Kali IN-5 Studio Monitor Review

[voltronic]

This is interesting. I have a midbass issue, and I just plugged your Full Range figures into IIEQ Pro (a 10-band equalizer I use with SoundSource on a Mac). It seems to do good things. But it mostly cuts things at about 150 Hz, no? I don't see a 10 Hz cut here. Or is there some other software you're also using that has a Full Range setting on top of this?

Oh, and the overall gain is just left at 0.00 db?

The broad cut around 150 Hz is addressing the mid bass hump in my room response, which I mentioned earlier. Maybe your mid bass issue is similar which is why it sounds good to you, but I would definitely run your own measurements and corrections rather than apply ones specific to my setup.

The 10 Hz cut is the default LF roll-off corner frequency added by REW when generating filters if the Speaker Type is set to Full Range. 80 Hz is the default roll-off for Bass Limited speakers. But I now realize that I only had REW set to generate filters 20 Hz-20 kHz so a filter at 10 Hz wouldn't be created anyway.

 

[denzel200219]

The preference score is really low. Would the score be improved in near field listening?

 

[Pritaudio]

If some lower frequency (not sure which) is cut off, why should these not sound identical to in8 v2.
The only factor I can immediately identify is the cabinet size.
Drivers the same, wattage the same.
The bass driver being between 5 inch and 8 inch results in less distortion as it only deals with lower midrange.
And an attached sub can do the rest.
Power limiters yes are different.
Have the crossovers been designed differently between these two models?

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Have the crossovers been designed differently between these two models?

The TI combination DSP+Class-D chips driving the woofers are different, with the IN-5 requiring more woofer EQ and thus more amp power than the more sensitive, lower F3 IN-8 driver. Other than DSP programming, there is no crossover design per se AFAIK -- and it's possible the PCB layouts are identical assuming the one chip that is different has the same pinout. According to the published specs, the IN-8 has lower overall distortion -- probably the result of having to drive the IN-5 woofer harder to achieve the specified bass extension. Max. AC power draw for both models is the same according their back panels, so I think we can safely assume they use the same SMPS.

 

[Pritaudio]

The TI combination DSP+Class-D chips driving the woofers are different, with the IN-5 requiring more woofer EQ and thus more amp power than the more sensitive, lower F3 IN-8 driver. Other than DSP programming, there is no crossover design per se AFAIK -- and it's possible the PCB layouts are identical assuming the one chip that is different has the same pinout. According to the published specs, the IN-8 has lower overall distortion -- probably the result of having to drive the IN-5 woofer harder to achieve the specified bass extension. Max. AC power draw for both models is the same according their back panels, so I think we can safely assume they use the same SMPS.

If I am using a sub such as svs sb2000 pro crossovered with in5, why should it sound different than in8 v2 with the svs sb2000 pro.
I was thinking it would be mid bass only.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

If I am using a sub such as svs sb2000 pro crossovered with in5, why should it sound different than in8 v2 with the svs sb2000 pro.
I was thinking it would be mid bass only.

That seems to be a sensible surmise -- perhaps a slight difference in distortion between the 80Hz high-pass from the sub and the 300Hz crossover to the midrange driver, otherwise pretty much the same.

 

[Rednaxela]

Do they measure the same above 80Hz?

 

[Ultrasonic]

Do they measure the same above 80Hz?

No. See the graphs at the start of this thread vs here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...econd-wave-3-way-studio-monitor-review.24586/

You'd expect differences through the bass-mid crossover region (centred at 280 Hz) due to the different bass driver sizes, and cabinet size differences have scope to affect the response right up the the highest frequencies.

How significant the differences are and what may be preferable is a whole different question that I'm currently pondering for myself as I'm weighing up which to try. I'd be using with a subwoofer and high-pass filtering the Kali's but as your question alludes to there is more to this than just the region the sub would cover.

(Edit: for context I own a pair of LP6 v2s that I currently use as rear surrounds but I've not heard either In-5 or In-8 models.)

 

[2020]

I recently got these speakers and thought I would give some subjective comments about them. Get ready for a wall of text.

