• 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 KH150

I won‘t pretend that I fully understand this, but wouldn’t the MA-1 automatic monitor alignment correct this? I do not have that dip, measured at my listening position in what is technically far field.
It's the off-axis sound - thus the reflections - that will "disagree" with the on-axis sound at "mid/far field" distance in a standard reflective room. You can "fix" the off-axis sound by "breaking" the on-axis sound, or vice-versa. Only when directivity error is very low can you EQ for both and have it make sense at MLP...
 
My Genelecs 8330 don't sound any brighter than my Neumann KH150. Due to the shorter listening distance (< 1 m) in the case of the Genelec, I'm tempted to say that the Neumann ( approx. 2.3 m) sound brighter. However, both have a flat frequency response, so you can't go wrong with either of them...
Truly their biggest difference in the mids where the KH150 have rather a dip in the sound power and also PIR:
newplot (9).png
 
It's the off-axis sound - thus the reflections - that will "disagree" with the on-axis sound at "mid/far field" distance in a standard reflective room. You can "fix" the off-axis sound by "breaking" the on-axis sound, or vice-versa. Only when directivity error is very low can you EQ for both and have it make sense...
Thank you for the quicker and correct answer.
 
Anyone compared the KH150 to Genelec Ones?
Not that it's fair to compare a 2-way to a coaxial 3-way but still
 
Anyone compared the KH150 to Genelec Ones?
Not that it's fair to compare a 2-way to a coaxial 3-way but still
The Ones have for me significant advantages over the KH150 like less directivity issues (the KH150 performs there worse than the KH80/KH120) and being a 3-way also cleaner midrange at higher levels due to lower multitone distortions.
 
The Ones have for me significant advantages over the KH150 like less directivity issues (the KH150 performs there worse than the KH80/KH120) and being a 3-way also cleaner midrange at higher levels due to lower multitone distortions.
Thanks I assumed the Ones are much better
Unfortunately the price difference is also very big :confused:
1000064587.jpg
1000064589.jpg
 
It's the off-axis sound - thus the reflections - that will "disagree" with the on-axis sound at "mid/far field" distance in a standard reflective room. You can "fix" the off-axis sound by "breaking" the on-axis sound, or vice-versa. Only when directivity error is very low can you EQ for both and have it make sense at MLP...
Thanks - so this inevitably results in a, well, duller sound both on- and off axis, or do I misunderstand the consequences?
 
Thanks - so this inevitably results in a, well, duller sound both on- and off axis, or do I misunderstand the consequences?
"Dullness" can be tuned with EQ and isn't the problem, the problem is that the reflected sound is always different to the direct one.
 
"Dullness" can be tuned with EQ and isn't the problem, the problem is that the reflected sound is always different to the direct one.
Haas effect and all that jazz (reflected sounds and direct sounds within ~20ms {~20ft} of each other are "heard" as a single sound).
 
Anyone compared the KH150 to Genelec Ones?
Not that it's fair to compare a 2-way to a coaxial 3-way but still
I have - I sold the 150's and kept Genelec (then eventually D&D). So, I guess that's my review? There's nothing useful I can tell you that hasn't already been presented here or available in measurements, I just prefer the 'brighter' Genelec sound.
 
I just wish they were a little bit brighter like Genelec
Then they would have been perfect
I only had the KH120 but the KH150 has the same tweeter so I assume they sound the same in the highs
If they were brighter they would not have a flat frequency response and therefore would not function as well as studio monitors.

You are correct. The 120's and 150 have the same tweeter and sound (and) measure the same.
 
The KH150 may sound warmer due to their mentioned lower bass but also due to their directivity issue which makes their sound power and thus also room response V-shaped having too low level between 600 and 6000 Hz:

View attachment 418524
For most of us which are casual listeners that doesn't matter as the only thing that matters is that we like its sound but other than nearfield usage it is not recommendable as its quite coloured.
Well v shaped between 600 and 6kHz i don't see, must be my eyes. Vertical absorption helps.
1000002995.png


8030C's have a dip too btw
1000002996.png
 
Well v shaped between 600 and 6kHz i don't see, must be my eyes.
See the plot I posted above and the one below where the pure sound power is shown and it can be seen better.
8030C's have a dip too btw
Yes, but their sound power is more continuous while the KH150 have a kink having a more of constant directivity behaviour above 1 kHz:
1736002345653.png
 
The 120's and 150 have the same tweeter and sound (and) measure the same.
They don't, on-axis similarity isn't enough. In nearfield they might sound very similar but at increasing distances their differences in sound power start to play a role.
 
See the plot I posted above and the one below where the pure sound power is shown and it can be seen better.

Yes, but their sound power is more continuous while the KH150 have a kink having a more of constant directivity behaviour above 1 kHz:
View attachment 418604
Isn't that taken into account for the in room response? I would expect so.
 
Isn't that taken into account for the in room response? I would expect so.
The PIR is an estimation for a specific listening distance and room absorption, the higher the listening distance and lower the absorption the more the sound power contributes to it.
 
Last edited:
If they were brighter they would not have a flat frequency response and therefore would not function as well as studio monitors.

You are correct. The 120's and 150 have the same tweeter and sound (and) measure the same.
No and no. The Genelecs aren't tilted up on axis. They just tilt less off axis.

And beyond that, the 120 and 150 don't sound the same! The 150 is noticeably darker.
 
Last edited:
When recently one of my KH150 speakers died and was sent for repair under warranty, I connected again my old Adam Audio A3X speakers plus sub and used them for three weeks and a half. Then I switched back to KH150 after repair (mainboard failure) and initially the Neumanns felt like dark sounding indeed, however after a relatively short re-adaptation period they started to sound perfectly normal again (with treble set +1 on the back) to my ears.
 
The KH150 may sound warmer due to their mentioned lower bass but also due to their directivity issue which makes their sound power and thus also room response V-shaped having too low level between 600 and 6000 Hz:

View attachment 418524
For most of us which are casual listeners that doesn't matter as the only thing that matters is that we like its sound but other than nearfield usage it is not recommendable as its quite coloured.
Thank you for this as the more information people can interpret for me, the better it will be for me to suggest a system to others in the future.
I will say that I am not an audio recording engineer but a casual listening. But I love detail as I moved into 'active monitors'. I loved the sound and I'm not going back. As an aside I have not listened to any Revel speakers which apparently measured well, or some do that have been referenced by Amir.

What I have 'hear' 'here' is a sound that is not overly warm, but warmer (which I seek, warm bass) with tons of details and a presentation (soundstage, imaging) that just fascinates (bonus).

I will remember this frequency response graph as my personal reference point. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom