• 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!

Neumann KH 80 DSP Speaker Measurements: Take Two

It is not as bad as I thought, I made an error in headroom loss calculation - this graph realistically shows the SPL relation between uncorrected and corrected version, so app 4.5dB of headroom is lost. Max boost is 7.5dB at 97 Hz, which shouldn't put much stress on a speaker. Max boost can, of course, be reduced on account of more headroom loss.

Capture.JPG
 
To the 4.5 dB gain drop the 7.5 dB of the positive PEQ are added so its approximately closer to your initial calculation of reduce headroom by 12.6dB.
Anyway, in my past experience such wide SBIR gaps should be fixed by moving the loudspeakers and not by filling them with EQs as these don't correct the missing mid-bass punch but only make the sound muddy, plus of course the disadvantage of the lost headroom which for a small and bass SPL limited loudspeaker like the KH120 can be a no-go criterion, unless listened only at very moderate levels.
 
To the 4.5 dB gain drop the 7.5 dB of the positive PEQ are added so its approximately closer to your initial calculation of reduce headroom by 12.6dB.
Anyway, in my past experience such wide SBIR gaps should be fixed by moving the loudspeakers and not by filling them with EQs as these don't correct the missing mid-bass punch but only make the sound muddy, plus of course the disadvantage of the lost headroom which for a small and bass SPL limited loudspeaker like the KH120 can be a no-go criterion, unless listened only at very moderate levels.

Yes, I checked again and it is indeed -12.6dB. And by all means speakers should be repositioned instead of forcing EQ like this.
 
Headroom loss actually is 7dB but HF is pushed lower with shelve filter.

This is how filter looks before pushing it by 7dB to get 0dB gain to avoid clipping:

Capture.JPG
 
To the 4.5 dB gain drop the 7.5 dB of the positive PEQ are added so its approximately closer to your initial calculation of reduce headroom by 12.6dB.
Anyway, in my past experience such wide SBIR gaps should be fixed by moving the loudspeakers and not by filling them with EQs as these don't correct the missing mid-bass punch but only make the sound muddy, plus of course the disadvantage of the lost headroom which for a small and bass SPL limited loudspeaker like the KH120 can be a no-go criterion, unless listened only at very moderate levels.

Correct graph this tme.. :)

As you can see filling the dip around 97Hz was actually reasonably small so I wouldn't be worried about loosing mid-bass punch, but headroom loss is certainly there.


Capture.JPG
 
Headroom loss actually is 7dB but HF is pushed lower with shelve filter.

This is how filter looks before pushing it by 7dB to get 0dB gain to avoid clipping:

View attachment 69516
Of course it depends on the reference frequency, but since you wisely don't really EQ above 700 Hz if we take the region 700 Hz to 20 kHz as reference then the headroom loss is as written above by both of us approximately 12 dB as you must add the "preamp" loss due to the bass EQ peak.
 
Of course it depends on the reference frequency, but since you wisely don't really EQ above 700 Hz if we take the region 700 Hz to 20 kHz as reference then the headroom loss is as written above by both of us approximately 12 dB as you must add the "preamp" loss due to the bass EQ peak.

Correct. Price for such large peak to peak variation must be paid. :)

On the other hand, it will sound much better when listening on normal SPLs and if he has a preamp with high output and/or a powerfull amp to compensate for headroom loss he may still be able to get decent SPLs. But as I said at the beggining, finding a better speaker position is really recommended here.
 
The high peak at 53 Hz I don't see as a big problem as it can be EQed nicely but the very wide dip from 70 to 140 Hz which is per average 8 dB deep and exactly in important the kick/mid bass region:

1592491664756.png


Of course it could be EQed fully or partially with a moderate 5-6 dB PEQ but in my experience that still doesn't sound by far as good if there wasn't a dip in the first place, so moving the loudspeakers is the only great solution. Don't ask me how I know, I fought with a similar dip for years in my old house... :facepalm::D
 
The high peak at 53 Hz I don't see as a big problem as it can be EQed nicely but the very wide dip from 70 to 140 Hz which is per average 8 dB deep and exactly in important the kick/mid bass region:

