New Neumann KH 310 II and KH 350 Rumors: Leaked Pricing & Info

[Steakhouse]

View attachment 558023

No AI Slop please.

 

[Curvature]

I extracted the -6dB curves of the Neumann speakers to show the increased horizontal LF directivity control as the speaker gets bigger. Don't take the below too seriously with respect to the KH350 since Neumann's data is presented so differently compared to the rest. The Y axis is not SPL, it is the horizontal angle.

It's clear that Neumann's priority is to have constant directivity with a gradual slope down to wherever the speaker has a sudden flare (related to baffle width). This flare is of course dependent on frequency and level, and we see that -3dB, -6dB, -9dB below correlate with a higher frequency across a wider angle. They are willing to trade the smoothness of that flare with the consistency of beamwidth above. However, the KH310, KH350 and KH420 show a much smoother transition due to the midrange driver.

https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Neumann KH 80/ASR/asr-v3-20200711/SPL Horizontal Contour.html
https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Neumann KH 120 II/ASR/asr/SPL Horizontal Contour.html
https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Neumann KH 150/ASR/asr/SPL Horizontal Contour.html
https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Neumann KH 310A/ASR/asr/SPL Horizontal Contour.html
https://www.spinorama.org/speakers/Neumann KH 420G/ASR/asr/SPL Horizontal Contour.html

It's a good lesson regarding where sound differences may come from with speakers in general, but also, for very similar speakers, if you are listening, which range should be most closely considered. Below Schroeder, rooms are responsible for bass response, while the speaker just provides the energy, so below around 300Hz the only difference is really in the bass extension and the degree to which SBIR triggers nonminimum phase FR issues, while above 300Hz, the issue is the consistency of energy distribution around the speaker. It's hard to say exactly what the effect is for a given radiation pattern, but research supports that there should not be abrupt discontinuities, rather smooth transitions across angles. Resonances in particular are interesting exactly because they cause a discontinuity of energy distribution over a wide angle, which is why they proved to be so audible in Toole's testing. There's more work to be done to compare and define the differences in audibility of different directivities and how to interpret small differences in particular.

 

[IamJF]

Thanks Pedro. Been following this closely. When will Amir/Erin generally post their measurements ? Also, I remember you mentioned before that you are going to be doing your own measurements and comparing these to the likes of AtC. Are you still on track for this?! Also I found this video online where they used an Neumann mic head to hear the tonal differences between the speakers - not sure if it’s just me but 310ii sounds a lot clearer than the rest (but it could be the position of the head and/or the room).

The speakers are on completely different height. Speakers with similar height sound similar.
You should at least keep the reference height (not sure with the 3-way model, maybe tweeter level or in between tweeter/midrange?) around ear level.

KH350 with a 2nd 8" ... that would be a speaker ...


It seems the 3" in KH420 is different and more powerful? At least it goes down significant deeper. I'm wondering why they cross them that high - I use my 3" domes down to 450-480Hz, ATC down to 380Hz. But both without waveguide and wide radiating.

 

[IamJF]

I own KH120, 120ii and KH80 and did setups with MA1 and the fitting subwoofer for others.
The upgrade to KH120ii gives you significant sound improvements! The new lowmid driver sounds cleaner, significant better midrange. And the soundstage is REALLY good for such a speaker, the DSP crossover and pairing the speakers is done very well.

Not sure if there is a similar upgrade with KH310ii ... but integration in the MA1 system alone is probably worth the price. And I really like to connect my monitors per digital input - only one conversion at the end of the chain.

KH120ii has the best price/performance ratio in the market. It's performance is close to KH150 for nearly half the price (€770 vs 1440). Everything else ... has the Neumann lable ...
But it's a very good eco system, you can build an ATMOS system starting with a bunch of KH120ii and adding more channels and bigger speakers over time and they all fit perfectly together. MA1 is one of the best measurement systems on the market.
Over all it's the goto monitoring system for professional "no fuss" use for me. (until you need mastering performance ... but that's a different story)

 

[Pearljam5000]

When did Neumann buy a Klippel?

