Neumann KH 150 Monitor Review

[Pearljam5000]

The KH310 is 12 years old
Where's the new model Neumann?

 

[Count Arthur]

The KH310 is 12 years old
Where's the new model Neumann?

I imagine that at some point their older models will be replaced with newer equivalents that use DSP and class D amplifiers.

 

[teashea]

I don't necessarily disagree but would Neumann state 'recommended listening distance' as 1 metre to 2.5 metres (feasible from 0.75) if it wasn't optimal? Which is the same as they state for the KH150 by the way.

KH 310 A - Three Way Nearfield Monitor

High-resolution tri-amplified near-field monitor, optimized for midrange and a dry bass sound.

www.neumann.com

I use my KH 310's at 1.2 meters. It is fine.

 

[Drew456]

Where's the new model Neumann?

You should probably direct that question to the upper echelons of Sennheiser and, while you are at it, request they allocate a bigger share of their profits to more convincing customer service, as well as better quality control of their products. That's just my opinion however..

In any case, haven't you just ordered a pair of Genelec 8361?

 

[teashea]

I imagine that at some point their older models will be replaced with newer equivalents that use DSP and class D amplifiers.

The only models they have that are not new are the KH420 and KH310. I expect a new KH310 II next.

 

[Tovarich007]

@Drew456 : i've read these specs too. But "recommended" or "feasable" are not synonyms of "optimal".

Of course, you can listen with good results A 310 at 1m/1m30, but it's difficult to get a perfect imaging at this rather short distance with a non coaxial as good as it is, especially for mixing or tracking (I don't mean the result will be bad, far from it, but one get even better at a little longer distance).

At short distance, the two drivers of the smaller KH150 will integrate more easily. Moreover, the KH150 benefits from a DSP which allows for a very precise phase. The analog filtering of the bigger 310 is very good, but not quite equal to what can be obtained today with an up to date well engineered DSP.

If ever Neumann decides to actually release a new version of the 310, there certainly will be some improvements. Some ASR forumers seem to have got some informations from Neumann about such a release since more than one year now. but nothing's confirmed yet.
As we used to say in french : "c'est une arlésienne, ce scoop". Maybe there was a project and prototypes (R&D teams never stay without ideas) but perhaps Neumann executives have finally considered the KH310 is good enough and always sells well, and doen't justify the investment and marketing campaign for a new version.
We're in the pro market, not the hifi market. In the pro domain, there are new products only if there is a solvable market demand.

 

[VTKZ]

I use the KH150 in a ,farfield, listening / homecinema setup and even they are with Sub Support more than enough imo. I just say : ~106 dB Peak. When this is not enough i dont know. Just imagine what the KH310 or 420 would capable of with Sub Support.

I'm a Neumann Fan & owner since many many years. Had the 310, 120 and now 80 & 150. But my tip is : invest in Room treatment & subwoofer concept (double bass array or multi bass) + minidsp. The new 310 mk2 will be neumann level perfection, but wouldnt be ,magical, or ,next level,. And imo you get the same results with professional dsp setup with miniDSP, ConeQ, AcourateCV or similiar softwares - or just book professional Service who set everything up manual.
for me : Manual Setup > Automation
you pay here around 500€ for Main + Subwoofer(s) / Single / Double Bass Array Setup

And i'm pretty sure the new KH310 would be close to 4k or even more. The 150 costs 2.8k, and with a new model the price would be setup very high

 

[teashea]

I use the KH150 in a ,farfield, listening / homecinema setup and even they are with Sub Support more than enough imo. I just say : ~106 dB Peak. When this is not enough i dont know. Just imagine what the KH310 or 420 would capable of with Sub Support.

I'm a Neumann Fan & owner since many many years. Had the 310, 120 and now 80 & 150. But my tip is : invest in Room treatment & subwoofer concept (double bass array or multi bass) + minidsp. The new 310 mk2 will be neumann level perfection, but wouldnt be ,magical, or ,next level,. And imo you get the same results with professional dsp setup with miniDSP, ConeQ, AcourateCV or similiar softwares - or just book professional Service who set everything up manual.
for me : Manual Setup > Automation
you pay here around 500€ for Main + Subwoofer(s) / Single / Double Bass Array Setup

And i'm pretty sure the new KH310 would be close to 4k or even more. The 150 costs 2.8k, and with a new model the price would be setup very high

"That scoop is always being promised, but never delivered"

 

[LTig]

Good for KH150 but IMO a little too short for KH310 to get an optimal imaging. This could (IMHO) explains your impressions considering you get a better pinpoint imaging with the 150 ?

I don't think so, mid and high domes on the 310 are closer together than tweeter and woofer of the 150, and I think location information lies mainly in this frequency range.

