Palmer Orbit 11 vs Neumann KH120a

[sidechain]

In comparison to Neumann KH120a and KS-Digital D606, I would put the Orbit in first place, then the KS-Digital, and the Neumann in third place.

This is a very personnal and subjective opinion ; my experience with Neumann/K&H speakers (heard and worked on most of them except the KH420 Gs) is that they are insanely accurate but insanely uninspiring to produce on, I wouldn't describe them as "fun" speakers in any way. I have a feeling the Orbits have the potential to be the perfect compromise between accuracy and "fun" for people who split their time between mixing and production work.

 

[h2opt]

Setup (Nearfield, 1m)

Tested the near field today. The acoustics at this spot are more difficult as in the midfield, but the result is still okay. That completes the testing.

View attachment 515226View attachment 515227


Conclusion

The Orbit speakers are tonally balanced and offer good depth of field. Due to their size and low cutoff frequency, they are very versatile and could make a subwoofer unnecessary in some setups.

In comparison to Neumann KH120a and KS-Digital D606, I would put the Orbit in first place, then the KS-Digital, and the Neumann in third place.

The Orbit and the KS-Digital speakers leverage their advantages due to the three-way design and the coaxial design, thus setting themselves apart somewhat from the Neumann speakers. From my point of view, the Neumann KH310 would be a better comparison partner.

The differences between Orbit and KS-Digital are less pronounced. I prefer the depth of field of the Orbit and find it easier to pick out details. The bass of the KS-Digital is crisper, but the Orbit plays significantly deeper.

A clear recommendation for the Orbit, they are excellent speakers at a very fair price.

A selection of the test tracks:

• Bastille "Distored Ligth Beam" (subtle reverberation).
• Fischerspooner "Danse En France" (depth of field).
• Mark Knopfler "Rüdiger" (body of the voice).
• Yello "Life is a Snowball" (reference audio recording).

@EAXAE
I want to replace the KS-Digital for the following reasons:

• They have a noticeable hiss, even at 2.5 meters. Actually pretty bad for the price range, but I overlooked it because of the sound quality.
• They get hot. I'm worried the amplifier will blow in the summer.
• I've had these speakers for 10 years and I'm ready for something new.

The original plan was to replace them with the Neumann KH120 II in the summer. The Orbit then tempted me to make a spontaneous purchase.

interesting, I also wanted to upgrade with a pair of kh120ii but then Ornit11 appeared and now I am not sure what to buy, I produce and mix/master... waiting for Amirs measurements.

 

[h2opt]

This is a very personnal and subjective opinion ; my experience with Neumann/K&H speakers (heard and worked on most of them except the KH420 Gs) is that they are insanely accurate but insanely uninspiring to produce on, I wouldn't describe them as "fun" speakers in any way. I have a feeling the Orbits have the potential to be the perfect compromise between accuracy and "fun" for people who split their time between mixing and production work.

I produce mix and master and not sure what to buy Orbit11 or kh120ii.. for me mixing and mastering is more important
I would like someone to compare this two monitors.

 

[amirm]

@amirm
I'm not sure what you mean. I calculated the drop in volume using the inverse square law (sound pressure level decreases by 6 dB when the distance is doubled, free field). But the result is only approximate and only applies to one loudspeaker. I tried measuring larger distances (0.5, 1m) with the SPL meter, but it remained at 30 dBa "Under".

You can't do that because noise doesn't have a single frequency spectrum. It is broadband and heavily concentrated in bass frequencies that we don't hear nearly as well as we can in 2 to 5 kHz. You have to capture the noise and analyze its spectrum to determine audibility, especially in the case we are talking about where it is treble noise, not bass.

See this article: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

And this graph:

Your SPL meter shows a single number that is not at all representative of the full spectrum and as I noted, most likely is low frequency weighted. For speaker noise to be inaudible, it would need to be so across the full threshold of hearing, not just in bass. The best room in that study "Min" achieved that even though a SPL meter would read well above 0 dBSPL.

 

[3125b]

You have to capture the noise and analyze its spectrum to determine audibility

His meter indicates dBA, so that value should be a-weighted (unless that fine 30€ piece of test equipment is lying).

For noise it should ideally be d-weighted, but I don't think that's really available.

 

[amirm]

His meter indicates dBA, so that value should be a-weighted (unless that fine 30€ piece of test equipment is lying).

That is yet another sum so not suitable for this purpose. You specifically want to do an analysis of noise, when converted to equiv. sine response, against the threshold of hearing. This is not something folks can do so just have to trust people's ears when they say they hear it.

 

[CB89]

@amirm
I see, thank you for the explanation. It would have been nice if it were that easy to measure. It would be even better if manufacturers included the self noise in their technical specifications.

 

[jean-benoit]

This is a very personnal and subjective opinion ; my experience with Neumann/K&H speakers (heard and worked on most of them except the KH420 Gs) is that they are insanely accurate but insanely uninspiring to produce on, I wouldn't describe them as "fun" speakers in any way. I have a feeling the Orbits have the potential to be the perfect compromise between accuracy and "fun" for people who split their time between mixing and production work.

its funny you say this. between the kali in-8, iloud mtm precision and the neumann kh150, the neumann to me is the speaker that i felt most comfortable for production and mixing work. i also enjoy them very much for just listening. they sound just right for me, not clinical at all and not fatiguing. but i also applied the MA-1 calibration, and the result in my room was outstanding. iloud arc calibration is pretty good too imo.

them double woofers on the orbit-11 are intriguing though.
just wished, the orbit-11 would have room correction as well, even in a well treated studio environment, i wouldnt want to live without it anymore.

