Selling my KRK VXT8, need your advice

[alfaholiq]

Hello everyone,

I am selling my KRK VXT8 for some new pair of monitors, but not sure what to buy.
VXT8 are used in my studio, but digitally corrected because I can not stand anything but "flat" curve, so now I am torn between A7V and KH120 II, also I am available to any other suggestion.

Both, Adam and Neumann have their dsp corrections, however I never found Sonarworks working well at least in my space.
The main problem for me is the low range, VXT8 produce 37 easily in my current setup, but A7V and especially KH120 II play noticeably higher at 44hz.

Your thoughts?

edit:

I just read the forum, basically I am now thinking about the KH120 II and IN-8 V2.
I understand they are not competing in the same price range, but is it better to go Kali + SUB than just Neumann?

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

Generally, people here (me included), would recommend having a subwoofer if you can. In my opinion, most bookshelf speakers with 6.5" woofers tend to run out of bass capability at 80hz, and having the subwoofer take over below that can greatly improve sound quality.

However, if there is an option to get the Neumanns and add a sub later then that would probably be better.

But in order for me to make any actual speaker recommendations, I would need to know a few things:
1. How big is your room / how far away are you from the speakers (desk nearfield, on stands in a living room, etc)
2. How loud do you listen? (If you have a recent iphone, there are DB meter apps you can use, I generally use C-weighting for measurements)
3. What do you listen to? This will determine the importance of bass extension. For example, dance / hip hop music usually has a lot of deeper bass, while rock music tends to not have as much or as deep of bass.

Lastly, I will add a comment about your strike-through-ed text:
You mention targeting a "flat" curve, presumably for your frequency response. Generally speaking, if you take a well-designed speaker with an anechoic flat frequency response (Say the Genelec 8361A), and put it in a room, you will end up with a downward-sloping line for your frequency response, at least above the room's "transition frequency" (Which is governed by room size).
In the past, I once tried EQing a speaker system to a flat response at the listening position, and to me it sounded horrible. If you have somehow gotten yourself used to that sound, then I would encourage you to try not using EQ, and to get yourself used to a more normal speaker sound.
Of course, I could be wrong and you could simply be EQing out room-related bass issues, and any more significant speaker issues. In that case, then that is generally agreed to be beneficial to sound quality.

 

[alfaholiq]

1. My room is around 35 square meters (375 sf), not perfect acoustics and mildly acoustically treated. I use this room for my home studio setup, with my listening position being in an equilateral triangle with the side being 110cm, so near field.
2. I do not listen very loud while mixing, around 80db measured from my sitting position, often lower than that I suppose.
3. Well, this is my setup made for composing, arranging, mixing and mastering, however I tend to work with real instruments, live band sound, something that was called pop-rock back in the eighties. I need to hear 40hz to set the kick and bass properly, so I suppose anything that goes to 40hz +-3db is the upper limit for me.

Well, this is why I said "flat". I can work with a really flat curve, however I use my version of the Harman curve with some gentile slopes for the low and high frequencies.
My room adds some nasty 44hz and 51hz standing waves so raising the low frequencies more than 3db will introduce some problems, but as I said it is not really a problem for me as I used to my ATH R70X, which are maybe a bit warmer in the 200hz region, but they have a very discrete and conservative low extension, so adding just a little bit of bass is good for me.
But you were right, in general by flat curve I mean the dips and bumps being ironed out, while I consider the house curve to be somewhat a personal preference as those slopes are really wide and gentle.

***

So, my idea is to go simple with only two monitors, but only if I must I would add a sub, which is not a perfect solution for me, as this is not my main studio but something like an atelier that should be almost fully functional like a studio, but simple and with the "back to basics" ideology in mind.

