PSI vs Neumann vs Geithain

[Docteur Poulet]

I currently own a pair of Rowen AT1, these speakers are the A215M ancestors.
Same factory, same electronic.

In my 12m² living room, they are clearly overkill.
Having said that, very very good sweet spot: larger horizontaly than vertically.

I also own two pairs of Rowen AM1C which are really close to the A14M.

 

[FeddyLost]

In my 12m² living room, they are clearly overkill

For such small spaces even A14 might be ok. A17-21 for sure will be enough.
A215 are "compact mastering monitors" without needs of supporting subwoofer, but LF extension was bought at cost of distortion. If A215 have to be used at some decent SPL (like 90 db/m as in manual graphs), user need to keep that in mind.
Rowen electronics unit really looks like PSI. Maybe they are OEMs for Rowen.
But I think lifestyle Rowen might be tuned slightly different. I've never seen really "flat" small speakers in hi-fi. They are usually kind of tone compensated for hearing curve.
And 45 Hz claims for AM1C gives us an idea that they are barely monitors. 45 hz from 5" compact bass reflex usually far from precision.

 

[Frank Dernie]

According to to her Genelec is garbage lol

No she didn't, they came 3rd after the PSI and Focal, for her use.
Making a short list then auditioning them personally is the only sensible way to choose speakers for one's own use IME and IMO.
I find the measurements useful in making a shorter list to audition than it would otherwise be.
Few people I know of, if any, have published a better thought through listening test.
Bravo.
Her listening environment is quite unlike mine so my conclusion may well be different.
I was surprised the KH310 didn't do better.
I also have found the few Genelecs I have listened to a bit bright too. I haven't heard one of their coaxials though.

 

[FeddyLost]

I was surprised the KH310 didn't do better.

A17 have phase compensated crossover at 3,6K, KH310 have 4th order crossovers at 650 and 2K, and all the mids are cut in three.
If room have no significant issues and SPL is low, this might be the most significant difference.
She also liked 2-way Focals with crossover around 2,5K which is also more "single-source" than KH310.

 

[thewas]

A17 have phase compensated crossover at 3,6K, KH310 have 4th order crossovers at 650 and 2K, and all the mids are cut in three.
If room have no significant issues and SPL is low, this might be the most significant difference.
She also liked 2-way Focals with crossover around 2,5K which is also more "single-source" than KH310.

Sorry but these are audiophile myths about not "cutting the mids", if the crossover and directivity transition are well designed and the listening distance is sufficient you will have less problems with such a design then with a higher crossover frequency and a directivity step.

Lets have a look at the vertical dispersion of the KH310

and of the supposedly more single-source" 2-way Focal Solo 6 Be

Due to the waveguides and the smaller 3" mid dome its much more smoother and closer to a point-source at the Neumann.

With this I don't want to question her chosen preference, but such often heard popular reasoning speculations about it.

 

[Scholl]

I second what thewas said. Often in 3 way speakers, the emissive centers of the tweeter and midrange are closer to each-other than in two way speakers because of the smaller size of the midrange driver (especially for large 8" two way speakers). And since the crossover frequency between the bass driver and the midrange is much lower, this is a non issue for those drivers.

 

[FeddyLost]

if the crossover and directivity transition are well designed and the listening distance is sufficient

Don't forget, that we are talking about nearfield studio environment in that contest. No "sufficient" listening distance, suppressed reflections, and carefully chosen working place with constant height make vertical directivity .... not so critical.
Most of standard vertically aligned monitors have vertical directivity "troubles" at crossover region and it's not a problem for studio work.

More interesting question is that KH310 have much lower HD, and that wasn't revealed in any way...

 

[DJBonoBobo]

I think this review, although sighted and highly subjective, gives an overall picture of her use case and needs in the context of some of the speakers mentioned here, namely Genelec, Neumann and PSI Audio. I like this review because she's very specific in her use case and chose accordingly.
Review of PSI a17m vs KH310 vs 8340A vs Focal vs Dynaudio Core

She can do what she wants, but personally i find this kind of review not only not helpful but misleading. She is saying it herself ("What I can hear/notice may differ to what someone else might pick up. ... Everyone's circumstances are different."), so not too much critisism to her. But i don´t think this stuff needs more promotion.

