• 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!

KRK ROKIT 5 Gen 4 Review (Studio Monitor)

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,954
Likes
17,223
These look like great desktop speakers
As noted, floor (and ceiling) reflection are the issue here so put some absorber there or keep that path length long.
Unfortunately in desktop application floor bounce is an issue as not many want or can place some absorbers on their desktop. Also with its directivity loss above 3kHz due to its too small waveguide it might be good for "Hifi sound" but personally wouldn't want to mix on them.
 

dominikz

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
807
Likes
2,646
I like the EQ option on the back of the speaker, that's quite intriguing and a good value addition, would be interesting to know more about that in terms of number of PEQ filters available, etc.
I was excited about this a while ago, but then found it is not really much different than the voicing corrections offered by other brands via (DIP) switches. It seems it is not a full-fledged PEQ nor GEQ - every of the 5 bands of EQ provides a few preset EQ curves :confused: for typical situations like desktop placement, boundary control, HF shelving etc...

You will see most KRK marketing material actually mentions 25 EQ *presets*, and if you look at some YT videos you can see how you can toggle between them with the rotary/push control.

It would be really cool to have a budget active speaker option one day with built-in DSP PEQ and (ideally) digital input :)
 
Last edited:

phoenixsong

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
880
Likes
690
But then again, adjusting the levels might do injustice to rare small speakers that perform reasonably well even at loud volumes
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,259
Likes
11,611
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
Note: Rating is for far-field listening

Preference Rating
SCORE: 3.6
SCORE w/ sub: 5.9

Frequency response: +/-6.5dB 43Hz-20kHz ; +/-3.4dB 20Hz-20kHz.
Spinorama 15.png
Horizontal Directivity 14.png
Horizontal Directivity Normalized 15.png
Vertical Directivity 15.png
Vertical Directivity Normalized 14.png
chart 23.png
 
Last edited:

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,259
Likes
11,611
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
It costs US $176 each
Preference Rating
SCORE: 3.6
SCORE w/ sub: 5.9

Compared to the ~$150/ea KRK Classic 5, it’s a decent improvement, not to mention the included EQ capabilities (but I wonder who this is for, as you can apply system-wide EQ; so people using this in a bedroom/game setup? Traveling professionals?):
Preference Rating
SCORE: 2.8
SCORE w/ sub: 5.2

Frequency response: +/-7.8dB 40Hz-20kHz ; +/-5.4dB 80Hz-20kHz
index.php
 

MZKM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
4,259
Likes
11,611
Location
Land O’ Lakes, FL
Every single time port causes stupid issues like noise and distortion...
You need a really well designed port. I’m pretty they only way to achieve that is to have a program with fluid simulation capabilities.

Basics though is flared on both ends. Just looking at the outside of this port, lots of harsh edges.
 
Last edited:

Vict0r

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
657
Likes
1,603
Location
The Netherlands
Hey, that's cool! Another <$200 contender. It's crazy how much value you can find in monitor speakers these days. I remember times that were VERY different! :) Thank you, Amir! You're a gem.
 

tktran303

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
687
Likes
1,237
Watched the YouTube review- you appear surprisingly impressed.

Did you get a chance to listen to it in a living room setup?
 

YSC

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Messages
3,266
Likes
2,687
Unfortunately in desktop application floor bounce is an issue as not many want or can place some absorbers on their desktop. Also with its directivity loss above 3kHz due to its too small waveguide it might be good for "Hifi sound" but personally wouldn't want to mix on them.
Since this is a budget DSP speaker with PEQ options built in (What a bargain!!) I would just do something like genelec for desktop mode, get a 150hz -3db zone and in practice it works
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
465
Likes
3,916
Location
French, living in China
Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:
Score no EQ: 3.67
With Sub: 5.92

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Port again, looks like a recurring unwanted guest
  • Fairly good directivity
  • Not that smooth
KRK 5 Gen 4 No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
KRK 5 Gen 4 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

KRK 5 Gen 4 LW better data.png

EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.
  • The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
  • The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
  • The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 4.5
with sub: 6.64

Score EQ Score: 5.05
with sub: 7.19

KRK 5 Gen 4 EQ Design.png


Code:
KRK 5 Gen 4 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
February252021-174633

Preamp: -0.8 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 39 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 0.97
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 84.5 Hz Gain -2.36 dB Q 1.15
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 359 Hz Gain -0.96 dB Q 2.73
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 646 Hz Gain -3.75 dB Q 2.5
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1356 Hz Gain -1.66 dB Q 5.4
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4442 Hz Gain -1.59 dB Q 1.96
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 8005 Hz Gain -2.7 dB Q 1.87
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 10290 Hz Gain 2.43 dB Q 5.62
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 13639 Hz Gain -0.71 dB Q 2.44

KRK 5 Gen 4 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
February252021-174520

