Neumann KH120 II Monitor Review

[teashea]

Artists rely on their senses. There is a mix of people on GearSpace, but a substantial part are musicians making music and they favor gear that make the sound they like. That is not necessarily a correct or true sound, but what fits their music. So opinions on GearSpace is relevant if you want to make music in the same style/genre of a said person on that forum. That is a different approach from hifi. But there is of cause also people on that forum that look for a neutral sound also...

Too few

 

[teashea]

This is an absolutely terrible idea if you want to make music for other people to listen to, though. Because they won't be using whatever speaker you chose specifically for however it sounds for your music.

It is amazing that most music producers on GS do not understand this.

 

[teashea]

I'm talking about so called engineers and especially mastering engineers, which when confronted with blind test or measurement of any kind cover their ears and scream "if it sound good it is good". I found quite a few times major problems with plugins just by testing them in plugin doctor, like for example generating DC or oversampling not working at all, but when they see plugin doctor or any graph they just panic. I'm a sound guy too, had GS account for 15 years, recorded/mixed/mastered more than 500 albums, but there's a border I just don't want to cross

The pinnacle of this ---- the engineers who rely on Yamaha NS10's.

 

[teashea]

From my almost 2 decades of experience I think majority of mastering engineers aren't worth the price and this profession will die first because of the AI. I started doing mastering by myself to save my musician friends from destroying their music 10 years ago and now it's a big part of my job but I won't cry after it. I have a subscription to Mix With The Masters website and there's a lot of video material about "top tier" mastering, it's just horrible. Pure voodoo with explaining how 0.05dB boost at 20Hz is giving the music foundation it lacked, I'm not exaggerating, it's in the video from Sterling Sound studio, one of the most famous facilities (with ATC monitors of course).
Here's a cool experiment about it

It is a sad scam.

 

[teashea]

Yep, it is absurd that the tools of a sound engineer are considered to be a legitimate matter of taste! As if a wrench would come in arbitrary sizes, for each his own. All those excuses for deviating from good practice, let alone de facto standards. A vanity fair.

To give a more positive perspective, the sound engineer / mixer is utterly free to design the recording to his taste, granted. But the tools he uses to validate the result of his work need to be standardized. So that the customer of all that fine art of record-making can listen to the identical sound, with reasonable tolerances, as the producer. Isn't *that* meant with high fidelity?! If not, what else? ... ... ... ... ...

I think they do not want this. Many are desperately trying to bring in some money. The want it to seem like it is a high-secret art.

 

[teashea]

Ive just got my first sub! Im now a 2.1 system . Anyway, messing around with bass has really got me stumped. Do I actually want a flat response? I mean how do we know what bass response was used to master the music? And then did they boost it to “help” crappy customer speakers or airpods? Im not sure of my target at the moment.

I want to know the truth of what the song really sounds like. Are you going to second guess every song?

 

[teashea]

This is pretty nuts for a 5.25" monitor. Has to be on your list if you're not in the market for the truly big guns. I guess this is what a well-designed speaker with good DSP looks like. Makes me wonder what DIYers might do now that Hypex plate amps support FIR...

DIY's in their garages cannot compete with this. Is is 100 time more complex than one parameter.

 

[teashea]

Going to gently disagree here, because we are entering into how mixing engineers approach their work - which is very subjective, unique, etc. I mix/master my own content and I do want "perfectly measuring" studio monitors in order to find and correct deficiencies in my mix. If it is fatiguing, so be it because my raw recording sucks and needs correction - it's not the speakers fault. These are "pro" speakers that are tools designed for a specific purpose and if people happen to buy them for easy listening that's fine, but the idea of no "listening fatigue" is a bit of a paradox like testing a race car and then commenting "it would be nice at the end of a race to take it for a relaxing cruise down the boulevard with softer seats and less noise."

However, unlike a race car, these speakers have full DSP EQ function so you can voice it to sound less fatiguing if you wish!