When i see phrases like "boomy", "muddy", "nice attack", "warm", "clear", "punch" i would always ask first about the influence of room acoustics before even thinking about A/B-listening tests. But if I understand it correctly, she did not use calibration. So i think all of this is pretty much worthless outside the fixed positions in her own room or the moment she starts to use Sonarworks or whatever.

 

[Frank Dernie]

She can do what she wants, but personally i find this kind of review not only not helpful but misleading. She is saying it herself ("What I can hear/notice may differ to what someone else might pick up. ... Everyone's circumstances are different."), so not too much critisism to her. But i don´t think this stuff needs more promotion.

When i see phrases like "boomy", "muddy", "nice attack", "warm", "clear", "punch" i would always ask first about the influence of room acoustics before even thinking about A/B-listening tests. But if I understand it correctly, she did not use calibration. So i think all of this is pretty much worthless outside the fixed positions in her own room or the moment she starts to use Sonarworks or whatever.

Harsh!
Compared to other subjective reviews she did match levels and compare instantly in pairs.
That makes it about 100 billion times better than most if not all subjective reviews or speakers I have ever seen, and the flowery adjectives are also both less flowery and more meaningful than usual, to me.

 

[thewas]

Don't forget, that we are talking about nearfield studio environment in that contest. No "sufficient" listening distance, suppressed reflections, and carefully chosen working place with constant height make vertical directivity .... not so critical.
Most of standard vertically aligned monitors have vertical directivity "troubles" at crossover region and it's not a problem for studio work.

In contrary I see at her place rather sufficient listening distance but quite some strong unsuppressed reflections for the vertical radiation

and personally prefer at such settings smoother vertical directivity than higher crossover frequencies, which shows also that preferences are individual and can't be generalised.

A good studio setup avoids such by tilting the console

Source. https://support.genelec.com/hc/en-u...ole-meter-bridge-Which-orientation-is-better-

 

[DJBonoBobo]

Harsh!
Compared to other subjective reviews she did match levels and compare instantly in pairs.
That makes it about 100 billion times better than most if not all subjective reviews or speakers I have ever seen, and the flowery adjectives are also both less flowery and more meaningful than usual, to me.

My harsh judgment comes from the fact that I myself have owned the KH310 for 8 years and have already experienced all these adjectives with the same speakers, even in the same room. The smallest changes in placement, furniture, absorbers - not to mention EQ - have affected this in my experience.

I'm not denying at all that you can tell differences between speakers when you listen to them under the same conditions, but I think the aspects related to room acoustics overshadow the overall impression too much. At least too much to draw conclusions for other rooms or even other positions or treatments in the same room (what she explicitely does not).

Maybe it is too harsh, but that´s where it came from.

 

[Frank Dernie]

My harsh judgment comes from the fact that I myself have owned the KH310 for 8 years and have already experienced all these adjectives with the same speakers, even in the same room. The smallest changes in placement, furniture, absorbers - not to mention EQ - have affected this in my experience.

I'm not denying at all that you can tell differences between speakers when you listen to them under the same conditions, but I think the aspects related to room acoustics overshadow the overall impression too much. At least too much to draw conclusions for other rooms or even other positions or treatments in the same room (what she explicitely does not).

Maybe it is too harsh, but that´s where it came from.

Well she does say her conclusions are hers for her system and requirement and others may differ, which again is a refreshing change in a speaker review.
Certainly the speaker position and the room and the listening position and the chair the listener is sitting on, and its upholstery make a difference.

I still think I value this subjective review higher than most if not all others I have read.
Mind you I don't own any of the speakers reviewed so don't have the common inclination to criticise the review we always see when Amir measures a speaker.

 

[FeddyLost]

In contrary I see at her place

That's strong. Her working place is a big closet.
I hope at least white panel on the ceiling is absorber.
Also, there's always a chance that picture distorts distances...

