Neumann KH120 II Monitor Review

[perlindgren]

Has anyone tried kh750 + kh120ii using digital link between the sub and 120ii. According to the 750 manual, it has a AES3 BNC output (75ohm), while the 120ii has an SPDIF (consumer) digital input (also 75ohm). The digital signalling is not exactly the same between AES3 and SPDIF in general, but the 750 and 120 should use the same signalling as far as I understand.

In the 120ii manual it mentions the use together with a sub, but don't give any schematics to make a converter.

Looking here https://www.ranecommercial.com/legacy/note149.html

According to this it should be fine to connect the 750 to the 120ii by attenuating (-6db) T network. (The other way around, from a consumer SPDIF to the input of the 750, would need no attenuation as the signal levels on SPDIF is lower.)

1) Did anyone try this
a) Connecting 750 -> 120 using a BNC -> RCA cable
b) Connecting a consumer SPDIF to the 750 (RCA -> BNC)

Another thing in the 120ii manual, it says:

Set the INPUT SELECT switch on the left loudspeaker to S/PDIF L and the INPUT SELECT
switch on the right loudspeaker to S/PDIF R The CONTROL switch must be in the Local
position.

This seems weird, in the local position it would use the backplate settings and not the "aligned" setting. I have calibrated (aligned) the kh120ii to the room using MA1, it would be strange if this would be lost.

2) So when using the SPDIF input of the kh120ii, what is the exact effect of the Local/Network setting?
/Per

 

[IamJF]

Just connect them, it should work. AES3 and SPDIF are not that different in real life and short cables - I never had any problem with wild mixmash of these.

I'm pretty sure there is a way to define sigital in R/L in the aligned setting. Have a look in the software. You just need to put it to local when you use the local switches.

 

[danbei]

I use the KH750 and KH150 with a UCX II: SPDIF (UCX II) to to AES3 (KH750) with an adapter, then AES3 (KH750) to SPDIF (KH150) with an adapter. It works well, no problems so far. I confirm the software allows you to set which speaker is right and left.

 

[Christoph-ASR]

Sorry, but I have a simple question --> In the frequency response measurement, what is the "DI"?

 

[Curvature]

Sorry, but I have a simple question --> In the frequency response measurement, what is the "DI"?

Directivity index.

Here's the relevant definition from the standard:

The standard is attached.

 

[Christoph-ASR]

Ok, DI is clear now, thanks. Another question --> how are the ER measured?

 

[olieb]

Ok, DI is clear now, thanks. Another question --> how are the ER measured?

It is in the standard document too:
Early Reflections
The early reflections curve is an estimate of all single-bounce, first-reflections, in a typical listening room.

• Floor Bounce: 20°, 30°, 40° down
• Ceiling Bounce: 40°, 50°, 60° up
• Front Wall Bounce: 0°, ± 10°, ± 20°, ± 30° horizontal
• Side Wall Bounces: ± 40°, ± 50°, ± 60°, ± 70°, ± 80° horizontal
• Rear Wall Bounces: 180°, ± 90° horizontal

 

[Pearljam5000]

So basically if I understand correctly KH150 vs KH120 II:
KH150 A little bit more bass output and SPL, narrower dispersion ?
I'm not sure the KH150 is worth the extra $$$
Which is a bit confusing Becaue KH150 Is much bigger so you don't expect them to be so close.

 

[Robbo99999]

So basically if I understand correctly KH150 vs KH120 II:
KH150 A little bit more bass output and SPL, narrower dispersion ?
I'm not sure the KH150 is worth the extra $$$
Which is a bit confusing Becaue KH150 Is much bigger so you don't expect them to be so close.

Buy it!

 

[Pearljam5000]

Buy it!

I can't decide which one
It's driving me crazy

 

[AudioJester]

I can't decide which one
It's driving me crazy

Either way you will probably need a sub.
The kh120ii is the better choice for your small room

 

[IamJF]

I can't decide which one
It's driving me crazy

I would say the KH120ii price/performance is really great. KH150 could be 2-300,- cheaper but is in the pricerange of it's direct competitors.

When you think about adding subs ... stay with KH120ii. When you are sure you don't want subs and stay with 2 speakers (e.g. mobile setup) - KH150 gives you a little "more".

 

[Robbo99999]

I can't decide which one
It's driving me crazy

I know, I was just joking, it's the running joke where we're always pulling your leg about never buying one!

 

[mj30250]

If you don't have or intend to use subs, KH 150s.

If you do, but don't plan to dial in anything more than a mild (if any) bass boost, KH120 IIs.

