M&K S150 - what is a genuine step up and is this design philosophy too compromised by modern know-how?

[mgrobins]

WHAT
I'm wanting to address a popular historic design that is perhaps well surpassed by newer technology or more technically modelled speakers - the M&K S150.
To decide if a replacement is a good choice... I need to better appreciate the ASR test regime; its pros and cons.

WHY
The review on ASR leaves me somewhat uncertain about the audible behaviour of this model vs others deemed more "scientifically pure" through the test regime used here.
What does the testing tell us, how does it matter and what does it NOT tell us that matters in a home cinema speaker?

I own M&K S150 Mk2 speakers and use them in an LCR arrangement. I have found them to be nice, dynamic and seemingly spatially accurate... but I feel a lack of dimension I had with previous Dynaudio speakers, and which I have experienced with some past speakers I have auditioned in my homes.

I can't rule out room layout as that has changed a bit with the addition of some treatments. Location has been the same though.

There is a LOT of marketing on all of these brands that makes it worse than buying a mattress as far as comparison goes.
The manner of sales today means in home demo is often impossible - and even in store is not possible for many of us (I live in Australia).

Desired Outcome
I want a "better" speaker array for my front stage and surrounds.

"Better" means:
A. Superb clarity,
B. Enormous sound stage in all dimensions;
C. Precise positioning in that field.
D. Superb dynamic capability - able to present complex detail even at lower listening levels.
E. When something needs to have "punch" to it the speaker needs to deliver that viscerally.


Speakers must be stand or shelf mount to go under a TV and bass will be provided by dedicated subs. Listening distance is 3m (is that still Nearfield?).


Some will say the S150Mk2 already offers this - a design that is engineered to steer sound vertically and horizontally with precision. Plenty of headroom with the 3 tweeters and 2 MR drivers.

The scientific plots from the ASR review suggest different compromises are possible and that some of the design ideals are ... not ideal.

So... what passive speakers deliver on what I'm after in an assuredly superior way to the S150?
What active speakers do?

If I went with genelec for example, how do you take care of surrounds?

I use an Anthem AVM90 with ARC ... so buying into Genelec or Neumann with active correction software is better or just doubling up?

 

[Ron Texas]

What's that on the left side of the image? You might be doubling up. The KH150 is a great product, albeit a bit pricey. Just don't get trapped in the numbers game.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

First things first: At the end of the day, the goal is to have a sound system that sounds good, and satisfies your needs. In my parents' case, that is a 5.2 system with the JBL Studio 580 towers, the 520 center, 2 of the 550p subs, and a Yamaha Rx-V6A (B/C it has custom EQ, and lots of power). Is it the best by the numbers? No. But, we compromised where we didn't really care about, in this case, it was amplifier SINAD, and the subwoofer system.

One thing to consider is that many of the modern powered monitors dynamic limitations are usually due to the tweeters.
Looking at your requirements, it seems like you want a speaker that can get decently loud.
I would recommend looking at something like the JBL 708, or the HDI-1600, if you need the bookshelf size.
The tweeter + waveguide system on them ensures good imaging, as well as good dynamic capability, and the woofers are good as well.

The passive vs active is really just dependent on what you're trying to do. For a residential surround system, I would say passive is easier to work with since you only need 1 cable to each speaker location, vs power and signal cables for active speakers. You will also be able to turn on and off the system from one location.

No matter who you go with, the surrounds are easy: Buy a matching speaker. In the case of the above-recommended HDI-1600, I would recommend more of them for surround duty. If you were to use the Genelec 8361 as your LCR, then maybe you could get away with the 8341 or something like that as surrounds.

Room correction software is an interesting point. Done right, it is really impressive, but done halfway it doesn't really work. My approach is to first get the room and system as good as possible by moving the speakers, listening position, and occasionally using room treatments (rugs, curtains, etc). After that, I employ room correction software and EQ to correct for anything that is impractical to correct for physically.

In conclusion. I can't really give you any proper recommendations without knowing everything about your room, and your system requirements. But, given your current setup, and your stated desires, I would feel pretty confident recommending JBL's premium lines, as well as some powerful amps if you don't already have them.