 

[slavenoise]

Zastanawiam się, czy powinienem przejść z obecnego systemu 310a/750/ma1 2.2 do 350/870II 2.2.

I have a similar problem. This 350 is beautiful and I'd like to upgrade. I'd keep 2 x 750 only at that price...

 

[ozonepaul]

...I'm wondering why they cross them that high...

It's a compromise between the following design elements/acoustical parameters:
Driver size/driver material
vs crossover slope (how much frequency overlap area will be there)
vs the distortion level at the different frequencies
vs the given drivers ideal performance boundaries (in the frequency domain)
vs intermodulation distortion
vs directivity/waveguide design
etc.
So actually, when trying to find the perfect compromise (let's say in the case of a 3 way system like the KH420 or the KH350) and you calculate the optimal frequency windows based on all the above for all 3 drivers (woofer vs mid; mid vs tweeter) than "at the end actually there is not much you can play with".


If you want more detail on this topic, than check out this Markus Wolff interview (he is Neumann's system designer), I put a time stamp where they talk about crossovers.

But to be honest I think it's well worth watching the full video. It's nearly 2 hours long, as nerdy as it gets, it's very informative. Interesting interview with the driver designer; interview about the cabinet design, all the mechanics/acoustics of the enclosure; presentation on the electronic parts etc. etc. etc. Great stuff for anyone interested about these monitors.

 

[Karmacoma]

It's a compromise between the following design elements/acoustical parameters:
Driver size/driver material
vs crossover slope (how much frequency overlap area will be there)
vs the distortion level at the different frequencies
vs the given drivers ideal performance boundaries (in the frequency domain)
vs intermodulation distortion
vs directivity/waveguide design
etc.
So actually, when trying to find the perfect compromise (let's say in the case of a 3 way system like the KH420 or the KH350) and you calculate the optimal frequency windows based on all the above for all 3 drivers (woofer vs mid; mid vs tweeter) than "at the end actually there is not much you can play with".


If you want more detail on this topic, than check out this Markus Wolff interview (he is Neumann's system designer), I put a time stamp where they talk about crossovers.

But to be honest I think it's well worth watching the full video. It's nearly 2 hours long, as nerdy as it gets, it's very informative. Interesting interview with the driver designer; interview about the cabinet design, all the mechanics/acoustics of the enclosure; presentation on the electronic parts etc. etc. etc. Great stuff for anyone interested about these monitors.

I've watched it, and I think this video really deserves its own thread, super interesting wether you own Neumanns or not.

 

[goat76]

Thanks Pedro. Been following this closely. When will Amir/Erin generally post their measurements ? Also, I remember you mentioned before that you are going to be doing your own measurements and comparing these to the likes of AtC. Are you still on track for this?! Also I found this video online where they used an Neumann mic head to hear the tonal differences between the speakers - not sure if it’s just me but 310ii sounds a lot clearer than the rest (but it could be the position of the head and/or the room).

As others have mentioned, the guy in the video made a big mistake by not adjusting the loudspeaker height to align their acoustic axes with the dummy head's ear level.

• With the obvious height problems in mind, the KH120 sounded as if it lacked a bit of low-midrange "fullness".
• The KH310 sounded the most balanced of them all, even though it looked to be positioned a bit low compared to the ears of the dummy head.
• The KH350 sounded the worst in the test, especially in the second song, where the male vocals sounded a bit "closed-in" and muffled, which, of course, can probably be blamed on the height of the tweeter compared to the dummy head, but the strange thing is that the KH420 did not suffer from the same, where the male voice didn't sound as "closed-in" and muffled.
• The KH420 was obviously affected the most by the height issue and was lacking the most in the high frequencies, but as mentioned, it's a bit strange that it didn't suffer the same as the KH350, as it sounded more open and less "closed-in". Is this difference in sound possibly caused by the midrange driver in the KH420 covering a larger portion of the frequency range- 570 Hz to 2 kHz for the KH420 and 700 Hz to 1700 Hz for the KH350?