Preamp: -0 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 40 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 0.97
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 85 Hz Gain -2.36 dB Q 1.15
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 367 Hz Gain -1.13 dB Q 1.87
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 646 Hz Gain -3.75 dB Q 2.5
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1363 Hz Gain -2.28 dB Q 6.85
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4425 Hz Gain -1.79 dB Q 1.46
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 8362 Hz Gain -3.7 dB Q 1.41
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 10158 Hz Gain 2.68 dB Q 5.62
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 13000 Hz Gain -1.06 dB Q 3.44

Spinorama EQ LW
KRK 5 Gen 4 LW EQ Spinorama.png


Spinorama EQ Score
KRK 5 Gen 4 Score EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
KRK 5 Gen 4 Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal
KRK 5 Gen 4 Regression - Tonal.png


Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Nice improvements
KRK 5 Gen 4 Radar.png


The rest of the plots is attached.
 

Attachments

  • KRK 5 Gen 4 APO EQ LW 96000Hz.txt
    493 bytes · Views: 157
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 APO EQ Score 96000Hz.txt
    493 bytes · Views: 137
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    285.1 KB · Views: 148
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    415.3 KB · Views: 131
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    431.5 KB · Views: 144
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 Normalized Directivity data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 Normalized Directivity data.png
    492.1 KB · Views: 136
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 Raw Directivity data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 Raw Directivity data.png
    788.4 KB · Views: 118
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 Reflexion data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 Reflexion data.png
    253.6 KB · Views: 147
  • KRK 5 Gen 4 LW data.png
    KRK 5 Gen 4 LW data.png
    265 KB · Views: 100

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,954
Likes
17,223
Since this is a budget DSP speaker with PEQ options built in (What a bargain!!) I would just do something like genelec for desktop mode, get a 150hz -3db zone and in practice it works
Mind you the 150 hz desktop bump is a different issue than the presence region vertical directivity problem I mentioned above.
Also AFAIK this KRK series just offers predefined PEQ placement filters like the similar expensive Kali LP-6 which I would prefer.
 

TNT

Active Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2020
Messages
250
Likes
160
You mean something like this?
View attachment 114744
Are you using laser or microphone for distorsion in the above measurement? Just here or/and in general, please?

Sorry for repeating this question but I think the method used effects the intepretation of the result. As you are a heavily measurement driven activity, I think it is fair that you describe your measurement technology and procedure in detail.

Thanks in advance!

//
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,499
Likes
15,908
Location
Oxfordshire
Every single time port causes stupid issues like noise and distortion...
One needs to check whether it is shortcomings in the port design itself causing resonances above the required one for mode change at bass resonance or whether it is simply the port being a window to the cacophony of sound inside the cabinet volume due to undamped internal modes.
If it is the latter the simplest solution is to put the port on the rear, since bass is omnidirectional and will be properly added, but the higher modes from internal resonances will be projected away from the listener.
It would still probably be best to fully damp the internal modes though, I would have thought.
Perhaps too expensive to do consistently at this price level.
 

uwotm8

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Messages
422
Likes
493
Thanks for the review, Amir.
What you'd personally choose between Rokit 5G4, Adam T5V and JBL 305?
 

sandymc

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2021
Messages
98
Likes
230
I've always liked the KRKs - they tend to get a bad rap in the industry, but my experience has been that they have good sound, and are very reliable. But imho, the KRK V series are the ones to get rather than the Rokits. To my ears, they are much better. @amirm any chance of a KRK V series review?
 

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,144
Likes
11,088
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
I was not a fan of previous Rokits but this one seems pretty OK for the price.
 

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,854
Unfortunately in desktop application floor bounce is an issue as not many want or can place some absorbers on their desktop. Also with its directivity loss above 3kHz due to its too small waveguide it might be good for "Hifi sound" but personally wouldn't want to mix on them.
Isn't someone mixing music always sitting right in the sweet spot tough? A significant proportion of mixing engineer still use ProAc Studio 100 as their mains. This guy has no wave guide. Possible that I am not fully grasping the importance of a wave guide, but intuitively I would have thought the opposite, more important for hifi in domestic use, where you want to be a few people listening and not only the one perfectly positioned for the full experience or is there something I am not getting?
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,954
Likes
17,223
Isn't someone mixing music always sitting right in the sweet spot tough? A significant proportion of mixing engineer still use ProAc Studio 100 as their mains. This guy has no wave guide. Possible that I am not fully grasping the importance of a wave guide, but intuitively I would have thought the opposite, more important for hifi in domestic use, where you want to be a few people listening and not only the one perfectly positioned for the full experience or is there something I am not getting?
I agree that a smooth directivity is even more important for usual domestic hifi listening where reflections and sound power dominate more but even in studio near field application the perceived tonality and imaging are partially influenced by it.
 
Top Bottom