I'm using them with PC speakers and don't have the best setup, but I would say I have a better set up than the average person. Using with Motu M2, Sonarworks, JBL LSR310 sub, and on diy wooden desktop stands.

I know that calibration isn't everything, but even after profiling them, I find these speakers to be a mixed bag. The sound signature is neutral-dark and smooth. There is a sense that the tonal balance is more accurate than I remember. The mid-range does have increased clarity. It does feel opened up, but not in a drastic way. I noticed details and things seem more easily discernible in the mid-range. But it's strange to me that the clarity is coming from that place and not the top. And even though I was using this sub before, I feel like it is now highlighted in a way. If I watch a spectrograph with music, those lower bass regions that really light up when a beat kicks in; I can really put the image to the audio I hear.

The tweeter is my problem. I chose these speakers because of the coaxial dome for the enhanced placement. Even if you have stands, you still may not be able to get them to the perfect ear height or tilt. The increased vertical sweet spot is more important than reducing bounce.

The tweeter is.... dark? There is an overly smooth feeling to it. Where is the zzzzzing or imposing or piercing nature? Now, I'm not saying I need it to fatiguing , but I detect a lack of bite that isn't as simple as just EQing it in. The simple tilt control in Sonarworks does not address it.

We all have our own unique experiences of audio growing up - the music, the trends in production, the hardware used, the quality level, the context it's listened to, the room acoustics, our own ears.... ultimately adding up to an abstract concept of how we think things are "supposed" to sound.

When I think of high frequencies, I expect them to be sharp. Attention grabbing if necessary, piercing but not overly, transient rich, *fun*. You get the point. Glitchy noises and distortion is supposed to sound digital and distOrT-eD. Enhanced sense of clickiness and directional percussion. I guess there is an element of "ugliness" that I expect to be present that acts like the bass equivalent of body or weight. An impact that highlights that frequency range.

Here's an example I use for context:

There are some whistle tones in this song that are quite clear and I feel they are supposed to cut through the mix and really catch the listener's attention. On these speakers though, they sound noticeably darker and don't have the same kind of impact at all.

Actually, any kind of music that I remember being very distorted or forward is a hell of a lot smoother. Disarmingly so. This song is so intentionally distorted, but now it's just not hitting the same:

https://soundcloud.com/fraxiom%2Ffly-with-ue

Do I just like distorted treble? I understand these are studio monitors and aim for a neutral sound as well as being non-fatiguing, but they seem too non-fatiguing. I have taken care of my hearing since I was still in single digits and have had zero sound damaging accidents growing up, either through real life noises like a concert or heavy machinery or something artificial, like playing headphones too loud, too long. I have babyed my hearing. I don't desire bright treble to make up for damaged hearing.

I have no choice to keep them right now because that's the beauty of buying online and opening late lol. I'll try to maybe get used to them but they seem shockingly different than I expect or even want and I can see myself trying to offload them in the future.

The three-way, but make it economical, speaker area is a real unicorn right now. The price jump in trying to find anything else that is three ways quite drastic. I think the cheapest you can aim for is barefoot footprint03b which is $2,000 before tax. And that has one of those reduced vertical Sweet spot designs too.

I wish they had used a metal tweeter or done something exotic like a square AMT (that way they could add some vertical sweet spot. aren't AMTs already ultra-wide anyway? They can afford to trade some width).

 

[Ultrasonic]

I know that calibration isn't everything, but even after profiling them...

Out of interest, did you do any listening to the top end without any EQ applied there? I'm trialing a pair on IN-8 v2s currently that have the same tweeter/mid arrangement and I don't really sense the same limitation you're describing, unless as you say you're used to a form of treble distortion.

About 3 years ago I tried a pair of Hedd Type 05 Mk2 speakers that use their AMT tweeter and there was something about the top end that I really didn't get on with - hard to describe but somehow sort of always made me feel slightly on-edge? Totally put me off that design so personally I'm very happy Kali don't use one. Not that it would really be feasible in a coaxial design I think?