From what I read, Neumann KH120 II are genuinely good, it is not just the brand name. Although I find their microphones made after the 80's unjustifiably expensive because of the brand name, these monitors are truly something special as I can see.
I can afford KH120 II + sub, however I am not sure I want to. Still not decided, and open to all your suggestions.
At the moment I am thinking about having those affordable Kali IN-8 V2, then add the sub in the worst case scenario. I really like great sounding gear, however I also value the value.
Either way, I will digitally correct the monitors in my room so there is a logical question, will those differences between Kali and Neumann will be valid in an acoustically problematic room. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[ZolaIII]

So room is about 4 m long on the setup listening side and you still didn't say what's the listening distance but judging by purpose it's a near feald setup. DSP room modes, especially first fundamental (44 Hz) and second and third (harmonics of it) will also go down. Try to extend the length to let's say 5 m if possible so that first fundamental faals into mid 30's (as no one put low bass peaks when mixing under that). Trick is not to kill them entirely but instead use them as reinforcement for mains. As equal loudness compensation transition is about 100~105 Hz the monitors won't be exactly able to follow it very good as it goes up on low SPL and neither will a sub crossed under transition frequency. I don't know either do you have space to go with let's say 2x sealed 10" sub's and 6.5" mains a top of them or will to do it (120~130 Hz crossovers, multichannel DSP or interface/sound card...) if not pair of bigger 8" monitors will be good enough with low pass Q 0.71 100~110 Hz for mid 70 and upwards SPL. I wouldn't go Kali's for close feald, V2 is just average regarding self noise, Neumann's are much better. Actually try to find JBL LSR2328P's for a good price instead of KH120 II.

 

[alfaholiq]

Thanks. I mentioned above, my listening position is around 110cm from the speakers and yes, this wall where my desk is measures a bit more than 4 meters.
The room is irregular shape like letter L, so the longest side is 7 meters and I could theoretically place the desk there, but practically I will probably stay at where I am now unfortunately.
But you are right, my goal was to use those standing waves and harmonics as reinforcements for mains.

Two questions regarding subs:

1. Can I mix brands? This should be plain physics, right?
2. I understand that using two subs is better for stereo imaging even down there as there is some important content even in the lower regions, especially when mixing and mastering mid/side, but is there anything else that I loose by using only one sub?

 

[ZolaIII]

By using one sub you lose obviously the additional +3 dB (so it's +6 to +3 dB above that) in low bass which two naturally provide from 60~70 Hz downwards where wave length are longe and sum perfectly (mono). You need a bit longer room to get the first one down to ideally mid 30 Hz where lowest true peeks will be. You don't have to go with some expensive sub's and you don't really need or want bigger than 10" for time domain. So it doesn't have to be a pair of KH750 you can pass with something like Wharfedale WH-D10's and DSP them to almost as KH750's are (internally DSP-ed already). Wouldn't mix models but that's me.

 

[alfaholiq]

By mixing brands I meant using brand 1 for monitors, and brand 2 for subs, surely not to have two differently branded subs.

Ah, I never liked this sub setup for the studio as it seemed so complex, for example should I line the subs with the main monitors or just line them up with each other.
Also, the crossover and how to measure them, it is much simpler with just two speakers. In REW, for example, there is an option to measure the subs separately, but it could be measured all together as well.

I wanted simplicity, this is very helpful, but it gets more complex very fast. I need to find the sweet spot.

 

[ZolaIII]

That you can do fur sure. In 2.2 you go L to L sub and same to right and to each other. I use third order Butterwort @ 120 Hz and plugged port's on mains (6.5" two way pasive) it's not near field and it's relatively small A/V room. I PEQ crossover transition range, then crossover and arrange them, FIR with VBA and afterwards PEQ a bit more. You probably won't use FIR anyway for the latency it introduces (but if it's good for movie's can be used and in mixing). Crossovers done right are actually the toughest part.

 

[alfaholiq]

Ah, so glad to hear this, someone not afraid of using the PEQ, some religious purists (read ignorants) I know die in agony every time I mention digital correction.

Thanks, I am really thinking more and more about what you suggested.
How does the 8030C and WH-D10 look as one of the possible combinations? This costs around 2k.
What would you suggest for up to 1.5k?
Is Kali still in game for this amount of money?