That is what pleasure listening speakers are for.

 

[teashea]

The thing is that even if the monitors used are not fully correct measuring-wise but the mixing engineer finds them to sound right with well-known reference tracks, he still will be able to make correct mixing decisions with the target of those reference tracks. But if he instead uses some other monitors he doesn't like the sound of, even if they are considered objectively better, he will most likely overcompensate for the things he doesn't like with the sound. He could still use the reference tracks to get in the ballpark of correct, but it's a way better starting point to like how the reference tracks sound on his monitors.

If a professional mixing engineer will be able to work for 8-10 hours a day, it would be a really bad choice of studio monitors if he gets listening fatigue in an hour or two, no matter if the monitors he uses are considered objectively great or not.

Bob Clearmountain is considered a great mixing engineer who's in the mixing world and is also famous for using Yamaha NS-10s, do you think his mixes would have been significantly better if he had used Genelec or Neumann monitors instead? The same goes for all other great mixing engineers out there who are used to completely different sounding monitors of all kinds, and of all types of brands which are all measuring differently from each other. Do you really think their mixes would have been significantly better if they had chosen other studio monitors with objectively better measurements than the ones they are used to and have already given great and proven results?

I don't think so, I think the use of (for the mixing engineer) well-known pair of studio monitors, using well-known reference tracks that sounds right to him on those speakers, and mixing in a familiar studio room will most likely give the best result.

Yes. They would have sounded better.

 

[teashea]

Really? That's a very wide-ranging statement and could do with a bit of substantiation, rather than just falling into the "hearsay" category. Of course, it's a point of view that comes up on HiFi forums that differ from this one. Keep in mind, even back in the 1970s, the "studio monitors" produced by companies such as B&W, IMF, etc., all tended to strive for a flat on-axis frequency response.

Maybe if they happen to be working in an unfamiliar acoustic room environment that might ring true. However, although tainted sound reproduction in one's monitors may still allow one to achieve a reasonable result, but it's probably going to result in a less-than-ideal mix. It does appear that the variable "requirements" for mixing are as variable as the "quality" of loudspeaker designs.

But why make the job harder for oneself? I really doubt that the mooted approach is actually all that good.

In the end, any mix made on imperfect monitors is likely to be a less-than-perfect mix. However, it can still sound acceptable, just not perfect. If less than perfect is acceptable, then mixing on non-flat monitors is acceptable.

Yes --- I think you are correct. It is that kind of audio engineer who purchases Neumann monitors.

 

[dfuller]

"if it sound good it is good".

Taken out of context. All that "if it sounds good, it is good" means is that there is no right way to get to a finished product.

 

[holdingpants01]

Taken out of context. All that "if it sounds good, it is good" means is that there is no right way to get to a finished product.

artistically sure but I wasn't talking about that, from an engineering standpoint there are plenty of ways to do things wrong, or not do at all even if you feel something is done, or do things blind because you can't hear certain range at all

 

[teashea]

Hello everyone

I just registered and I couldn't help answering in this thread because a few weeks ago I was able to compare these Neumann KH120 II with my beloved Genelec 8340 at home.
I finally returned the neumanns. They sounded pretty good, and amazing bass for their size, but I was missing the sparkle and texture of the sound of my genelecs.
Its features are impressive, especially considering its size, but I liked the way the 8340 sounded better and more powerful.

A few months ago I was also able to compare the 8340 with the Adam S2V and something similar happened to me, although the KH120 II sweeps the S2V in quality/price ratio.

Greetings

...... which is exactly why the Neumann's are so excellent from my perspective. They do not sparkle. They do not color the source. It is up to the music to sparkle; not the monitors. I want monitors that add nothing to the source.