 

[AnalogSteph]

The tweeter is.... dark? There is an overly smooth feeling to it.

I mean, I'm not exactly surprised. You'd be expecting the upper treble in particular to be slightly recessed when direct sound dominates as it likely is in your case:

I'd see whether making the 10-13 kHz area maybe 2-3 dB spicier improves matters. That looks like it might be a bit too low even for my tastes, not to mention this ~13 kHz dip business. Kali coax treble dispersion just isn't quite on KEF or Genelec level in general, but then again what is. If coaxes were that easy to perfect it wouldn't have taken 90 years.

I would also compare what Sonarworks does to a MMM measurement in REW (note: the Sonarworks mic only comes with a 0° calibration as a text file which makes this slightly annoying but not impossible; I wish they had a 90° calibration like that available as well, not just in the proprietary Sonarworks format).

 

[Ultrasonic]

Note that 10° - 20° off-axis is probably better overall:

 

[2020]

Out of interest, did you do any listening to the top end without any EQ applied there? I'm trialing a pair on IN-8 v2s currently that have the same tweeter/mid arrangement and I don't really sense the same limitation you're describing, unless as you say you're used to a form of treble distortion.

I don't really use them without EQ. Since I generally perceived these as dark anyway, it's not like the trouble is drastically worse when I turn correction on and off.

Sonarworks is doing max ~4db correction at 13.25khz, the dip in my room extends from 10.5khz-14.5hz.

Before that, the treble section in my room looks okay. It's a little bit dropped but, but only by 2.4db at max from a quick look on the chart. Seems to fall and rise between this 2.4db dip and zero.

And thank you for the feedback. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

About 3 years ago I tried a pair of Hedd Type 05 Mk2 speakers that use their AMT tweeter and there was something about the top end that I really didn't get on with - hard to describe but somehow sort of always made me feel slightly on-edge? Totally put me off that design so personally I'm very happy Kali don't use one. Not that it would really be feasible in a coaxial design I think?

I wish I could afford something like that!

I think I would like the edge you are describing as long as it doesn't feel like it's aping everything else.

I did try the Adam Audio T7V years ago, but used it with a crappy PreSonus interface before I realized it was so bad. I was under the impression that DACs are mostly similar and shouldn't be too audibly different than each other - at least on the low end. That has not been my experience at all though. That presonus interface I swear had an internal bright sounds signature applied to it's output at all times. Low suppression combined with treble boost. T7V sounded so bright it was noticeably sibilant, even after sonarworks. They had to go back but I didn't know what was the real culprit. I saw a huge change in sound when I switched interfaces.

From what I've read, the dome is the "perfect" shape for dispersion. The breakup shapes are smoother and more predictable. When other designs are looked at, they becomes complex or more costly to engineer around. So that's why I didn't really go for anything else.

I'm not sure AMT ould be utilized in a coaxial setup either but we can always dream. I'm just chasing the value proposition right now, coaxial or not. Adam A8H is vastly more expensive (1500 MSRP). And then SM-5 (the high-end version of the IN-5 with a metal tweeter) is even more than that - $1700 MSRP! 1700 for the one with a 5-in woofer lol.

 

[2020]

I mean, I'm not exactly surprised. You'd be expecting the upper treble in particular to be slightly recessed when direct sound dominates as it likely is in your case:

I'd see whether making the 10-13 kHz area maybe 2-3 dB spicier improves matters. That looks like it might be a bit too low even for my tastes, not to mention this ~13 kHz dip business. Kali coax treble dispersion just isn't quite on KEF or Genelec level in general, but then again what is. If coaxes were that easy to perfect it wouldn't have taken 90 years.

I would also compare what Sonarworks does to a MMM measurement in REW (note: the Sonarworks mic only comes with a 0° calibration as a text file which makes this slightly annoying but not impossible; I wish they had a 90° calibration like that available as well, not just in the proprietary Sonarworks format).

I was aware of this treble dip/rise going in. I guess I was thinking that it wouldn't be too much of an issue based on what I've read online though, considering I'm always applying EQ.