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

If this isn't your primary studio, then I would say the Kalis since they have a 3-way design, and are a bit less expensive. Yes, the coaxial driver isn't ideal (just turn them off axis a bit), but if you don't want to have a subwoofer than having the 8" woofer built into the speaker would probably be nicer than the 6.5" Neumann or 5" Genelec.
Now, if this was your primary space, and you were doing this professionally, then the Genelecs or the Neumanns would make sense as they are more commonly used around the world, and are probably better recognized.
Yes, the Neumann KH120, Kali IN-8 and Genelec 8030C, are all good monitors.

Given that you aren't listening at really high volumes, are listening near-field, and are using digital correction, not having a sub is probably not the end of the world, and any SPL advantages that Genelec or Neumann may have probably won't matter.
Also, the Kalis are like half the price (In the USA) of the Neumann KH120, so that may be a factor to consider.

If you are interested in a subwoofer, I would recommend looking at the commonly-recommended ones here. SVS is popular and tends to have good performance, though you do need DSP on your main speakers to get a good integration.
Personally, if I were considering between the Genelec 8030C + sub, the Neumann KH120, or the Kali IN-8v2 + a possible sub, I would probably go with the Kalis, and if I wanted more bass I would get the Kali WS-12 subwoofer to pair with them.
I cannot recommend the wharfdale sub referenced above. I have not heard it and it isn't one of the more commonly-recommended brands here. SVS, Arendal, etc, are more reliably good picks.

Please don't buy into the whole plugging ports thing. With these active DSP monitors, unless the manufacturer supports it (ie, DSP settings on the speaker to compensate), it will probably screw up the sound more than it helps. While port resonances are a thing, the benefit of ports is in reduction of distortion and increased output capacity around their tuning frequency. Use DSP filters to match the subwoofer and mains crossover slopes, and go from there.

Running stereo subwoofers is also not always recommended, especially if you are in a small or bass-challenged room. Stereo imaging in the bass is really only possible in larger rooms when the subs are set up properly, in my experience in smaller spaces it tends to always be annoying, as at different frequencies one sub or the other will interact with the room in a different manner, and your image just keeps moving around.

But, this is really up to you. I have not heard any of these speakers, but all of the ones you listed are good options. Given a good DSP setup and tuning you should get good results from any of them.

 

[YSC]

Ah, so glad to hear this, someone not afraid of using the PEQ, some religious purists (read ignorants) I know die in agony every time I mention digital correction.

Thanks, I am really thinking more and more about what you suggested.
How does the 8030C and WH-D10 look as one of the possible combinations? This costs around 2k.
What would you suggest for up to 1.5k?
Is Kali still in game for this amount of money?

not sure about actual performance, but WH-D10 seems having bass extension to "only" 30hz, which is around the 7040 range, I would suggest you go SVS or something to get deeper bass if needed. IMO Kali is up to the game at what it is asking for, yes in absolute linearity it falls short from Neumann and Genelec, but I personally would say it is in the "good enough" category where you practically won't hear the difference in a real room, just get what you can comfortably spend without caring selling your kidneys, then use PEQ to tackle the major room modes

 

[ZolaIII]

