Palmer ORBIT 11 Cardioid Coaxial 3-way studio monitor (MSRP 799€/899$)

[see_no_evil]

Am I mistaken, or are all of your posts these last couple pages AI-generated garbage?

it sure seemed to me that way

 

[Mnyb]

Actually, I get the feeling that the biggest adversary of the Palmer Orbits will be the rooms they’re placed in. The paradox with these speakers is that, on paper, they can function as "compact main monitors” in the Barefoot style — except Barefoots are priced in a way that assumes they’ll be used in a properly treated studio. Here, the Palmers extend low enough that any studio, even a relatively large one, will have its room modes heavily excited by that low‑end extension.

For example, in my own room I have several modes around 40 Hz. With my Focal Shape 65s, that’s not a big issue because they don’t put out much energy down there, so the resonances stay limited. With speakers like the Orbits, it’s a whole different story: while acoustic treatment to manage my modes around 80 Hz is still perfectly doable, keeping a reverberation time that doesn’t smear everything below 40 Hz is impossible without membrane resonators or active absorption like PSI’s solutions — which are vastly more expensive than the speakers themselves.

So despite the incredible price‑to‑performance ratio of these monitors, it’s likely that I’ll go for an upgrade to the KH150 instead, which will let me mix all acoustic and electric instruments without any issues, and then add one or two subs for movies and to check the infra‑bass on certain electronic tracks.

Most has to resort to DSP to handle bass modes that should be doable even for a desktop setup . Would not a “studio” even at home have this capability already in the software somewhere ? Or High pass the speakers to some degree to check , the opposite of testing with a sub ?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Yeah honestly I'm also worried about the bass because my room is only 3X3 meters

 

[Purité Audio]

There is this thing called EQ…
Keith

 

[BeeKay]

There is thing called EQ…
Keith

 

[Pearljam5000]

I've owned Genelec One speakers for a few years now. Before that, I had Neumanns. While the Genelec One speakers are very accurate and I love their coaxial design (which is an absolute must in the nearfield), they really lack character/soul. So, unless you're specifically producing, mixing or mastering, in my opinion, precision isn't everything.

To me precision is above everything else

 

[goat76]

This is exactly the reason what we need measurements for. We are reading description or feelings which can mean different things for different people on one hand. On the other hand no one from us can really compare two speakers which are not available at the exact same time, with the exact same volume. Our brain makes us believe we can do it, but finally this would be only possible within a double blind ABX testing. Not out of memories. Unfortunately. We can only say that we like something at the specific moment or not.

When the listening environments are acoustically okay, in a home or in a demo room, it’s really not hard to hear and remember the main characteristics of that loudspeaker. I have actually never been surprised by the sound of a speaker I’ve heard before, they always sound close to how I remembered them to sound on previous occasions.

What I can say is e.g. if a piano which is standing in the same room as my audio equipment can be copied by the audio chain or not. Since I can listen to it more or less at the same moment. This is typically my “measure”. Listening to acoustic instruments via my audio equipment and compare it to the real acoustic instrument. From my point of view they should sound as close as possible, which is only possible with a very neutral loudspeaker. That’s at least my personal experience or impression.

This can be a good way to compare, but don't forget that the audio chain involved in the recording process can color the sound as well, so how do you make sure the actual recording is a good representation of how the piano sounds, IF the only loudspeaker in the room is the one you are evaluating?

Another problem, unless the recording is very dry, is that you will get a “double effect” of the room acoustics when playing back the recording in the same room where the actual recording took place.

 

[Oboreal]

I will have to say it again, but eq will never fix the time domain... never.

We all want to trust this speakers and dsp fairy but we can't change physics.

As beautifull your frequency response curve will look at the sweespot after eq (wich i will do, of course, as a sound guy) it will sound like shit if you have 300 ms in the mid and higs and 2 seconds at 40 hz. Yes, eq will help to excite the room less, but that's it, it will never ever fix your time domain issues.

And yes, i will prefer a clean sound in the frequency range that really matter for music (from the low E of a bass wich is 40 hz until 15 khz for music) over a ****** sub bass region. That being said, in a well controlled room, it's amazing to be able to have total full range at such a decent price.

 

[Ratterbass]

I will have to say it again, but eq will never fix the time domain... never. You can tell yourself this speakers and dsp fairy as much as you want, it won't change physics. As beautifull your frequency response curve will look at the sweespot after eq (wich i do, of course, as a sound guy) it will sound like shit if you have 300 ms in the mid and higs and 2 seconds at 40 hz. Yes, eq will help to excite the room less, but that's it, it will never ever fix your time domain issues. And yes, i will prefer a clean sound in the frequency range that really matter for music (from the low E of a bass wich is 40 hz until 15 khz for music) over a ****** sub bass region. That being said, in a well controlled room, it's amazing to be able to have total full range at such a decent price.

That's why it's not EQ but FIR processing. The output is linear phase. The issues you describe are not present in this design and concept.

 

[Liftro]

You’re absolutely right — no one can speak for someone else, and of course acoustic measurements are a good point of reference.