For my room, Sonarworks is showing my treble to be slightly recessed. Of course my graph looks different than the one post above, but it doesn't look as dramatic as the spinarama here. Seems to be about 2.5db drop at max, and then the famous dip from 10.5hkz-14.5, peeking at 13.12hkz with -4.4db

Even if I use the tilt control, trouble doesn't have the same kind of piercing quality that I've always conceptualized in my head. I don't like this property but I'm glad others benefit from it.

I will look more into REW. So far I like the idiot proof routine that is sonarworks, although I know it's just only one of many calibration systems. I want to get dirac live for studio again someday for that impulse response modeling although it has the clunkiest measurement process. The last time I tried it, it literally required a separate DAW and didn't exactly inspire confidence if you were doing the process correctly. Sonarworks "learns" the physical area of your room and speakers by taking a lot of measurement points so it can instruct you if you're in the correct area for measurements in real time. That's what's also keeping me away from Rew although I have seen it over the years.

 

[Ultrasonic]

@2020 I've not used Sonarworks specifically but bear in mind that at the high-frequency end of the spectrum, what is seen on a microphone measurement is somewhat different to what we actually hear since our ears/brain distinguish between sound travelling directly from the speakers and that reflected off room boundaries and other surfaces whilst microphone measurements don't (unless time-windowing is used). This was why I just asked if you'd tried listening without any EQ as Sonarworks could be making things worse. If Sonarworks has an option of only being applied below say 200 Hz I'd at least give this a try in case you like the results, as this is where in-room measurement-based EQ works best. However, your comments about using tilt make me think you are potentially still looking for something these speakers don't do for you. Presumably you've tried just a simple treble boost too, with either the dip-switches on the back of the speaker or in Sonarworks (i.e. a shelf-type treble lift as distinct to tilt)?

Do you have the option to return/exchange your IN-5s? I don't really think you'll find them massively different but if you could then presumably the IN-8 v2 model won't be much more and so in a similar value bracket for you, and the measured data from Erin shared here does show some improvement in the higher frequency range (and look specifically at the 10º off-axis data as coincident driver speakers like these are not designed/intended to be listened to exactly on-axis). Data here:

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

Copy/paste from my site. Review may not translate from my site so here is the link to the full review on my site: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-8v2/ Kali Audio IN-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Saturday, Jun 26, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[2020]

@2020 I've not used Sonarworks specifically but bear in mind that at the high-frequency end of the spectrum, what is seen on a microphone measurement is somewhat different to what we actually hear since our ears/brain distinguish between sound travelling directly from the speakers and that reflected off room boundaries and other surfaces whilst microphone measurements don't (unless time-windowing is used).

I'm learning this the hard way. I was familiar about room reflections being different than direct sound and not mixing well or not really being accounted for in measurement mic stuff, but I guess I didn't give it the weight that it deserves!

This was why I just asked if you'd tried listening without any EQ as Sonarworks could be making things worse.

It's funny you say that. I did dig into this topic a little bit and compared it to Arc 4 and Dirac Live and some people do think that Sonarworks kills dynamics or does not sound as natural or good. I would more likely go with Dirac Live if I had to choose between the two, although it is much more expensive. Arc 4 is about $250, and it includes a physical piece of hardware that houses the correction for it's system wide correction, unlike Sonarworks and Dirac which rely on virtual sound devices to pass things through. Of course there are other more expensive solutions out there as well, and there is already REW, but I like to just go with not too expensive paid options. Let somebody else do it all the finessing I don't have to work as much as the end user.

If Sonarworks has an option of only being applied below say 200 Hz I'd at least give this a try in case you like the results, as this is where in-room measurement-based EQ works best.

It really doesn't. Well, it has some control, but not exactly what it are asking. Or v4 doesn't. v5 it's called SoundID and when it first came out, people said that it was just a UI update and the actual calibration and measurement process was unchanged. So I never upgraded.

Sonarworks work tries to flatten everything although. It's just the nature of it being a studio type product instead of a general equalizer.