 

[alex-z]

Due to the multi-driver layout, the radiation pattern has a narrow sweet spot. Anything less than listening directly on-axis, at ear level, will compromise the sound.

Additionally, they are designed to provide almost flat in-room response. A quality which is often desired for mixing, but not consumption of music. I would strongly recommend EQ to make them sound more pleasant.

The final concern is impedance, you need a 2 Ohm stable amp in order to utilize their full dynamic range, impedance is below 4 Ohms from 140-500Hz.

As for what would sound better, probably some KEF R3 Meta + R6 Meta. Top of the line coaxial drivers for a broader sweet spot, more inert cabinets, and a crossover tuned for in-home listening, rather than studio mixing.

 

[kemmler3D]

Looking at the graphs of the S150, the big weak point is bass. It's arguably deficient below 500hz and definitely deficient below 100hz. This is where all your slam, body, visceral impact is missing, however you want to call it. Subs can and should cross over around 100, but IMO you're going to notice a lack if your mains are falling short there. My mains will go down to 35, I run them full range and I cross my sub around 150 to smooth out nulls. YMMV.

The main advantage of this speaker seems to be vertical directivity, so I might keep it for the center. Otherwise, there are plenty of good options that are going to hit you harder.

However, your requirement of a big and precise soundstage are somewhat at odds.

Likewise, your requirement of a lot of visceral impact and a smaller footprint are somewhat at odds. Anecdotally, 10"+ is needed (many will tell you 15") to get a large coherent wavefront you can actually feel. This might be subjectivist nonsense, but you can find a handful of people on this forum that will vouch for the idea.


All that said, the KH120 or 150 will do better than the S150, as will most stuff KEF puts out.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

However, your requirement of a big and precise soundstage are somewhat at odds.

Likewise, your requirement of a lot of visceral impact and a smaller footprint are somewhat at odds. Anecdotally, 10"+ is needed (many will tell you 15") to get a large coherent wavefront you can actually feel. This might be subjectivist nonsense, but you can find a handful of people on this forum that will vouch for the idea.

I will vouch for needing displacement to feel it.
Maybe not 10+", I find that good towers with multiple 8 inch or bigger drivers can deliver visceral impact, though not as much as a PA with multiple 12" woofers and 18" subs...

And one other bit about soundstage, given your placement of the speakers, you aren't going to get a great soundstage. You need distance between the speakers, and distance from the walls to get really good imaging / soundstage.
And lastly, Big vs precise: you can have a big, and precise soundstage, by having a big system in a large space. But in OP's case, OP should probably define whether he wants to pursue accuracy in the soundstage rendition, or if he wants one which is inflated to seem more impactful.

There really isn't any right answer for whether to pursue a big or accurate soundstage, it just depends on what you want.

 

[mgrobins]

What's that on the left side of the image? You might be doubling up. The KH150 is a great product, albeit a bit pricey. Just don't get trapped in the numbers game.

The Sub? It's my own build. Uses a Dayton RSS390HE-22.

 

[mgrobins]

Due to the multi-driver layout, the radiation pattern has a narrow sweet spot. Anything less than listening directly on-axis, at ear level, will compromise the sound.

Additionally, they are designed to provide almost flat in-room response. A quality which is often desired for mixing, but not consumption of music. I would strongly recommend EQ to make them sound more pleasant.

The final concern is impedance, you need a 2 Ohm stable amp in order to utilize their full dynamic range, impedance is below 4 Ohms from 140-500Hz.

As for what would sound better, probably some KEF R3 Meta + R6 Meta. Top of the line coaxial drivers for a broader sweet spot, more inert cabinets, and a crossover tuned for in-home listening, rather than studio mixing.

I'm tweaking the angles of my LCR's to make sure this is the case. Toe-in on the L and R will reduce the off axis response but also reduce the width of my stage a little. I'll play with that.

 

[mgrobins]

Looking at the graphs of the S150, the big weak point is bass. It's arguably deficient below 500hz and definitely deficient below 100hz. This is where all your slam, body, visceral impact is missing, however you want to call it. Subs can and should cross over around 100, but IMO you're going to notice a lack if your mains are falling short there. My mains will go down to 35, I run them full range and I cross my sub around 150 to smooth out nulls. YMMV.