 

[digitalfrost]

View attachment 118689

I wonder which impact the screens (monitors) have in front of the speakers.

 

[prestigetone]

Thanks all for your help and input. I really value it. I've decided to stick with PSI. I have yet to hear better...

 

[Martijn W]

For the 944K1, at least, there's a clear directivity error around 3 kHz that'll colour the sound in mid and far field.

You can use the analogue input on the Ones.

Why? It's sad to give up all the advantages that internal DSP can give (room correction without a computer, factory sample correction using hidden filters) and pay more for external DSP that may not be as good.

I don't know, I didn't listen to them. The data PSI gives doesn't paint it as worth its price compared to the competition.

I own both Geithain and Neumann.
previously I used K+O O300’s with O800 sub. Later I used KH 310, but now I have 120’s with 750 sub (as secondary monitoring). my primary monitoring system is now Geithain RL944K1’s with 11K sub.
While all Neumanns are very accurate monitors, Geithain is different league imo. Neumann sounds very thight and honest, Geithain has all the same strenghts but sounds much nore natural/musical. Midrange information is very clear (like ATC) but smooth and unobtrusive (unlike ATC).

I heard PSI A21M and A25M and both were great as well. Very nice detail. I would personally choose PSI A21 over KH 310.

So I like all options! )

 

[Pearljam5000]

I have both a


I own both Geithain and Neumann.
previously I used K+O O300’s with O800 sub. Later I used KH 310, but now I have 120’s with 750 sub (as secondary monitoring). my primary monitoring system is now Geithain RL944K1’s with 11K sub.
While all Neumanns are very accurate monitors, Geithain is different league imo. Neumann sounds very thight and honest, Geithain has all the same strenghts but sounds much natural/musical. Midrange information is very clear (like ATC) but smooth and unobtrusive (unlike ATC).

I heard PSI A21M and A25M and both were great as well. Very nice detail. I would personally choose PSI A21 over KH 310.

So I like all options! )

How does Genelec compare to Geithain?

 

[Martijn W]

Thanks all for your help and input. I really value it. I've decided to stick with PSI. I have yet to hear better...

Only ATC and Geifhain imo. But both are more expensive.(

How does Genelec compare to Geithain?

Not my cup of tea.. A friend of mine has 8341’s with 10” sub (7360 or something?). I think this generation Genelec “One’ coax monitors did improve a lot from the 8*** series, but to me the treble still sounds loud, harsh and edgy..

 

[q3cpma]

I own both Geithain and Neumann.
previously I used K+O O300’s with O800 sub. Later I used KH 310, but now I have 120’s with 750 sub (as secondary monitoring). my primary monitoring system is now Geithain RL944K1’s with 11K sub.
While all Neumanns are very accurate monitors, Geithain is different league imo. Neumann sounds very thight and honest, Geithain has all the same strenghts but sounds much nore natural/musical. Midrange information is very clear (like ATC) but smooth and unobtrusive (unlike ATC).

I heard PSI A21M and A25M and both were great as well. Very nice detail. I would personally choose PSI A21 over KH 310.

So I like all options! )

You're not really comparing similarly priced items, are you? The KH420A is the one to beat, at this price point. I do think that the RL901K is better than anything Neumann makes, but I would still take the 8351B/8361A over it. If Geithain changed its way by:
* Offering a larger warranty considering its prices, at least 5 year.
* Using DSP (maybe external DSP, but still).
* Being distributed through Thomann or enlarging their own sales network.
, it'd be incredible.

By the way, this is a kinda scientific community, speakers can't be as neutral while sounding differently.

 

[Martijn W]

KH 420 is a very different speaker than RL944K and should be compared with RK933K or 922K.
These are midfield monitors.

Geithain rl944k1 is actually very comparable to kh 310 in terms of
- size
- power
- freq response (bass extension)
- amount of drivers
- size of drivers
- listening instance (both are typical nearfield)

You are correct that the Geifhain is more expensive, but it is also higher quality.

this does not mean I do not like Neumann. because I do. They make really good monitors in their price range imo.