However, your comments about using tilt make me think you are potentially still looking for something these speakers don't do for you. Presumably you've tried just a simple treble boost too, with either the dip-switches on the back of the speaker or in Sonarworks (i.e. a shelf-type treble lift as distinct to tilt)?

Yeah, I'm really thinking these speakers are not for me. You can't do any shelving in SW, only a tilt. One more knock against it lol.

But even with a tilt applied, it doesn't respond the way I thought it would. There is a lack of "sharpness" missing from everything. When I say sharpness, I mean like a form of "punchy sibilance".

I read this quote recently and I would agree with it:"I guess one man's harshness is another man's clarity and detail." I listen to Black Dresses too and they are a chaotic, distorted noise pop group. Of course it is completely subjective, but I would say that a certain level of "harshness" is required to accurately portray their music. Take this song for example: https://on.soundcloud.com/bSeqM

It's like the tweeter in itself has an inherent character, which simple EQing can't account for (at least in my use case). Even if it measures ok on a graph or I try to make it artificially brighter, it's tonality is too smooth or laid back for me.

Do you have the option to return/exchange your IN-5s?

No. I really went into this with different expectations and kind of waited too long to set everything up . I knew the speaker might be a little bit veiled, but I thought I could just easily correct that with some EQ and call it a day. I'm just one of the numerous people that are used to those JBL cheap studio monitors and assumed the IN-5 that this would be an inherent upgrade in all aspects without breaking the bank. And on paper they present a lot of improvements over the LSR/30#p series. Three-way instead of 2, front port, and coaxial. I thought that alone would kind of do the heavy lifting. I might just try to sell them locally or bring them to a store to have them buy off me in time. Shipping would probably be kill the online aspect.

I don't really think you'll find them massively different but if you could then presumably the IN-8 v2 model won't be much more and so in a similar value bracket for you, and the measured data from Erin shared here does show some improvement in the higher frequency range (and look specifically at the 10º off-axis data as coincident driver speakers like these are not designed/intended to be listened to exactly on-axis). Data here:

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

Copy/paste from my site. Review may not translate from my site so here is the link to the full review on my site: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kali_in-8v2/ Kali Audio IN-8v2 (Second Wave) 3-Way Studio Monitor Review Saturday, Jun 26, 2021 Foreword / YouTube Video Review...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I was going to buy these but I just found them too massive. I know you can orient them differently, but I didn't want to feel like I had to keep them landscape for them to be viable. The smaller one I have some flexibility with. You know, I really should try landscape though and see how that goes.

Although I've mostly on them here, I think the IN-5 would be great for anybody who hates anything even remotely fatiguing. It's not that the total balance is totally whack, I just want more top end. These speakers also seem more forgiving of material that are extreme casualties of the loudness wars. Everything sounds less crunchy but also simultaneously less compressed.

Here are a couple songs that I think sound particularly good on these speakers:

---

 

[uwotm8]

Where is the zzzzzing or imposing or piercing nature?

It's too much of coincidence - I was just discussing one funny video in neraby thread [disclaimer: youtube listening in a nutshell is a bad idea]

It's Italian but has Eng subtitles; speaker comparison starts at 1:15
Unfortunately, I didn't hear Kali IRL. Excessive hype makes me suspicious tho.

Anyway, as far as you don't like the sound, I higly suggest you to get some other decent speakers somehow and check if you're getting real clarity. Starting from Adam T series, U-ART AMTs used there are not as revealing as X-ART but still clarity is their strong side. T5Vs have a little treble overdose on axis - measuread and to my ears as well, T7Vs should be balanced, didn't hear them personally.

This song is so intentionally distorted, but now it's just not hitting the same:

If it helps, Adam A7V run it perfectly smooth, showing that all that distortion and madness is intended art element. I mean, you don't even think of checking yourself whether it's a speaker or recording. It actually sounds clear, except my brain still explodes because of the content itself Too chaotic or maybe I'm too old lol.

