Neumann KH120 II Monitor Review

[Brent71]

What about the KH120 ii step response do you dislike?
For a 2-way, it looks pretty much like the right angle triangle ideal, imo.
View attachment 399178View attachment 399179

Edit: I’ve added what an “ideal” step response looks like….kinda familiar, no?
View attachment 399183

It's supposed to fall away gradually, not dip, come back up, then trail off.

"Integrating the impulse response gives the speaker's step response: the output it would have if presented with a voltage step from zero to some arbitrary DC value. The ideal shape resembles a right triangle—ie, the trace moves vertically away from the graph's time axis, then moves back to it at a shallow angle. (Actually, the ideal decay-back-to-zero amplitude is exponential, meaning that it will have a slight concave curve, but this difference is inconsequential.)" - John Atkinson (Dunlavy SC-IV review)


This is is a 2-way done properly. Dunlavy SC-I.

 

[goat76]

I'm not sure why some are concerned about this though with this small loudspeaker, which should be used in the application for which it was designed: a very linear studio monitor used at moderate volumes and/or high-passed with subs.

Sorry, but I find it highly concerning if a loudspeaker that is supposed to be of high quality already shows such a large flaw at a low SPL of just 70 dB. Why is it even designed to go this low in frequency if it can't handle it even at a moderate SPL at such a short listening distance as in the video by @bitels?

I hope there is something wrong with his particular pair of speakers, or maybe a faulty batch. I think it sounds as if something is loose and rattling inside the speaker, but it's still strange if that same fault would show up in the other speaker as well.

Where are all the other users who can test if their KH120 II behaves the same when playing the sound file he provided?

 

[Halbknapp]

I wonder if this would happen also on KH150

I can tell you that KH150 has surprisingly low port noise and the cleanest port response in such a small speaker I have ever seen. I compared to Genelec 8341 and other 2 Way speaker with passive membrane. At the same level the KH150 was subjective on par with the passive membrane speaker 2 Way but measurement showed much lower distortion on the KH in the Bass down to 40hz. The Genelec very clearly distorted with a lot of port noise at similar sound level (even less absolute bass as genelec rolled off in bass and KH150 is linear down until it cuts off). Of course you could probably get it to distort in bass at some point but I personally could not in nearfield get it to do so.

 

[RobL]

It's supposed to fall away gradually, not dip, come back up, then trail off.

Not true. All speaker step responses will oscillate after the initial rise and fall. The oscillation is just cut off of the response you chose to show but will definitely be there.

"Integrating the impulse response gives the speaker's step response: the output it would have if presented with a voltage step from zero to some arbitrary DC value. The ideal shape resembles a right triangle—ie, the trace moves vertically away from the graph's time axis, then moves back to it at a shallow angle. (Actually, the ideal decay-back-to-zero amplitude is exponential, meaning that it will have a slight concave curve, but this difference is inconsequential.)" - John Atkinson (Dunlavy SC-IV review)


This is is a 2-way done properly. Dunlavy SC-I.
View attachment 399261

John Atkinson is correct in that the ideal decay would be an “an exponentially decaying cosine wave oscillating at the fundamental resonant frequency of the loudspeaker.” (quote taken from Audioexpress)

 

[jean-benoit]

Can you send us this reference here? I wanted to test my KH120 II. Maybe someone else will be interested too

out of curiosity: did you had a chance to test?

i was just about to get a pair for my small bedroom, but im not sure if this monitor should be in my consideration anymore.
from the measurements of my phone app, i listen/produce mostly at 70db in a nearfield situation (1m). but seeing that the kh120 mk2 might struggle at that volume, im just not so confident in giving them a chance.

 

[Bambo]

out of curiosity: did you had a chance to test?

i was just about to get a pair for my small bedroom, but im not sure if this monitor should be in my consideration anymore.
from the measurements of my phone app, i listen/produce mostly at 70db in a nearfield situation (1m). but seeing that the kh120 mk2 might struggle at that volume, im just not so confident in giving them a chance.