 

[teashea]

A great product by the pro and consumer market brand Neumann. In contrast to most consumer market only brands, I guess Neumann is a brand with no bullshit products and not supporting bullshit in their communication. Great audio equipment does not need to cost a lot. Thanks to @amirm for this great review and for all his work in making the hi-fi business much better: My guess is that he (by far) is the best and most influential hi-fi-gear reviewer ever.

That is what makes ASR so excellent - useful.

 

[teashea]

Yes, depending on volume desired. If you want loud you need bigger speakers. If your play at more moderate volume, then these will be fine. If you want deeper bass then add a sub.

I have listened to my KH 120 II's many times at various distances. I use them at one meter. I certainly understand Neumann's recommendation that they not be used beyond 2 meters. They simply are not designed for that. That does not mean that they are terrible at 3 meters but they are not nearly as good.

 

[teashea]

Ok, I think I'm going to trade in my KH 120 ii for the KH150s. After owning the KH120ii I think they are very good and accurate, with great bass but I do want at least a little more bass for R&B and Hip Hop music, and I think compared to spending $10k on the KH 420, I would be fine with the KH150 95% of the time and save over $6500 for something else, or at least till KH 420 ii come out but I will listen to the KH120 a little longer before making up my mind fully.

I would be interested to know what you decided..... I have both and I do like the KH150's better, by a small margin.

 

[DearSX]

I would be interested to know what you decided..... I have both and I do like the KH150's better, by a small margin.

I ended up getting the Buchardt A10 bookshelf speakers which was about $4k (pre-order price). All these speakers were going in my living room so looks played a role in my choice. I was not too enamored with the KH120ii looks for the living room. I really liked the idea of streaming straight to the speakers, going wireless, having different EQ and Masters tuning options, room correction, quality components, good bass extension, good resale value and the all natural wood cabinets.

I like the A10 more then the KH120ii overall, but do wish for more volume. I'm going to still plan to get larger speakers in the future, but for now all round the A10 is a good speaker to chill out and enjoy the music at low and moderate volumes. Have not used my pre-amp, cables, DAC etc. in a while now Its super hot these days and my huge A biased A/B amp doubles as a radiator, so don't miss it right now.

I'm still curious about the KH150, but I think I will go even bigger next purchase, at least KH310ii so I can party more Going from online measurements I expect the KH150 to measure better then the A10, even in bass, but waiting for more A10 data.

 

[teashea]

I ended up getting the Buchardt A10 bookshelf speakers which was about $4k (pre-order price). All these speakers were going in my living room so looks played a role in my choice. I was not too enamored with the KH120ii looks for the living room. I really liked the idea of streaming straight to the speakers, going wireless, having different EQ and Masters tuning options, room correction, quality components, good bass extension, good resale value and the all natural wood cabinets.

I like the A10 more then the KH120ii overall, but do wish for more volume. I'm going to still plan to get larger speakers in the future, but for now all round the A10 is a good speaker to chill out and enjoy the music at low and moderate volumes. Pre-amp, DAC etc. in a while now Its super hot these days and my huge A biased A/B amp doubles as a radiator, so don't miss it right now.

I'm still curious about the KH150, but I think I will go even bigger next purchase, at least KH310ii so I can party more Going from online measurements I expect the KH150 to measure better then the A10, even in bass, but waiting for more A10 data.

Sounds like a good decision - best wishes

 

[DearSX]

Sounds like a good decision - best wishes

Thanks Wish you the same. I don't think you can go wrong with any of these speakers overall. None are perfect, none are bad and all offer pretty good bass extension for most music at moderate volumes.

 

[teashea]

There were some "tricks" to work around the flaws of the NS10s, like putting the tissue paper over the tweeter so it's less offensive, or touching the woofer to feel if there's some low end content, you couldn't hear it but could feel it or see it. I always hated the sound of these, but I started with neutral response monitors and never got used to ns10s
View attachment 300723
View attachment 300724
View attachment 300725

Interesting. I think I would prefer DSP to tissue paper and actual sound over fingertips.