The main advantage of this speaker seems to be vertical directivity, so I might keep it for the center. Otherwise, there are plenty of good options that are going to hit you harder.

However, your requirement of a big and precise soundstage are somewhat at odds.

Likewise, your requirement of a lot of visceral impact and a smaller footprint are somewhat at odds. Anecdotally, 10"+ is needed (many will tell you 15") to get a large coherent wavefront you can actually feel. This might be subjectivist nonsense, but you can find a handful of people on this forum that will vouch for the idea.


All that said, the KH120 or 150 will do better than the S150, as will most stuff KEF puts out.

Yes I agree the soundstage size and precision are seemingly at odds, however a speaker that has more linear off axis is going to be perhaps easier to get more from while retaining precision because I won't necessarily have to toe it in.

I didn't realise the s150 was diminished in the 100-500Hz nor that it has an impedance drop there. I'm in the midst of upgrading my amplifier to some of the March Audio Purifi models (P422 and a P421 ... I assume there is no downside to using a stereo amp instead of 3 monoblocks? The only potential difference would be shared power supply in the stereo one?). These are reputed to be comfortable with 2ohm and will offer plenty of power. My current amp - a 20yr old Elektra Theatron, may be lagging in this.... unsure .

One point to make on the "Visceral" aspect is that Particle Velocity is far more important than SPL. A ported speaker has 10x more impact than a sealed one (fwd port). That's one of the reasons the Neumann KH150 interested me as it's forward ported.

The studies on particle velocity have been done well on subs and worth reading about if you want to know the potential achievement you can have that isn't only linked to diaphragm size. Few bookshelves are front ported... so there is that. If I can find the summary I was reading I'll link it here.

I'm limited by my space under my TV for speakers which has meant loss of the options you would likely point at as perfect for my situation. I'll be constructing a nearfield sub and as far as the lower mids go... I'll see if I can EQ my S150's for now, and look at what could best fit my needs as an alternative. I think 45cm was the max height I could use. The KH310 Neumann is layed on its side and would be a great 3 way option too I think? That just brings in my uncertainty of capacity for the active monitors to fill a room. I'm not a loud listener by any stretch... I just feel like I'm lacking something with my current arrangement.

 

[mgrobins]

I will vouch for needing displacement to feel it.
Maybe not 10+", I find that good towers with multiple 8 inch or bigger drivers can deliver visceral impact, though not as much as a PA with multiple 12" woofers and 18" subs...

And one other bit about soundstage, given your placement of the speakers, you aren't going to get a great soundstage. You need distance between the speakers, and distance from the walls to get really good imaging / soundstage.
And lastly, Big vs precise: you can have a big, and precise soundstage, by having a big system in a large space. But in OP's case, OP should probably define whether he wants to pursue accuracy in the soundstage rendition, or if he wants one which is inflated to seem more impactful.

There really isn't any right answer for whether to pursue a big or accurate soundstage, it just depends on what you want.

I'm on the same page as you in terms of the compromises in soundstage. I do think a speaker with a narrow linear dispersion is best toed in to accommodate that... which then narrows the soundstage and likely sharpens the placement. If I can have a speaker with nicer off axis response then I may not need to toe in. I also have no side wall for my right speaker which means no reflections to create the width of stage to the right... so the room is my enemy here!

I'd say I like a bigger sounding stage for movies with vocals still accurate enough to the persons location, but with music instruments need to sound precisely located - not big. Maybe I'll become one of those with 2 systems haha. Or headphones.

What I want with soundstage for films maybe I just won't be able to have in spades... but perhaps a different speaker could give a bit more of what I'm after? .

Certainly I've some great ideas and feedback from those of you offering advice - it's very much appreciated

 

[mgrobins]

Looking at the graphs of the S150, the big weak point is bass. It's arguably deficient below 500hz and definitely deficient below 100hz. This is where all your slam, body, visceral impact is missing, however you want to call it. Subs can and should cross over around 100, but IMO you're going to notice a lack if your mains are falling short there. My mains will go down to 35, I run them full range and I cross my sub around 150 to smooth out nulls. YMMV.