Genelac's aren't neither great nor quite, just expensive and half way DSP-ed (all similar digitaluzed one's are). In every way worse than Neumann's. Again try to find JBL LSR2328P's, it's great done (Buterrwor passive crossover developed on bigger digital brother, good class A-B amp, wave guide...) and quality (originally had 5 years warranty). You can probably get them cheap as they are discontinued (as new of course) so even for a better price than Kali IN 8. I won't recommend Kali's at all! If it whose mid to far field then yes (again not IN 8 for far feald).
Lot of looney tunes around hire this day's. Remember when I told proper crossover is the hardest part? It's also most important. So you go 10" close enclosure sub's to keep time domain in line and better RT60 decay times, decay times in generally and so on. Plugins the port's on mains is for two main reasons, to eliminate port cuff and reinforcement so that you get lower THD especially under the FB tuning, less box refractions and better mids with it. Of course you get less extension that way or better say you get what woffer can provide in the first place. They don't become like sield box that way regarding slope and rool of, just closer to it. In the end slope and rool of is determined by the big box aka room, and there you comply and to it make corrections (including which order will crossover be). So you see integration indeed is complex thing and most folks never done it properly and to the end. I mean how could they? When they have port cuff, bad designed in the first place too low and too prominent going over woffer and being only a single half tone (for that reason). And same pops out on the sudden in a crosser not to mention port losing and regaining function as pressure changes with SPL. Still to see a single ported design done properly on either HiFi, boutique speakers or studio monitors. On DIY and PA yes in some cases done as suport to main woffer just above Fs under neath it giving slight extension, DR increase there and cut underneath port tuning all together. So we plug the port's to gain control among cuple small quality improvements on the way. Wharfedale WH-D10 sub's aren't anything special but they will do the job and qualify regarding size and enclosure. You should try to find them for 300 $/€ or even less a peace. Rest is a matter of using digital filters and you will get about 25 Hz 0 dB or a slight minus (I do) in relatively small to mid sized room from two of them and enough for even far field 86~88 dB program (106~108 dB bass peaks). Neumann KH750 pair would be better but not that much after you DSP Wharfedales (like with all already DSP-ed things). SVS is nothing special and probably never will be, just not trash like some even much more expensive ones. It's over hyped hire. Did you hear a story about the guy who made better DIY 10" sub (with use of DSP of course) than KH750? Hire you go:

I measured 10 subwoofers.

Hi, it's been a while! I would like to thank the people who made this project possible on a scale never before imagined in South Korea. I measured a total of 10 subwoofers, including my own DIY subwoofer(L26RO4Y), and measured them to the CEA-2010 standard using a Klippel TBM module. Below are...

www.audiosciencereview.com

It's harder to do things properly with active studio monitors than pasive speakers as you won't know things like FB and Fs for them which you see in pasive speakers measurements but you will be on more than a safe side simple following the physics and using monitors with big woffer's and cutting and tuning above possible limit in the first place (let's say 120 Hz).

Getting back to the start considering complexity of proper integration of per chenel subwoofer's (including things I still didn't talk about like chanel remapping and so on) I still advise you to first buy a pair of big 8" studio monitors that are very good designed and engineered including quality and will be quite regarding self noise and no hiss like Neumann KH 120 II's or mentioned JBL's as budget proposition. And later decided do you need more and better bass extension and if you are really, really ready to cope with amount of work and learning it needs to really get there.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

I promised myself I wouldn't get drawn into this, but:

Genelac's aren't neither great nor quite, just expensive and half way DSP-ed (all similar digitaluzed one's are). In every way worse than Neumann's. Again try to find JBL LSR2328P's, it's great done (Buterrwor passive crossover developed on bigger digital brother, good class A-B amp, wave guide...) and quality (originally had 5 years warranty)

While I don't doubt that the JBLs are good, I do take issue with your comment that a DSP crossover is worse than a passive one. From an engineering standpoint, using a DSP crossover is better as you do not have to deal with component tolerances, heat / power related value drift, and standard component values which all limit the efficiency and performance of a passive crossover. With DSP, I can put a crossover filter wherever I want, and it always will be at that frequency, with that slope, all the time. I can also individually calibrate my DSP to each speaker, which is part of what enables such insanely flat frequency responses in the Genelecs and Neumanns.

Now, passive crossovers can be useful in say home theater or large distributed installations, where the extra amp channels and wires are far more costly than a good passive crossover. In these cases, getting a good passive loudspeaker, or a few hundred, and DSP to correct any major issues is required. For example, the JBL Control 47C/T, can be used passive and sounds pretty good doing it, but I can use the JBL tuning files on a BSS or crown DSP to correct them and improve the sound quality.