I was aware of this treble dip/rise going in. I guess I was thinking that it wouldn't be too much of an issue based on what I've read online though

Unfortunately even in "objective" audio reviews you have to read between the lines.
What did Erin say? "I'm missing some air on the top end", 'a bit dull". On some other reviews he claimed KEFs as somewaht bright speakers. For a lot of people KEF are on a borderline of being dull, so...
Then, whad did measurements show? A 5-6 dB hole @10 kHz. And this is a soft dome tweeter.
Oh yes, all that "scientific" claims that material does not matter, yep sure. But for some reason you never get...

the zzzzzing or imposing or piercing nature?

...a hard dome-like zzing with a soft dome. Even with Dynaudio tweeters which I love. Metal domes can do that for some reasons, ribbons and AMT are more transparent and I'd say are rather too fast, clear and detailed to "just zzing" (which contain some resonances in synergy with direct sound in case of metal dome). And... call me audiofool but nothing plays brass more realistic than compression driver in a big horn, same goes for kick drum played by big yet fast woofer.

So TL;DR: don't make yourself cope, try another speakers if you can.
We are all different; Erin can call KEF bright, one friend of mine called Adam T5Vs dull and dark.
It's you who will listen and hopefully enjoy music, not "experts", so get speakers that you'll really like.

P.S. Insanely praised Senn HD 6xx (basically HD 650) are midrange-focused clock radio w/o EQ (OK' I'm not too serious, these are highly revealing cans once you get used to their signature). Bold claims be like: too little bass, dull treble, VEIL (tm). But these are headphones and they can be EQd and even as is they sound warm and sweet. Relaxing. And you still get the clarity because they play right into your ears. Overall one of my best buys.
The speaker with such tonality, however, would be a junk to me except I needed s**t-control - one of important sound engineer goals AFAIK for what they use NS-10 and cubes

 

[2020]

It's too much of coincidence - I was just discussing one funny video in neraby thread [disclaimer: youtube listening in a nutshell is a bad idea]

It's Italian but has Eng subtitles; speaker comparison starts at 1:15
Unfortunately, I didn't hear Kali IRL. Excessive hype makes me suspicious tho.

I have mixed feelings when I see brands engage in at a lot of intentional social media campaigning. On one hand, it seems like an intentional way to control the narrative about product quality by diluting real reviews with all kinds of sponsored stuff. On the other hand, any brand not willing to go this risk their company.

Think about how many good products existed that simply didn't have knowledge that they existed and now the company is gone. It doesn't mean they are inherently deceptive by generating their own hype, but it's a mixed issue.

Anyway, as far as you don't like the sound, I higly suggest you to get some other decent speakers somehow and check if you're getting real clarity. Starting from Adam T series, U-ART AMTs used there are not as revealing as X-ART but still clarity is their strong side. T5Vs have a little treble overdose on axis - measuread and to my ears as well, T7Vs should be balanced, didn't hear them personally.

Yeah I'm going back to the "do you like AMTs thread" which apparently I also partook in 5 years ago. Seems like the opinion is they are either a little more revealing or "too good" and then you lose the bite. Think the way we talk about revealing and detail and sharpness is getting lost in these simple words. It's hard to find common ground play the same thing but mean differently.

If it helps, Adam A7V run it perfectly smooth, showing that all that distortion and madness is intended art element. I mean, you don't even think of checking yourself whether it's a speaker or recording. It actually sounds clear, except my brain still explodes because of the content itself Too chaotic or maybe I'm too old lol.

Yeah no, it's not you. Hyperpop had a huge resurgence around lockdown and the couple years after and gave us a lot of art. Sophie popularized a noise music aspect of genre and it was iconic. Other artists like Fraxiom jumped upon this strain. I especially love the end of the song, it sounds like the world is sliding off a cliff or sliding tectonic plates and the destruction they bring. There is a romantic element to "fly with you" (originally a Gigi d'agustino song) and it paired so well with a dystopian, end of the world theme.