View attachment 69528

Of course it could be EQed fully or partially with a moderate 5-6 dB PEQ but in my experience that still doesn't sound by far as good if there wasn't a dip in the first place, so moving the loudspeakers is the only great solution. Don't ask me how I know, I fought with a similar dip for years in my old house... :facepalm::D

LOL MY situation is not much better, so I'm not in a position to judge anybody! :D

Here is if I do it the way you suggested, it saves some headroom and is pretty much equally smooth:

Capture.JPG
 
I think Amir should buy his own KH80 so that he can re-measure it every month. Why? To keep forum traffic up! :):)
I *have* bought the KH80 DSP used for this testing. I am out $500 because of all you rascals!!! :D
 
How suitable are these for normal home listening? Will the near field be an issue? These seem to have astonishingly low distortion and flat curve as well as management from phone. Will they work in normal stereo listening in a medium sized room with a sub?
 
How suitable are these for normal home listening? Will the near field be an issue? These seem to have astonishingly low distortion and flat curve as well as management from phone. Will they work in normal stereo listening in a medium sized room with a sub?
They are made for near field. They will work in a room with a sub but not to very high levels of SPL. It really depends on the size of the room and how loud you need to listen.

My wife currently uses a pair of Genelec 8020a (similar to KH80) in her room with 16 square meter without a sub and they sound fantastic. They are however positioned close to the wall, one of them lose to the corner. This means there is quite some room gain but also reduced imaging. Room EQ is active to flatten room gain. And no, even then there is nothing below 40 Hz and no real bass drum slam as in our main system with sub, so if you listen to music with a lot of deep bass (my wife doesn't) you'll need a sub.
 
We were also asked about measurements of the KH 120 in the NFS, so we repeated the process. Measurement setup is as above for the KH 80. There is a slight low frequency difference between measurements done in free field and in the Klippel Near Field Scanner, the cause of this difference is unclear. The high frequency difference is similar to that seen on the KH 80. Part of this is from the NFS microphone itself, but there appears to also be some unknown fixed offset between the 2 measurement set ups above 13 kHz.

View attachment 67979


The other measurements from Klippel are shown below:


View attachment 67980
View attachment 67981
View attachment 67982
View attachment 67983
View attachment 67984
View attachment 67985

View attachment 67986
View attachment 67987


I am very curious to see the preference rating of the KH120 (without and with sub).
I don`t know how you create it but I guess of the KH120 we have all data:
# https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...eaker-measurements-take-two.11323/post-425238
# https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/2054/download (Neumann *.gll file Ease viewer)
# https://de-de.neumann.com/kh-120-a-g (Neumann product documentation)
# https://de-de.neumann.com/product_files/1710/download (S&R review KH120)
# https://heissmann-acoustics.de/dxt-mon-vs-neumann-kh-120a/ (measurements KH120)

Are those information sufficent to create a preference rating?

Many thanks in advance!
Best regards
 
Price difference is too small to go for the KH80 instead of KH80
View attachment 95878
Did you mean the price is so close you’d rather go for the KH 120 instead of KH 80?

Makes sense to me. Neumann provided their own spinoramas performed my Klippel of both of these units (so same controlled testing conditions) and they are both superb. Price is not quite as close in the US, but still close and seems worth it for the extra SPL & lower distortion, while still being very compact and for nearfield. The real price jump is to the KH 310 and above.

You only give up built in DSP, which is fine if you use external DSP/room correction anyway. And linear phase is cool, but subtle and not sure if it would have any effect on double blind preference.
 
Did you mean the price is so close you’d rather go for the KH 120 instead of KH 80?

Makes sense to me. Neumann provided their own spinoramas performed my Klippel of both of these units (so same controlled testing conditions) and they are both superb. Price is not quite as close in the US, but still close and seems worth it for the extra SPL & lower distortion, while still being very compact and for nearfield. The real price jump is to the KH 310 and above.

You only give up built in DSP, which is fine if you use external DSP/room correction anyway. And linear phase is cool, but subtle and not sure if it would have any effect on double blind preference.
Oops yes sorry, that's what I meant.
Also, the bass of the KH120 is incredible, almost sounds like a 6.5 inch, I really doubt the 4 inch KH80 gets anywhere near that.
 
Back
Top Bottom