- Joined
- Mar 18, 2023
- Messages
- 669
- Likes
- 1,039
so you look at the measurements of genelec monitors then and say they are bright, or admit you're wrongLook at the measurements - not unreliable subjectivity.
Last edited:
so you look at the measurements of genelec monitors then and say they are bright, or admit you're wrongLook at the measurements - not unreliable subjectivity.
I wasn't meaning to offend you or your personal preferences. I understand that the KH 150 can be perceived as being brighter than the KH 120 in direct comparison in specific listening conditions. It's the other member who is known for regularly invoking the dubious claim that Neumanns are inherently "dark", after having only briefly listened to them (while not stating under which conditions did they come to such conclusion).
As for my personal experience, I am using the KH 120 daily for a year and a half now, and at first the treble even felt a bit too harsh for me (after having used the HEDD Type 07 MK2), but it looks like I got used to it. What is true, is that these speakers benefit from EQ that helps to get rid of some low-mid messiness due to desktop reflections. Then you can hear what they are really capable of. So perhaps this perceived "darkness" has more to do with suboptimal listening conditions rather than the tonality of the speakers themselves (as backed by their free-field measurements).
It is not that you are wrong in the sense that you are absolutely entitled to your preferences. However, it is important for all of us to understand the difference between objective reality and personal perception/preference. The point is that the un-brightness is not in the KH monitors --- It is in your perception and preferences.
In PJ’s defence there is an explanation for his perception of the KH120’s sounding darker to him and it has nothing to do with non-flat on axis response. As this post by thewas explains, the wider directivity of the Genelec monitors put more high frequency sound power into a room in comparison to the Neumann.That is exactly the point. The Genelecs are brighter - and that is not a good thing for studio monitors. Studio monitors are not supposed to make the music sound better. They are supposed to tell the truth of what the music actually sounds like.
I'm not seeing a large bass SPL advantage with the 310s at all (per Neumann's specs and Amir's THD measurements), and the DI is quite smooth for both. Of course, the V2s will have all of the advantages that a proper SOTA 3-way with a larger updated woofer would provide, but a substantial improvement would be surprising, especially for nearfield use. In any case, I look forward to seeing what Neumann will offer. A more powerful, MA 1-equipped sub to go along with the release would be a very pleasant surprise as well.First, don't tell me to read Amir's reviews. I have already.
Second, the V1s already have lower IMD, they have way more dynamics in the bass (the 150s are pretty hard limited at 96dB), they have smoother DI (driver size changes are less dramatic)... So yeah. The V2s will be better.
Check S&R's measurements of both. The 310's 10% THD level for LF is much above its 3%, where the 150's 10% THD is right on top of the 3%.I'm not seeing a large bass SPL advantage with the 310s at all (per Neumann's specs and Amir's THD measurements), and the DI is quite smooth for both. Of course, the V2s will have all of the advantages that a proper SOTA 3-way with a larger updated woofer would provide, but a substantial improvement would be surprising, especially for nearfield use. In any case, I look forward to seeing what Neumann will offer. A more powerful, MA 1-equipped sub to go along with the release would be a very pleasant surprise as well.
KH 150:
View attachment 339112
View attachment 339115
KH 310 A:
View attachment 339113
View attachment 339116
View attachment 339117
I owned the 120A for several years so not exactly "after he briefly heard them"I wasn't meaning to offend you or your personal preferences. I understand that the KH 150 can be perceived as being brighter than the KH 120 in direct comparison in specific listening conditions. It's the other member who is known for regularly invoking the dubious claim that Neumanns are inherently "dark", after having only briefly listened to them (while not stating under which conditions did they come to such conclusion).
As for my personal experience, I am using the KH 120 daily for a year and a half now, and at first the treble even felt a bit too harsh for me (after having used the HEDD Type 07 MK2), but it looks like I got used to it. What is true, is that these speakers benefit from EQ that helps to get rid of some low-mid messiness due to desktop reflections. Then you can hear what they are really capable of. So perhaps this perceived "darkness" has more to do with suboptimal listening conditions rather than the tonality of the speakers themselves (as backed by their free-field measurements).
Check S&R's measurements of both. The 310's 10% THD level for LF is much above its 3%, where the 150's 10% THD is right on top of the 3%.
I had to notch the 420's tweeter down 1dB to get it where I wanted, and I have a pretty treated room.I owned the 120A for several years so not exactly "after he briefly heard them"
And yes I think they sound darker compared to Genelecs especially
And an lot of people agree with me
Read some comments on Gearspace
Even this experienced reviewer says that the only downside of the KH420 is lack of sparkle at the top end, and they all share the same tweeter.
We all hear differently and have different preferencesI had to notch the 420's tweeter down 1dB to get it where I wanted, and I have a pretty treated room.
The 3 way neumanns have a somewhat flatter in room response than the 2 ways, FWIW. They trend a touch brighter in-room.We all hear differently and have different preferences
Quite untrue. Look at the measurements by Amir on the KH120 II's and KH150 compared to the three way designs. The KH 120 II's and KH150 are flatter.The 3 way neumanns have a somewhat flatter in room response than the 2 ways, FWIW. They trend a touch brighter in-room.
I repeat: in room.Quite untrue. Look at the measurements by Amir on the KH120 II's and KH150 compared to the three way designs. The KH 120 II's and KH150 are flatter.
Yeah, that had crossed my mind, but it's partly just wanting the higher model really. Plus the KH150 is just slightly better regarding distortion etc.Depending on your room you could probably just use 2x KH120ii when combined with one KH750 and save some money.
Oh for sure, buying these without M1A seems like a fools errand really, especially when you have all those capabilities left on the table. It's amazing how you have people spending many thousands on speakers in the Hi-fi scene, when these, £2500 a pair and the measurements that are like the holy grail of measurements, absolutely astonishing. Don't get me wrong, sometimes I like an EQ curve, but it's nice to have a flat base on which to tailor that. 90% of the time though I love the flat level sound. In audiophile circles people like to dismiss flat frequency response, it's amazing how they miss the advantages of such even if they then use an EQ afterwards.For "being done" I would strongly suggest to use the MA-1 measurement system. They should bundle it with speakers like KH150 anyways in my opinion.
And don't forget to do some experiments to find the best position for the subwoofer - EQ can't compensate a bad position!