 

[unpluggged]

I don't think so, mid and high domes on the 310 are closer together than tweeter and woofer of the 150, and I think location information lies mainly in this frequency range.

Also, in three-way designs driver integration is less of an issue since the crossovers do not generally lie in the most sensitive frequency region as with two-ways.

 

[Tovarich007]

I tend to partly disagree.
OK the location informations lie more in the high frequencies, I don't contest this point. But 650hz, the crossover frequency between the bass and the medium dome of the 310 is 650 khz. This is is a sensitive region as well, notably because very charged in sound informations of all kinds. Medium bass an mid-medium (say between 200 and 800 hz more or less) are crucial for complexity in informations and amplitude.

As for the crossover between the medium and the tweeter is at 2 kHz, which is sensitive too and close to the1,7 Khz crossover frequency of the 150, so this tiny difference doesn't change things much.

All in all, the phase and baffle reflections on a larger three way are relatively more complex to deal with and can have small but not completely null effects on amplitude and imaging. And, once gain, there is no DSP on the 310. It's not only the croosover frequency that matters.

Anyway, we're talking of small differences. Both speakers are very good but not completely identical in all aspects.

 

[AnalogSteph]

The 310's biggest problem (aside from being a bit of a power hog) may be a direct result of its shape and size - the horizontal dispersion irregularity in the low midrange. This is not going to be fixable without either making the speaker bigger so the midrange can get a larger waveguide, or some kind of even more radical shift like going for a side-mounted woofer or a pair thereof. Imagine they went with a trapezoidal footprint and twin KH120 woofers. It would definitely be about time for them to try something cardioid as well.

 

[teashea]

The 310's biggest problem (aside from being a bit of a power hog) may be a direct result of its shape and size - the horizontal dispersion irregularity in the low midrange. This is not going to be fixable without either making the speaker bigger so the midrange can get a larger waveguide, or some kind of even more radical shift like going for a side-mounted woofer or a pair thereof. Imagine they went with a trapezoidal footprint and twin KH120 woofers. It would definitely be about time for them to try something cardioid as well.

The KH310 requires only a signal. It is an active monitor.

If you are talking about its power consumption, you are also wrong. Maximum is 300 watts at full power. The KH 150 is 320 watts at full power. Both are modest.

The midrange dispersion is very good.

Twin woofers would be interesting.

 

[unpluggged]

Maximum is 300 watts at full power.

And at idle?

 

[dfuller]

If you are talking about its power consumption, you are also wrong. Maximum is 300 watts at full power. The KH 150 is 320 watts at full power. Both are modest.

the 310 is much higher at idle than the 150. The 150 idles (in on mode) around 15 watts. The 310 is at 24. Still not a ton, but a solid 60% more than the 150. The KH420 is where the power draw is higher - 60w at idle. But it also has hugely more amp on tap than the 150 or 310.

The 310's biggest problem (aside from being a bit of a power hog) may be a direct result of its shape and size - the horizontal dispersion irregularity in the low midrange. This is not going to be fixable without either making the speaker bigger so the midrange can get a larger waveguide, or some kind of even more radical shift like going for a side-mounted woofer or a pair thereof. Imagine they went with a trapezoidal footprint and twin KH120 woofers. It would definitely be about time for them to try something cardioid as well.

The WG on the midrange is really shallow, but there is no woofer:mid error (beyond the "one toothed comb" which is a result of the arrangement and the crossover frequency, not the depth of the WG itself. Note in the vertical that the flare isn't present.

For a point of comparison, this is the similarly sized ATC SCM25A's horizontal contour. Note that it mostly lacks the same flare - the waveguide is marginally larger, yes, but more importantly it is 270hz lower - the better part of an octave.

 

[Count Arthur]

I imagine that if Neumann release a 310II and 420II, they will be a class D, DSP enabled refinement, rather than a radical departure from the previous models.

One thing that might be interesting to see, is a rotatable tweeter and mid "plate" on both models, so they can be orientated either portrait, or landscape, like some other three way monitors:

 

[unpluggged]

One thing that might be interesting to see, is a rotatable tweeter and mid "plate" on both models

The current KH 420 already has it. Not so feasible for smaller enclosures such as the KH 310.

 

[funkera91]

Ok so, is KH 150 good for home cinema, used as FL, FR, Back R and Back L? Distance from the FR/FL arround 2.6 metres? IF YES, what Center channel to match with them ?

 

[teashea]

And at idle?

24

 

[teashea]

Ok so, is KH 150 good for home cinema, used as FL, FR, Back R and Back L? Distance from the FR/FL arround 2.6 metres? IF YES, what Center channel to match with them ?

It is not really a cinema speaker.