Hi! I haven't been able to test it yet, I hope I can today. I was away

 

[Pearljam5000]

We need a KH180 with a 8 inch driver
Bass output problem solved

 

[dfuller]

We need a KH180 with a 8 inch driver
Bass output problem solved

pretty sure that's just the 310, but what do I know.

It's supposed to fall away gradually, not dip, come back up, then trail off.

"Integrating the impulse response gives the speaker's step response: the output it would have if presented with a voltage step from zero to some arbitrary DC value. The ideal shape resembles a right triangle—ie, the trace moves vertically away from the graph's time axis, then moves back to it at a shallow angle. (Actually, the ideal decay-back-to-zero amplitude is exponential, meaning that it will have a slight concave curve, but this difference is inconsequential.)" - John Atkinson (Dunlavy SC-IV review)


This is is a 2-way done properly. Dunlavy SC-I.
View attachment 399261

Dunlavys will not have the same response shape as a KH120, if solely for the fact that the 120 is ported.

Beyond that, John Dunlavy was obsessed with perfect step response. That meant he was using first order slopes and sealed boxes. I shouldn't have to explain to you why first order crossover slopes are problematic. Also, given the SC-I rolls off starting at around 100hz, I can't help but think that they're not quite comparable.

Sorry, but I find it highly concerning if a loudspeaker that is supposed to be of high quality already shows such a large flaw at a low SPL of just 70 dB. Why is it even designed to go this low in frequency if it can't handle it even at a moderate SPL at such a short listening distance as in the video by @bitels?

Something else is likely going on here. I find it very suspect that he's encountering that much distortion and that much cone excursion at 75dB SPL. Likely there's some super-low frequency stuff in there that's causing problems.

 

[Pearljam5000]

pretty sure that's just the 310, but what do I know.



Dunlavys will not have the same response shape as a KH120, if solely for the fact that the 120 is ported.

Beyond that, John Dunlavy was obsessed with perfect step response. That meant he was using first order slopes and sealed boxes. I shouldn't have to explain to you why first order crossover slopes are problematic. Also, given the SC-I rolls off starting at around 100hz, I can't help but think that they're not quite comparable.




Something else is likely going on here. I find it very suspect that he's encountering that much distortion and that much cone excursion at 75dB SPL. Likely there's some super-low frequency stuff in there that's causing problems.

KH310 is more expensive because it's 3-way

 

[thewas]

We need a KH180 with a 8 inch driver
Bass output problem solved

And boom the more important mid region is compromised...

 

[Bambo]

I tested the monitors. Tell me yourself, do you hear artifacts? I don't, but I could be wrong.
Public link

Test KH120 II - Google Drive

drive.google.com

 

[dfuller]

I tested the monitors. Tell me yourself, do you hear artifacts? I don't, but I could be wrong.
Public link

Test KH120 II - Google Drive

drive.google.com

Sounds OK.

 

[jean-benoit]

I tested the monitors. Tell me yourself, do you hear artifacts? I don't, but I could be wrong.
Public link

Test KH120 II - Google Drive

drive.google.com

sounds fine to me – thanks for testing!

 

[IamJF]

I did plenty of measuring with sine sweeps with the KH120ii and never experienced such a behaviour around 50Hz. It will start with noises at way higher levels like every ported system.

 

[holdingpants01]

doing two test with two unknown levels isn't really showing or debunking anything, especially in this new one, it was so quiet it was barely any sound until the camera got really close to a speaker

 

[Bambo]

doing two test with two unknown levels isn't really showing or debunking anything, especially in this new one, it was so quiet it was barely any sound until the camera got really close to a speaker

Maybe you're right, yes. But I made the volume noticeably louder than I work at when mixing. Yes, I could have added volume, but I would have been uncomfortable listening to music in this mode. That is, yes, if I really turn it up, maybe the speakers will wheeze, but then I will also suffer from the huge volume of sound

 

[ChrisG]

Not true. All speaker step responses will oscillate after the initial rise and fall. The oscillation is just cut off of the response you chose to show but will definitely be there.

