Neumann KH420 Review (Studio Monitor)

[HarmonicTHD]

In Genelecs white papers of ”the one” they mention the theoretical dissadvantage with coaxials because of this, but they didnt write that there was any compromise in sound quality. The crossover point for ”the one ” is at 320 Hz for 8351with a step active filter ( probably 24 dB/oct or more ) so maybe the problem goes away then .

Thanks. Any similar insights on the passive Kefs?

Do I need to face the brutal facts and sell off my beloved Kefs

 

[Tangband]

Alas, for me the personal threshold is lower than -53% with the Klippel self-test, sigh!

But it depends on the frequency range a lot. Interestingly the most vulnerable regions seems to be the lower mids. In the higer mids, say above 1,5kHz the shrill of the rubbing tones alone is so annoying, that additional IM doesn't make a difference for me. => Go 4-way!

This is only anecdotal. But feel encouraged to do it yourself with yourselves. It might help to understand the nature of IM also.

Doppler is IM, as it can be transformed mathematically. It is said that the special phase relation in Doppler makes it less bad. For headphones that seems to be true (!?). But with speakers in room the phase relation is destroyed by crossover and mostly by room reflections. No way out here. Doppler easily, independently from the driver's quality, will reach up to 1% with only 1..2..3 mm of cone excursion in a 2-way.

If what you write is true ( which I think it is ) then the way to make really good loudspeakers with minimal doppler effect seems to demand an active 4-way loudspeaker.
This is by the way the conclusion Linn products made, over 20 years ago.

Now back to discuss Neumann 420 …

 

[james57]

Hi All, need some advice from the experts.. I am in the planning stage (for fall 2022) of updating my system and thought of posting here after seing the 310 vs 420 debate:

Room: 10*11 plus wide open on side, no accoustic treatment allowed
Current : TV driving Hometheater xbrZ9F HDMI arc, Oppo 105 preamp and media no BR , Celeste 4070 stereo B&W 804 matrix, Rythmik E15
Usage : music, tv and Hometheater, mixed but expected quality is equal although usage varies across time
Plan : system that performs better on all fronts
Options : 3 KH 310 (3.1) or 2 KH 420 (2.1)
Listening distance and sub extension do not seem to be a deciding factor with my setup
Any advice ? thanks

 

[Inner Space]

Hi All, need some advice from the experts.. I am in the planning stage (for fall 2022) of updating my system and thought of posting here after seing the 310 vs 420 debate:

Room: 10*11 plus wide open on side, no accoustic treatment allowed
Current : TV driving Hometheater xbrZ9F HDMI arc, Oppo 105 preamp and media no BR , Celeste 4070 stereo B&W 804 matrix, Rythmik E15
Usage : music, tv and Hometheater, mixed but expected quality is equal although usage varies across time
Plan : system that performs better on all fronts
Options : 3 KH 310 (3.1) or 2 KH 420 (2.1)
Listening distance and sub extension do not seem to be a deciding factor with my setup
Any advice ? thanks

Hi and welcome to ASR. Assuming two-person usage, if you can both snuggle up fairly centrally, I would go for the KH420 2.1 option. Superior all around. Also 3.1 with KH310s needs the center channel offset a bit, to get the mid axis central, which is visually annoying (maybe especially to a partner who wouldn't like acoustic treatment.) Best of luck with everything.

 

[tifune]

Hi All, need some advice from the experts.. I am in the planning stage (for fall 2022) of updating my system and thought of posting here after seing the 310 vs 420 debate:

Room: 10*11 plus wide open on side, no accoustic treatment allowed
Current : TV driving Hometheater xbrZ9F HDMI arc, Oppo 105 preamp and media no BR , Celeste 4070 stereo B&W 804 matrix, Rythmik E15
Usage : music, tv and Hometheater, mixed but expected quality is equal although usage varies across time
Plan : system that performs better on all fronts
Options : 3 KH 310 (3.1) or 2 KH 420 (2.1)
Listening distance and sub extension do not seem to be a deciding factor with my setup
Any advice ? thanks

If course the answer is the 310's I'm selling . Because you mention equal music/HT, I'd go with the L/C/R arrangement. It will be plenty loud and, depending on country you're in (I assume US because Rythmik) you'd still have $ left to add 2nd sub to even out bass. But 310's, especially 3 of them, are usable to 40Hz so maybe unnecessary. Usable = fine for music, not necessarily impressive for this seasons Marvel blockbuster.