Yes, I'm fully aware of the problems a listening test like this comes with, but it's still interesting to compare like this, even if we all should know that you must hear the speakers in person. It's a shame the tester in the video did not seem to understand the importance of adjusting the height of the speakers to align their acoustic axis with the height of the ears of the dummy head; otherwise, the sound test would have been a lot more useful.

 

[thewas]

When did Neumann buy a Klippel? View attachment 558181

This is not a Klippel NFS, they had other Klippel measurement devices since many years, remember seeing a Klippel Scanning Vibrometer System when I visited their R&D department many years ago.

 

[Pearljam5000]

This is not a Klippel NFS, they had other Klippel measurement devices since many years, remember seeing a Klippel Scanning Vibrometer System when I visited their R&D department many years ago.

He says in the video that it's from Klippel
I time stamped it for you so just press play

 

[thewas]

He says in the video that it's from Klippel
I time stamped it for you so just press play

Please carefully read my above response. I wrote that they have Klippel devices since many years and I even saw one at my visit there, just that the device you showed in the screenshot is not a Klippel NFS (but probably the same Klippel Scanning Vibrometer System I had seen and linked above).

 

[Pearljam5000]

Please carefully read my above response. I wrote that they have Klippel devices since many years and I even saw one at my visit there, just that the device you showed in the screenshot is not a Klippel NFS (but probably the same Klippel Scanning Vibrometer System I had seen and linked above).

Oops
Sorry
Thanks
Language barrier mistakes on my part

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Please carefully read my above response. I wrote that they have Klippel devices since many years and I even saw one at my visit there, just that the device you showed in the screenshot is not a Klippel NFS (but probably the same Klippel Scanning Vibrometer System I had seen and linked above).

They seem to also have (or at least use) a Klippel NFS. Markus Wolff talks in the video from around 1:20:10 about their anechoic chamber and how they are compensating for it´s lack of precision below 100 Hz. He mentions three things: 1. outdoor ground plane measurements, 2. simulations and 3. "there is a technology from another german company with that you can measure down to very low frequencies under even anechoic conditions" (with the disadvantage of being very slow compared to the anechoic chambers). I guess number 3 is the NFS.

 

[kharan]

But to be honest I think it's well worth watching the full video. It's nearly 2 hours long, as nerdy as it gets, it's very informative. Interesting interview with the driver designer; interview about the cabinet design, all the mechanics/acoustics of the enclosure; presentation on the electronic parts etc. etc. etc. Great stuff for anyone interested about these monitors.

The content was pretty disappointing to me, TBH. They spoke about a lot of things, but nothing out of the ordinary for whoever is familiar with speaker design.

The only two things I've learned that are specific to Neumann are:

First, they design everything in-house: the driver cones, surrounds, and suspensions, as well as the magnet structures. They also handle the integration of the ADC/DAC and the design of the amplifiers. As a side note, they keep calling it a digital amp; I think it might be a translation error rather than them using a Power DAC.

Second, they are very proud that they managed to integrate the whole bass management system and DSP for a surround system in the back of a KH 810 inside the subwoofer cavity. It was extremely challenging from an engineering point of view, from the heat to the vibration to the packaging concerns. They say it saves money for the customer in any of the situations they tested. I don't know about that, I still think having an external box you can ship back easily to the manufacturer in case of failure is the better solution.

 

[Karmacoma]

The content was pretty disappointing to me, TBH. They spoke about a lot of things, but nothing out of the ordinary for whoever is familiar with speaker design.