John Atkinson is correct in that the ideal decay would be an “an exponentially decaying cosine wave oscillating at the fundamental resonant frequency of the loudspeaker.” (quote taken from Audioexpress)

This depends entirely on your definition of "ideal". Any sensible loudspeaker (ie, one with a non-zero-Hz LF cutoff) will show some oscillation. This is just maths: it can be demonstrated using a 1Hz square wave and a variety of HPFs:

Finally, a first-order filter:

Which shows zero overshoot, but takes longer to reach zero than a higher-order rolloff.


Finally, I'd like to note that all non-coaxial designs can only be time-aligned (ie, produce a decent step response) at one vertical angle. If you move the mic up/down, it'll be closer to the woofer or tweeter, so their wavefronts will arrive at different times.


Chris

 

[Miguelón]

I can imagine the shock for some fan to see the absolutely correct answer from the company itself that there is nothing perfect in this universe and that everything is a compromise.

I had some small monitors at the same time to compare on my living room: 2 Genelecs (8020D and 8030C), 2 Neumann’s (KH80 and KH120 ii).

All of them throw port noise at a given level. The most spectacular was Genelec 8020D (not unexpected, was the smallest of the four), sounded like a helicopter at 60 Hz test tone.

Ups, I forgot the little Genelec 8010 which I had on my desk, lovely sound really (I can’t believe how nice sound to my ears) but as was shown by Amir’s review, at 70 dB it sounds like an asthmatic cow…

Physics laws cannot be changed, I don’t know if in the future someone could discover a way to control both airflow and bass response in those few liters boxes.

 

[neko8018]

Just a little update on the 120 II's in my studio. All LP's are 1 to 1.2 meters. The family sound of the Neumann monitors (and headphones) is very helpful to me, especially because of the dispersed workstation system I prefer. The important thing for me remains uncolored sound so that I can tell what the source really sounds like. To me the KH120 II's sound just as good as the KH 150's in my very nearfield use situations. (I just ordered another pair of KH 120 II's today from Sweetwater - the seventh pair of Neumann monitors in the studio). I am so impressed with the Neumann monitors. I cannot find anything I do not like about them. View attachment 381488View attachment 381489View attachment 381490

WOW,That's amazing,can I ask you some questions. I have a pair of KH80 + KH750, but I think the high-frequency isn't good enough. Would upgrading to a pair of KH120A/KHA20II improve the high-frequency quality? And what is the difference between KH120A and KH120II?KH120A is much cheaper.THANKS.

 

[unpluggged]

WOW,That's amazing,can I ask you some questions. I have a pair of KH80 + KH750, but I think the high-frequency isn't good enough. Would upgrading to a pair of KH120A/KHA20II improve the high-frequency quality? And what is the difference between KH120A and KH120II?KH120A is much cheaper.THANKS.

The tweeter is the same throughout the KH series, from the KH 80 DSP up to the KH 420, and it's very good. There are slight differences in waveguide geometry, but I don't think it makes a dramatic difference to the tonality (more has to do with directivity and driver integration). I would suggest you getting the MA 1 alignment kit for room EQ, provided you already have the KH 750 DSP. This would be the most significant upgrade in your case. You will be able to tweak a bit the target response should you find the tonality does not suit your taste, including in the treble.

The KH 120 A is the old all-analog model from 2010. The KH 120 D is the same, but with a digital input and a DAC built-in. These were discontinued in 2023, after the introduction of the DSP-based KH 120 II, which is better to describe as the 5.25" variant of the KH 150. As I said before, I don't think you'd get any significant upgrade if you replace your KH 80 DSP with either of these. You already have a well-integrated full-range nearfield system with the KH 750 DSP. Only if you need higher SPLs (e.g., for a greater listening distance) you'd want to look at something like the KH 150 and two KH 750 DSP subs.