I use one of my 310s for center, being perfectly on axis at all times in the Netflix-and-chill era is kind of unrealistic to begin with so I wouldn't stress the placement and if the aesthetics really bother you, a grille will largely soften the blow.

Anyways, that 420 sure is neat-o...

 

[Pearljam5000]

I like the minimalism of a setup like this one

 

[james57]

If course the answer is the 310's I'm selling . Because you mention equal music/HT, I'd go with the L/C/R arrangement. It will be plenty loud and, depending on country you're in (I assume US because Rythmik) you'd still have $ left to add 2nd sub to even out bass. But 310's, especially 3 of them, are usable to 40Hz so maybe unnecessary. Usable = fine for music, not necessarily impressive for this seasons Marvel blockbuster.

I use one of my 310s for center, being perfectly on axis at all times in the Netflix-and-chill era is kind of unrealistic to begin with so I wouldn't stress the placement and if the aesthetics really bother you, a grille will largely soften the blow.

Inner and Tif thanks, fyi I am in Canada, I already have my e15, I would probably source the 310 or 420 from europe as the price appear to be more reasonable even with trspt and duties but that is another story.

Placement of the center does not seem to be an issue for me, I was under the impression the 420 advantage was mostly on the low end and since I am covering this with my e15 I did not think it was an issue, two e15 is not an option I have enough at this point and symmetry or lack of is not noticeable to my ears.

Future proof : good 3.1 preamp are an issue especially if i want to venture in the dsp-room correction world unless I go with very expensive av processors and although I am quite happy with my oppo 105 alternatives are difficult to find, for example minidsp shd is limited to 2.1 without the addition of a processor unless I missed something

 

[Inner Space]

Placement of the center does not seem to be an issue for me, I was under the impression the 420 advantage was mostly on the low end and since I am covering this with my e15 I did not think it was an issue, two e15 is not an option I have enough at this point and symmetry or lack of is not noticeable to my ears.

Future proof : good 3.1 preamp are an issue especially if i want to venture in the dsp-room correction world unless I go with very expensive av processors and although I am quite happy with my oppo 105 alternatives are difficult to find, for example minidsp shd is limited to 2.1 without the addition of a processor unless I missed something

Cool - if your subwoofer works well in your room, you could opt for a 2.1 with KH310s. Less cost and bulk. My feeling is that 3.1 generally works fine for TV and HT, but 3 channel upmixing is generally awful for music. Whereas 2 channel is also equally fine for TV and HT if you can keep close to a central listening position. So the solution depends on your likely mixture of TV and music.

 

[LTig]

Hi All, need some advice from the experts.. I am in the planning stage (for fall 2022) of updating my system and thought of posting here after seing the 310 vs 420 debate:

Room: 10*11 plus wide open on side, no accoustic treatment allowed
Current : TV driving Hometheater xbrZ9F HDMI arc, Oppo 105 preamp and media no BR , Celeste 4070 stereo B&W 804 matrix, Rythmik E15
Usage : music, tv and Hometheater, mixed but expected quality is equal although usage varies across time
Plan : system that performs better on all fronts
Options : 3 KH 310 (3.1) or 2 KH 420 (2.1)
Listening distance and sub extension do not seem to be a deciding factor with my setup
Any advice ? thanks

Because of the large room and without treatment I'd go for the KH420. I think its directivity is a bit more narrow so you get less unwanted reflections.

 

[Frgirard]

Because of the large room and without treatment I'd go for the KH420. I think its directivity is a bit more narrow so you get less unwanted reflections.

You will have the unwanted reflection with the horizontal dispersion at 110 degrees and 80 in vertical.
The optimal listening distance is between 1,5 m and 3 m.

 

[Pearljam5000]

A nice review

Neumann KH420

Neumann are known for producing outstanding microphones, and their new flagship monitors are no less impressive!

www.google.com

 

[james57]

You will have the unwanted reflection with the horizontal dispersion at 110 degrees and 80 in vertical.
The optimal listening distance is between 1,5 m and 3 m.