The main advantage of this speaker seems to be vertical directivity, so I might keep it for the center. Otherwise, there are plenty of good options that are going to hit you harder.

However, your requirement of a big and precise soundstage are somewhat at odds.

Likewise, your requirement of a lot of visceral impact and a smaller footprint are somewhat at odds. Anecdotally, 10"+ is needed (many will tell you 15") to get a large coherent wavefront you can actually feel. This might be subjectivist nonsense, but you can find a handful of people on this forum that will vouch for the idea.


All that said, the KH120 or 150 will do better than the S150, as will most stuff KEF puts out.

What thoughts have you on this model? March Audio Sointuva Speaker

I'm in Australia and it's an option for me locally with a good discount on the cards as I'll be buying amps from March too if I go passive speakers.

My Shortlist is (no particular sequence):

Sointuva (can buy 3 so no issues of 2 pair or having a different horizontal "centre" model)
Kef R3 (I can get one pair very cheap but need a 3rd for centre too),
Revel M106 (same issue of being sold paired)
Neumann KH150
Neumann KH310 (I keep thinking this could be a really good one).

If I'm looking at purify amps, I cant help but wonder how the active Neumann products are in comparison. I guess they must have a quiet noise floor and sound very neutral. Are they in the range where comparing yields very little genuine difference?

 

[mgrobins]

Due to the multi-driver layout, the radiation pattern has a narrow sweet spot. Anything less than listening directly on-axis, at ear level, will compromise the sound.

Additionally, they are designed to provide almost flat in-room response. A quality which is often desired for mixing, but not consumption of music. I would strongly recommend EQ to make them sound more pleasant.

The final concern is impedance, you need a 2 Ohm stable amp in order to utilize their full dynamic range, impedance is below 4 Ohms from 140-500Hz.

As for what would sound better, probably some KEF R3 Meta + R6 Meta. Top of the line coaxial drivers for a broader sweet spot, more inert cabinets, and a crossover tuned for in-home listening, rather than studio mixing.

Just curious if you have any thoughts on my post above with the shortlist I have. I gather you have experience to compare monitors and "normal" speakers which I lack...

 

[kemmler3D]

What thoughts have you on this model? March Audio Sointuva Speaker

I'm in Australia and it's an option for me locally with a good discount on the cards as I'll be buying amps from March too if I go passive speakers.

My Shortlist is (no particular sequence):

Sointuva (can buy 3 so no issues of 2 pair or having a different horizontal "centre" model)
Kef R3 (I can get one pair very cheap but need a 3rd for centre too),
Revel M106 (same issue of being sold paired)
Neumann KH150
Neumann KH310 (I keep thinking this could be a really good one).

If I'm looking at purify amps, I cant help but wonder how the active Neumann products are in comparison. I guess they must have a quiet noise floor and sound very neutral. Are they in the range where comparing yields very little genuine difference?

I have seen good measurements of the Sonituva, it uses a purifi driver which to me is a big plus, very low distortion and more bass output than most of its competitors.

KEF is well-liked around here, as is Revel.

The Neumanns are definitely a good option, although they might be a bit large for your application. The amps in those will be (in practice) just as good as a Purifi unless you sit 6" from the tweeter.

Honestly no bad options here, I think if you could demo them that would help break the tie, otherwise go with the one that appeals to you at the most favorable price.

 

[mgrobins]

I have seen good measurements of the Sonituva, it uses a purifi driver which to me is a big plus, very low distortion and more bass output than most of its competitors.

KEF is well-liked around here, as is Revel.

The Neumanns are definitely a good option, although they might be a bit large for your application. The amps in those will be (in practice) just as good as a Purifi unless you sit 6" from the tweeter.

Honestly no bad options here, I think if you could demo them that would help break the tie, otherwise go with the one that appeals to you at the most favorable price.

Thanks .

I listened to the KH120 today, my local DJ Store not having the 150's in place. THey sounded really nice and seemed to go loud by my estimation. I know that's not a representation of dynamic range capability. I think that's the single point that has me stumped on the choice of active monitors in this role - do they have the power handling and headroom for modern movie tracks at decent (if lower than) reference level when paired with subs?