 

[sidechain]

its funny you say this. between the kali in-8, iloud mtm precision and the neumann kh150, the neumann to me is the speaker that i felt most comfortable for production and mixing work. i also enjoy them very much for just listening. they sound just right for me, not clinical at all and not fatiguing. but i also applied the MA-1 calibration, and the result in my room was outstanding. iloud arc calibration is pretty good too imo.

them double woofers on the orbit-11 are intriguing though.
just wished, the orbit-11 would have room correction as well, even in a well treated studio environment, i wouldnt want to live without it anymore.

You can buy cheap external correction dsp like Audient Oria Mini

 

[Liftro]

This is a very personnal and subjective opinion ; my experience with Neumann/K&H speakers (heard and worked on most of them except the KH420 Gs) is that they are insanely accurate but insanely uninspiring to produce on, I wouldn't describe them as "fun" speakers in any way. I have a feeling the Orbits have the potential to be the perfect compromise between accuracy and "fun" for people who split their time between mixing and production work.

Could You define "fun" to produce?

 

[sidechain]

Could You define "fun" to produce?

It's impossible to define, but I would say it includes low end, wide imaging and phantom center sweet spot, high spl, no latency or all of them combined together.

It would also not describe the Kalis or iLouds as "fun".

 

[IamJF]

Thankyou for posting this. I’m currently using a pair of KH120a’s with an Eve TS108 sub. I’m torn between upgrading my sub to the KH750 or change to the Orbit 11’s.

I would strongly think about upgrading to KH120ii + MA1 first! The new version goes deeper and louder and with MA1 you get reliable monitoring in most situations. Great for editing and mixing!

I produce mix and master and not sure what to buy Orbit11 or kh120ii.. for me mixing and mastering is more important

KH120ii + MA1 is a reliable tool. Most important for mastering.
But of course for mastering you want to have a fullrange speaker and you will miss the lowest octave with KH120ii.

I would say it depends on your room quality - in a perfect room you can try Orbit11, otherwise MA1 will play it's strength.

For me KH120ii + MA1 is the entrance level of professional monitoring. For MASTERING I would prefer to get a different league of speakers ... but that's a complete different price point.

 

[dickiefunk]

I would strongly think about upgrading to KH120ii + MA1 first! The new version goes deeper and louder and with MA1 you get reliable monitoring in most situations. Great for editing and mixing!


KH120ii + MA1 is a reliable tool. Most important for mastering.
But of course for mastering you want to have a fullrange speaker and you will miss the lowest octave with KH120ii.

I would say it depends on your room quality - in a perfect room you can try Orbit11, otherwise MA1 will play it's strength.

For me KH120ii + MA1 is the entrance level of professional monitoring. For MASTERING I would prefer to get a different league of speakers ... but that's a complete different price point.

Thankyou, yes I am considering this option as well as I really like the KH120’s. I would like the MA1 room correction and am torn between the various Neumann options :-

-1: KH120a + KH750
-2: KH120 mk2
-3: KH150 mk2

Ideally I could do with trying all options out in my room but don’t have the budget for this.

 

[IamJF]

I have KH120a, KH120ii and KH80.
For me the upgrade from KH120a to KH120ii was easy worth the money. Better midrange resolution and extremely good stereo panorama is what you don't see in the test data. I use the digital input - also great for various/cheap sources. Significant higher SPL and tight low end. And MA1 of course. Therefore I personally would not add a KH750.

But of course it can also make sense to firstly add the sub and gain MA1 for the whole set. And maybe later change the KH120.

KH80 is not on par with the bigger ones but for the money it's great!
KH150 does not get a lot louder as KH120ii but goes 10Hz deeper. For the money ... KH120ii + sub would be a better option.

 

[davidgale]

I have KH120a, KH120ii and KH80.
For me the upgrade from KH120a to KH120ii was easy worth the money. Better midrange resolution and extremely good stereo panorama is what you don't see in the test data. I use the digital input - also great for various/cheap sources. Significant higher SPL and tight low end. And MA1 of course. Therefore I personally would not add a KH750.

But of course it can also make sense to firstly add the sub and gain MA1 for the whole set. And maybe later change the KH120.

KH80 is not on par with the bigger ones but for the money it's great!
KH150 does not get a lot louder as KH120ii but goes 10Hz deeper. For the money ... KH120ii + sub would be a better option.

If find your comparison between KH120a vs KH120II super valuable. I have an opportunity to buy used KH120a for 50% less than brand new KH120II. Looks like I'd better buy KH120II.

 

[Mnyb]

@amirm
I see, thank you for the explanation. It would have been nice if it were that easy to measure. It would be even better if manufacturers included the self noise in their technical specifications.

+1
It’s not that easy to measure for most folks . So if the manufacturer did this using some formal specification so everyone used the same method we could atleast have relative values to compare . A raw value and one value weighted for audiability could be presented.