The only two things I've learned that are specific to Neumann are:

First, they design everything in-house: the driver cones, surrounds, and suspensions, as well as the magnet structures. They also handle the integration of the ADC/DAC and the design of the amplifiers. As a side note, they keep calling it a digital amp; I think it might be a translation error rather than them using a Power DAC.

Second, they are very proud that they managed to integrate the whole bass management system and DSP for a surround system in the back of a KH 810 inside the subwoofer cavity. It was extremely challenging from an engineering point of view, from the heat to the vibration to the packaging concerns. They say it saves money for the customer in any of the situations they tested. I don't know about that, I still think having an external box you can ship back easily to the manufacturer in case of failure is the better solution.

Question back to you, what subject would you have liked them to cover? Out of the ordinary I mean.

 

[kharan]

Question back to you, what subject would you have liked them to cover? Out of the ordinary I mean.

Going into the details of the speaker design, for example:

They spoke at length about the trade-offs between THD, IMD, directivity, and crossover slopes for the choice of how and where to place the crossovers, but that's common knowledge. Instead, they could have described the different alternatives for the crossover frequencies for the KH 350 and how each choice would have quantitatively affected the aforementioned parameters. Was there really no way to play the midrange lower in the KH 350 and have the waveguide play a bigger role in the directivity of the midrange?

Or when they spoke about using the same woofer for the KH 310 II and the KH 350, conventional wisdom would say that you need drivers with different T/S parameters for both, yet they claim to use the same driver; what pushed this choice?

 

[pedrojoaquimborges]

The content was pretty disappointing to me, TBH. They spoke about a lot of things, but nothing out of the ordinary for whoever is familiar with speaker design.

The only two things I've learned that are specific to Neumann are:

First, they design everything in-house: the driver cones, surrounds, and suspensions, as well as the magnet structures. They also handle the integration of the ADC/DAC and the design of the amplifiers. As a side note, they keep calling it a digital amp; I think it might be a translation error rather than them using a Power DAC.

Second, they are very proud that they managed to integrate the whole bass management system and DSP for a surround system in the back of a KH 810 inside the subwoofer cavity. It was extremely challenging from an engineering point of view, from the heat to the vibration to the packaging concerns. They say it saves money for the customer in any of the situations they tested. I don't know about that, I still think having an external box you can ship back easily to the manufacturer in case of failure is the better solution.

Bit of a high standard when you consider the context for this. "For whoever is familiar with speaker design" - I guess you could say this to minimize any discussion whose content isn't at the very frontier of its field. For whoever's familiar with the newest mechanic engineering research, any "lower" discussion about cars will be very ordinary.

I might be wrong, but I'd never seen an audio brand with reputable, widespread and well measuring products speak so directly of R&D issues, especially when they connect to legacy product limitations. The whole woofer redesign segment directly addresses the 310's greatest limitation and even points at the spider being a big cause for it, for example. I actually remember thinking it was odd for them to be saying that much at multiple points through the video.

But I do agree it'd be extremely interesting to watch them discuss the issues yiu mentioned.

 

[YouDontHaveEnoughBass]

Ultimately I think the design decisions for things like the crossover point make sense for much higher SPL environments like recording studios (where hearing loss is a hazard of the job) but less so for home listening

The distortion numbers on their products in the upper mids / treble are always impressive at levels a home listener will never listen at, while the trade off for this in the form of worse vertical phase cancellations is something that will effect home listeners more (not many living rooms have treated ceilings for example)

 

[Karmacoma]

Was there really no way to play the midrange lower in the KH 350 and have the waveguide play a bigger role in the directivity of the midrange?

He implied they did their best to make it play as low as possible.

Or when they spoke about using the same woofer for the KH 310 II and the KH 350, conventional wisdom would say that you need drivers with different T/S parameters for both, yet they claim to use the same driver; what pushed this choice?

For practical reasons. They tuned everything around it differently: cabinet, port, damping, filtering, excursion, and of course dsp. This conventional wisdom doesn't apply to dsp speakers.