The 310 interestingly, I thought was not as nice a sound as the 120.

I wonder when the KH150 II will release

Yes, I think the Sointuva has parts with impeccable pedigree. Purifi are certainly cementing a reputation for their technology.

 

[sarumbear]

Due to the multi-driver layout, the radiation pattern has a narrow sweet spot. Anything less than listening directly on-axis, at ear level, will compromise the sound.

This is a n interesting point. I can see two tests, first one is by @amirm here and the second one is by Erin. Erin's test shows a terrible speaker, whereas Amirm's shows a not so bad speaker, and what one expects from looking at the layout of the speaker. I realise that they are not exactly the same model but it is hard to see how a few bits of foam will change the dispersion that much. Very strange and hence, impossible to give you advise if you have decent speakers or not.

 

[kemmler3D]

Thanks .

I listened to the KH120 today, my local DJ Store not having the 150's in place. THey sounded really nice and seemed to go loud by my estimation. I know that's not a representation of dynamic range capability. I think that's the single point that has me stumped on the choice of active monitors in this role - do they have the power handling and headroom for modern movie tracks at decent (if lower than) reference level when paired with subs?

The 310 interestingly, I thought was not as nice a sound as the 120.

I wonder when the KH150 II will release

Yes, I think the Sointuva has parts with impeccable pedigree. Purifi are certainly cementing a reputation for their technology.

I think the KH120 is probably enough if you don't like to listen to movies at actual reference level, (which is pretty loud IMO) but if you did a multichannel setup with 150s I imagine you'd get there, although I haven't checked the numbers.

 

[mgrobins]

This is a n interesting point. I can see two tests, first one is by @amirm here and the second one is by Erin. Erin's test shows a terrible speaker, whereas Amirm's shows a not so bad speaker, and what one expects from looking at the layout of the speaker. I realise that they are not exactly the same model but it is hard to see how a few bits of foam will change the dispersion that much. Very strange and hence, impossible to give you advise if you have decent speakers or not.

There are 2 tested models floating around on here, EAC, and Spinorama. The "THX" and the new "MK2" which is not labelled as such - just S150. The THX has the foam.

The new version Mk2 has altered waveguides and different tweeters. The foam is removed.
Did both specify the same precise location as "centre" or "reference" for measurements? That would matter too yes?

I appreciate the S150 is directional in design - both vertically and horizontally. I'm using the spectral graphs to understand that and hopefully improve my experience with them. It won't resolve my issue of wanting more in other areas, but I am interested to see how they change/improve as I angle them with more nuance for a very specific listening head position.

On foam... yes it absolutely makes a difference. My educated guess - a factor of sufficient density/dimension to knock off the tweeters energy and if you consider cross section of the foam energy will pass through a different (greater) amount of foam as the angle increases. I surmise this would act to deplete more of the energy as angle increases. It *may* not be uniform given the range of frequency... and thus likely more complicated than I can picture in this moment!

Perhaps I'll buy some weather stripping and start selling it as "audiophile Waveguide Foam, with de-coupling adhesive". Jokes aside - it's how we tame energy in cabinets and in rooms... no reason it can't work on a speaker fascia and quite innovative for the time I suspect.

 

[mgrobins]

I think the KH120 is probably enough if you don't like to listen to movies at actual reference level, (which is pretty loud IMO) but if you did a multichannel setup with 150s I imagine you'd get there, although I haven't checked the numbers.

The store was a very large space and I stood back further than my normal distance, or anticipated distance if I move house. It was loud enough that the vocals were becoming unintelligible due to the reflections (I checked up close and still beautifully clear), and uncomfortable to listen to. It wasn't music with wide range though... so I'll go back with music and movie content that offers that.

The 150 is a scaled version of the 120 which makes me believe I'd just be adding headroom.... unless there are some nuances to the 120 II that I'm not factoring in (with the DSP, amps etc).

50% of activity in a film is out of the centre speaker - so using the stereo pair for experiencing output needs to be tempered by that consideration.