In the end, the only thing that really helps is testing for yourself — that’s clear.

But even if the measurements might not be that impressive, I’d still like to show one or two people that this speaker may nevertheless have the potential to be the right choice for them.

I ordered the speakers on a bit of a whim myself. My expectations were high, and before that I had only seen all the marketing talk and didn’t really believe what was written there — technical specifications that almost seemed too good to be true.

But well, we’ll see — time will tell.

In the end, I personally don’t care that much how they measure. Still, I would of course hope for good results, because for many people only the measurements matter — and if a speaker doesn’t reach a certain reference level, they won’t even consider testing it in the first place.

The KH120 II has been available for almost 3 years, so...

You are here since October 2020...a possibility is not enough anymore: please order something!

I understand it's good to wait for the manufacturer's reliability. Now problems are starting to appear with the 120kh II.

 

[Oboreal]

FIR is just a type of EQ filter, it’s made to EQ, nothing more. And linear‑phase EQ comes with its own drawbacks anyway (pre‑ringing being the most obvious one). But I wasn’t even talking about crossover design here. I was referring to the in‑room time‑domain response, which has little to do with crossover topology once you’re below the Schroeder frequency.

The issue isn’t the speaker itself. It’s simply that achieving a room with a clean, flat time‑domain response all the way down to 26 Hz is extremely difficult. That’s the paradox: you get an amazingly affordable full‑range monitor, but it ends up requiring a room that almost none of the people buying it will actually be able to have.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I understand it's good to wait for the manufacturer's reliability. Now problems are starting to appear with the 120kh II.

Yeah honestly that worries me

 

[Ratterbass]

FIR is just a type of EQ filter, it’s made to EQ, nothing more.

FIR can correct for phase independently of amplitude. Typically EQ cannot (please let's not start on allpass filter banks). That's the major difference. FIR is also always guaranteed to be stable, IIR (EQ) is not. The only drawback with FIR design is the latency, especially when correcting low frequency response. But there are processing techniques that can improve on that (mainly up- and downsampling the filter). 4ms is pretty good for a full range design.

Your point about room response is correct, but it's kind of moot since it applies to any speaker setup. If your room has challenging low end response, you can always high pass your speakers to get them to play only in the non-critical range. It's not a speaker specific issue.

 

[Matt_Holland]

Is it likely that the Orbit 11 has group delay correction based on what details are provided?
My thoughts are no because this would require more than 4mS of delay in the mids/HF.

 

[Bwaslo]

A simple iir eq can easily change a 28Hz bottom end speaker to a 50Hz speaker. If you're stressing about in-room response and don't have eq capability, you will be stressing forever

 

[staticV3]

Maybe @Honken is referring to this:

Ah yes, definitely tapered Thanks for the correction @Emulator II!

Looks like the woofers are mounted at an angle of 177° so a 3° offset, which would mean it will vibrate about 3% as much as an equivalent single woofer @Honken

 

[Breeze98]

• Both can cross over -> internal LPF and matching HPF to the Line out going to the Orbit.
• Neither can DSP the AES/SPDIF output, so you'll have to connect the Orbit via Line, resulting in two redundant signal conversions.
• Only the KH750 can apply room correction and time alignment to the Line output.

-> KH750 is more suitable.

Thanks for the clarification.

• Only the KH750 can apply room correction and time alignment to the Line output.

Does that mean MA-1 will be able to do room correction for the whole frequency range and not just the sub's?

• Neither can DSP the AES/SPDIF output, so you'll have to connect the Orbit via Line, resulting in two redundant signal conversions.

Is a different make of sub available where it's possible to DSP the AES/SPDIF output or is connecting a sub via line the only option?

 

[Henrik]

I wish the 80 Hz high‑pass filter could also be controlled by a footswitch. It would be handy for translation purposes, checking the low-end on a simulated constrained "2-way" speaker when mixing. Just by a simple press on the switch without getting up. Easy to implement, I would think.

 

[Liftro]

I've owned Genelec One speakers for a few years now. Before that, I had Neumanns. While the Genelec One speakers are very accurate and I love their coaxial design (which is an absolute must in the nearfield), they really lack character/soul. So, unless you're specifically producing, mixing or mastering, in my opinion, precision isn't everything.

How do you compare Genelec to Neumanns? Is there really that much difference?

 

[staticV3]

Does that mean MA-1 will be able to do room correction for the whole frequency range and not just the sub's?

Yes!

Is a different make of sub available where it's possible to DSP the AES/SPDIF output or is connecting a sub via line the only option?

Okay this is a bit conflicting.

The KH 750 DSP manual states that:

Which is why I said that to get full-range MA1 room correction, you'd have to connect via Line.

But the newer combined manual for the KH 750 DSP / KH 805 II states that:

Meaning you'll get the same MA1 output via Analog or Digital.

Maybe this changed with a firmware update, or maybe this applies only to the KH805 II and the manual is written in a misleading way.

I'd recommend you contact customer support regarding this, or if you own the KH750 anyway, make sure your sub is running the latest firmware and test this yourself.