two channels of amplification for each speaker. One channel for the woofer and the other for the coaxial midrange/tweeter. You can use it in full passive mode but it is still recommended to use their DSP settings. I have tried it three ways withe the same amp, no EQ passive, EQ passive and bi-amped with EQ which was definitely best of the three. I don't know if the active version will be tri-amplified but its MSRP is supposed to be less than the passive version when you use the recommended Lea amp.
What are your thoughts on its performance compared to their powered monitors, if you have been able to compare? I just got a pair of IN-5 and I'm very happy with them so far, particularly after REQ.
 
Definitely a good step up from the IN-5. I also have a pair of IN-5 in my home and really enjoy them. I liked the IN-5 better than the Kef R3 and I had a chance to get the R3 less than half price and below dealer cost when they were discontinued and replaced with the Meta. I also liked them better than the Meta.
Back to the SM-5-C I think they are going to compete in Genelec 8331/8341 territory. We didn't have any of the 'ones' at my work at time or I would have compared them. I would definitely take them over the IN-5 but they are ~6 times the price when you factor the price of the amp. To me the Lea amp is required.
 
Definitely a good step up from the IN-5. I also have a pair of IN-5 in my home and really enjoy them. I liked the IN-5 better than the Kef R3 and I had a chance to get the R3 less than half price and below dealer cost when they were discontinued and replaced with the Meta. I also liked them better than the Meta.
Back to the SM-5-C I think they are going to compete in Genelec 8331/8341 territory. We didn't have any of the 'ones' at my work at time or I would have compared them. I would definitely take them over the IN-5 but they are ~6 times the price when you factor the price of the amp. To me the Lea amp is required.
Wow, that's some very high praise.
 
Back
Top Bottom