If you prefer to decently juice up your bass, KH 150 + sub(s). The 150s do offer appreciably lower bass distortion than the 120 IIs around and above the crossover (fixed @ 80Hz if you use MA 1). Going this route is obviously a good deal more expensive and probably is something that won't offer much (if any) benefit at moderate volumes, but you'll have a lot of headroom available for louder listening along with whatever peace of mind goes along with that.

From an overall value perspective, the 120 IIs are insanely impressive and really hard to beat.

 

[Yiakubou]

I'm sorry if this was asked before, but I'm struggling to find an answer. Want to get the KH 120 II and deciding which RME interface and cable types I need to pick up for connections. My common sense tells me I should just use analog balanced cables as I would expect the DAC in RME interface to be better. But do I understand it correctly from reading in this thread, that even when connecting to analog XLR inputs, the signal gets converted to digital due to internal DSP processing? If that is true, then connecting from audio interface to Neumann's via digital is better indeed.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

I'm sorry if this was asked before, but I'm struggling to find an answer. Want to get the KH 120 II and deciding which RME interface and cable types I need to pick up for connections. My common sense tells me I should just use analog balanced cables as I would expect the DAC in RME interface to be better. But do I understand it correctly from reading in this thread, that even when connecting to analog XLR inputs, the signal gets converted to digital due to internal DSP processing? If that is true, then connecting from audio interface to Neumann's via digital is better indeed.

Neumann in general recommends digital connection for DSP speakers, because in theory, they are better. You understand correctly that an analog input is converted to digital for the DSP to work. There has been reports from people using the KH750 who thought it sounded better with analog inputs, though. They had a theory that the internal resampling to 48khz could possibly make the sound worse in some configurations. Maybe depending on the source. I personally can not tell a difference. Theoretically there should not be a difference between analog and digital. I would say, chose what is the most practical for you.

 

[DJBonoBobo]

I'm sorry if this was asked before, but I'm struggling to find an answer. Want to get the KH 120 II and deciding which RME interface and cable types I need to pick up for connections. My common sense tells me I should just use analog balanced cables as I would expect the DAC in RME interface to be better. But do I understand it correctly from reading in this thread, that even when connecting to analog XLR inputs, the signal gets converted to digital due to internal DSP processing? If that is true, then connecting from audio interface to Neumann's via digital is better indeed.

Neumann in general recommends digital connection for DSP speakers, because in theory, they are better. You understand correctly that an analog input is converted to digital for the DSP to work. There has been reports from people using the KH750 who thought it sounded better with analog inputs, though. They had a theory that the internal resampling to 48khz could possibly make the sound worse in some configurations. Maybe depending on the source. I personally can not tell a difference. Theoretically there should not be a difference between analog and digital. I would say, chose what is the most practical for you.

Some additions:
- I know of 2 people who reported this for the KH750 (not more), and zero in context of KH150 or KH120II.
- Found the link to the discussion about this topic: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-monitor-alignment.17902/page-35#post-1426050 (Posts 684 to 688, @audafreak)
- I personally use a digital connection from my RME UCX II to my 2 KH750s, but, for the peace of mind only, i configured Roon to resample everything to 48khz to take the Neumann resampler out of the equation. But like i said, i don´t really hear a difference. It is hard/impossible to make a valid test, though.

 

[Yiakubou]

Thank you. I am also picking up RME UCX II. Don't need so many I/O's really, but I want access to TotalMix and want something better than Babyface. As for the connection to monitors, considering how trustworthy Neumann is, I think it's safe to just follow their recommendation and go with SPDIF coax.

 

[IamJF]

So it is - digital connection is the best way in your situation. I use an UFX with ARC USB remote and that's really comfortable.
I hear a liiiittle benefit with my Hypex active modules when useing digital connection but could not find time yet to make a proper comparison with the KH120ii.
As long as you don't use 44,1 source files resampling should not be an influence and even then it should be less influence as a A/D - D/A conversion. Maybe they used a D/A converter which adds some sound they like? Which is fine when they are happy with the result?

 

[dominikz]

I'd be very much surprised if anyone could reliably tell digital from analog connection in a controlled (level-matched, blind) listening test with equipment on the level of Neumann and RME.
The extra DA/AD step is almost certainly below audibility.
That said, the main benefit of digital connection IMHO is that you wouldn't have to think about analog gain staging/sensitivity, and you may reduce the total system pass-through latency marginally.
Personally I wouldn't stress too much about it - either way you connect should sound great!