Unfortunately even in "objective" audio reviews you have to read between the lines.
What did Erin say? "I'm missing some air on the top end", 'a bit dull". On some other reviews he claimed KEFs as somewaht bright speakers. For a lot of people KEF are on a borderline of being dull, so...
Then, whad did measurements show? A 5-6 dB hole @10 kHz. And this is a soft dome tweeter.
Oh yes, all that "scientific" claims that material does not matter, yep sure. But for some reason you never get...

I'm so dumb, forgive me lol. I thought I could just bring EQ to the rescue.

...a hard dome-like zzing with a soft dome. Even with Dynaudio tweeters which I love. Metal domes can do that for some reasons, ribbons and AMT are more transparent and I'd say are rather too fast, clear and detailed to "just zzing" (which contain some resonances in synergy with direct sound in case of metal dome). And... call me audiofool but nothing plays brass more realistic than compression driver in a big horn, same goes for kick drum played by big yet fast woofer.

You're not the first person I've seen say that compression drivers are the most realistic.

So TL;DR: don't make yourself cope, try another speakers if you can.
We are all different; Erin can call KEF bright, one friend of mine called Adam T5Vs dull and dark.
It's you who will listen and hopefully enjoy music, not "experts", so get speakers that you'll really like.

I wish. I only make $30,000 a year. I have a hard time justifying audio purchases when I really should be talking care of my health. It's hard to find a career or anything nowadays, employers only want cogs and it seems like if you want to ever climb, totally on your own and your day can never be smooth or predictable.

Kali is like the only one (besides KRK) offering affordable 3 way monitors. The next cheapest thing is Footprint03, which, of I was going to spend a lot of money, I might as well move up at least 8 inch 3 way instead of 6.5" woofers. But what do I know? I'm out here buying speakers that don't jive with me.

Going to seriously try lowering these or turning them on their side. I think I might be dangerously close to the 50% room mode height wise. Stupid designers love to make the average height like 47 or 48 in and the ceiling twice as high.

 

[uwotm8]

I'm out here buying speakers that don't jive with me

I afraid my non-native English made you think that I'm suggesting you to buy more and more different speakers to find the one you'd like
(If you're homeless, then... buy a house lol)
My excuses.
Absolutely not that!
By "getting right speaker" I mean careful choosing; the best you can do ofc is find a store where you can listen to ones you're interested in and check how far (or maybe not so) those reviews are from reality. Because even buying what-everyone-likes, say, Neumann KH120 II - with no listening - is not totally risk free.

Talking about reviews, I'm more bothered about "objectivists" totally ignoring aspect of... class? level? whatever you call that - overall sound quality. FR is a very important part, but a part of the story. DSP-flattened FR of a cheap speaker does not guarantee you'll like it. I wish it was simple as that - you buy $100 Micca or Edifier, EQ them, done. So, back to the "levels". I'm pretty familiar with Dynaudio and when I had a chance to listen 3 ranges - Audience, Focus and Confidence - costing roughly $700, $1500 and $5000 for a pair of standmounters - I simply had no concerns about price increasing. In short - a very good by themselves Audience immediately become "a sound from a box" after you switch to Focus and then Confidence show you next "getting out of box" - but not much that, it's more about total dissapering of speaker and leaving you with a very clean and clear sound in the air. Their FR/signature does not differ that much and that way what should explain difference. Because it is in another aspects - transients, distortion, coloration and so on. Part of that can be traced by measurements from distortion and resonances to waterfall ofc.

As I said, for some reason ("harmanized" ideology?) objectivists purposefully ignore that don't speak about that "level". Maybe very-very deep between the lines lol.
The trend is to put a ruler to FR (and judging price according to how flat it is). Well, KH150 should be a total endgame speakers then

One of the most important things for me is - sonically - to get rid of box/boxiness as much as I can. Maybe that's why I like all these ribbons, AMTs, electrostatics and omnipolars (MBL). If sound goes "out of box" and I hear the speaker I don't care how flat it is. Something tells me, that for many people things are exactly opposite and they actually like when speaker sounds like a speaker. "New types" of transducers are uncomfortable to them it seems.