Thanks for all the advices..fyi yes I am close to 2,8m, prefer the simplicity of 2*kh420 but have fomo of center channel, does this make sense ?

 

[AudioJester]

I would definitely go KH420. The phantom centre is actually better than a lot of so called centre speakers.
If you are really after a full HT set up down the track can always add a KH420 centre speaker.
In my experience a quality 2.1 setup often sounds better with movies than a lower quality multichannel setup. The difficulty here is obviously the KH310 is an exceptional speaker if you can get around the assymetrical look in a home setting

 

[C. Cook]

I really love the styling of these speakers with the grilles off. Very classic, but also very modern. Wish I had several thousand dollars sitting around. :-(

 

[RobL]

Inner and Tif thanks, fyi I am in Canada, I already have my e15, I would probably source the 310 or 420 from europe as the price appear to be more reasonable even with trspt and duties but that is another story.

Placement of the center does not seem to be an issue for me, I was under the impression the 420 advantage was mostly on the low end and since I am covering this with my e15 I did not think it was an issue, two e15 is not an option I have enough at this point and symmetry or lack of is not noticeable to my ears.

Future proof : good 3.1 preamp are an issue especially if i want to venture in the dsp-room correction world unless I go with very expensive av processors and although I am quite happy with my oppo 105 alternatives are difficult to find, for example minidsp shd is limited to 2.1 without the addition of a processor unless I missed something

If you’re in Ontario, might be worth it to check these out. Not affiliated but looks like a pretty good deal to me!
KH420 for sale

 

[ririt]

Inner and Tif thanks, fyi I am in Canada, I already have my e15, I would probably source the 310 or 420 from europe as the price appear to be more reasonable even with trspt and duties but that is another story.

Placement of the center does not seem to be an issue for me, I was under the impression the 420 advantage was mostly on the low end and since I am covering this with my e15 I did not think it was an issue, two e15 is not an option I have enough at this point and symmetry or lack of is not noticeable to my ears.

Future proof : good 3.1 preamp are an issue especially if i want to venture in the dsp-room correction world unless I go with very expensive av processors and although I am quite happy with my oppo 105 alternatives are difficult to find, for example minidsp shd is limited to 2.1 without the addition of a processor unless I missed something

You should consider an Denon AVR 3700 or 4700 as a good preamp solution. Their full preamp mode combined with Audyssey XT32 as DSP-room correction make them very attractive. I am using a 4700 in my system and I am very happy with it both for music and movies

 

[Frgirard]

Thanks for all the advices..fyi yes I am close to 2,8m, prefer the simplicity of 2*kh420 but have fomo of center channel, does this make sense ?

If i had well understood Toole the center channel is the most important.

 

[Frank Dernie]

If i had well understood Toole the center channel is the most important.

I think this is only true for a room where there will be listeners off-axis watching films. It is certainly the case here. For a central listener 2 good speakers will sound better than 3 average ones IME.

It is also the case that if a lot of people are going to gather to watch a film positioning the speakers to lightly excite a lot of room mode harmonics rather than strongly excite the main room modes is a big gain.

If placed badly the sound can be reasonably well compensated at one listening position but not over a wide area. This is very noticable in the experiments I have done over the last 20 years or so.

 

[Frgirard]

I think this is only true for a room where there will be listeners off-axis watching films. It is certainly the case here. For a central listener 2 good speakers will sound better than 3 average ones IME.

It is also the case that if a lot of people are going to gather to watch a film positioning the speakers to lightly excite a lot of room mode harmonics rather than strongly excite the main room modes is a big gain.

If placed badly the sound can be reasonably well compensated at one listening position but not over a wide area. This is very noticable in the experiments I have done over the last 20 years or so.

Read Toole, I can not do for you. I'm in stereo and I doesn't feel the need of the center channel but I do not heard the solution with three speakers and some tracks mixed well.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Read Toole, I can not do for you. I'm in stereo and I doesn't feel the need of the center channel but I do not heard the solution with three speakers and some tracks mixed well.

I have read Toole in two different editions, a brilliant tome.

I am an engineer and I have read a lot of other technical books too.

None were a Bible.

I have done a lot of experiments as well.

You worship however you wish but don't expect everybody to share your religion, even if many do - religions are like that.