Lot of looney tunes around hire this day's. Remember when I told proper crossover is the hardest part? It's also most important. So you go 10" close enclosure sub's to keep time domain in line and better RT60 decay times, decay times in generally and so on. Plugins the port's on mains is for two main reasons, to eliminate port cuff and reinforcement so that you get lower THD especially under the FB tuning, less box refractions and better mids with it. Of course you get less extension that way or better say you get what woffer can provide in the first place.

Starting off by insulting everyone... Nice... For what it's worth, I have been studying and working with audio for around 10 years, and have significant engineering training and knowledge. Others here have even more experience. While I don't always agree with everyone here, we do generally respect each other and not call everyone looney tunes...
With that out of the way, my dissection continues:
Proper crossover and subwoofer integration is extremely important, hence why I recommended SVS as they have DSP on their subwoofers. I also recommended the Kali subwoofer as it is made by the same manufacturer, and probably has settings to integrate with the Kali IN-8v2. Because the same company makes both products, I would assume that they would take into consideration the time domain issues you mentioned. Then, since we have DSP which can ideally match both speakers, we don't need to plug the ports.
Also, port chuff is only audibly heard in speakers with badly designed ports, where the ports are forced to run below their tuning frequency. Once again, the benefit of active DSP monitors is that I can control that chuff using high pass filters and limiters, from the factory.
The commend about better mids is valid, if I was using a 2-way monitor speaker. However, with the Kali IN-8v2, it is a 3-way design, and therefore shouldn't have significant port resonances as the midrange is not being sent to the woofer. This is arguably one of the major advantages with a 3-way design, and will allow for (theoretically) "cleaner" midrange independent of the bass load.
--------------
The comments about subwoofers and sub integration are valid, in some cases. Many people do not know what a well-integrated subwoofer sounds like, and many people do not and/or cannot integrate their subwoofer well. Proper measurement tools, experimentation, and DSP correction is required to achieve optimal subwoofer integration.
The comment about how a guy built a better DIY sub than the Neumann sub:
The driver he used was the SEAS L24RO4Y. This driver alone costs $500, and was designed in partnership with Siegfried linkwitz to be used in his LX521 open baffle speaker, as an open-baffle subwoofer driver. As such, it has incredible excursion capability, and will reach that excursion very quietly. It is indeed an incredible subwoofer driver.
To be fair, DIY will generally be better value than buying a subwoofer. The shipping cost alone on these things can be a bit crazy, so when I look at the KH750, they probably are targeting less than $500 for their driver parts cost, and as it is sealed, the driver is the determining factor in output capability. Therefore, the KH750 is probably worse than that person's DIY subwoofer, but you must keep in mind that that person probably spent over $800 on making the passive subwoofer, and even more on the DSP amplifier to drive it.

It's harder to do things properly with active studio monitors than pasive speakers as you won't know things like FB and Fs for them which you see in pasive speakers measurements but you will be on more than a safe side simple following the physics and using monitors with big woffer's and cutting and tuning above possible limit in the first place (let's say 120 Hz).

But, in this case, if we get say the Kali IN-8v2, and their WS-12, then we are allowing Kali to do the work for us in determining all of the required parameters for the subwoofer integration! All we have to do is just hook them up, flip some switches, and use our measurement mic to set gain levels and do room eq.

The analogy to the PA world would be like setting up the Meyer LEO line array system with their 1100LFC. The two are designed to just match up perfectly, with the LEO system having power down to around 60hz, and the 1100LFC taking over from 60hz down. Why would I want to set up a LEO line array with a bunch of say JBL subwoofers? It just doesn't make any sense, as the manufacturer synergy is so important. (Also, why would I want to plug the ports on my LEO speakers? They are designed to run with the ports open, and the 1100LFC is designed to match up to the ported LEO array.)

Now, in this case, we can make different manufacturer products work together, but if you have the budget I would recommend sticking with one company's products just to benefit from the integration convenience. So my recommendation stands, unless you absolutely require perfection in your monitoring system, then go with the IN-8v2 and add a sub later if you want more bass.

 

[ZolaIII]

@AwesomeSauce2015 I never told analog crossover is better, on digital one you can do much, much more (if you know how and have good interface which is not the case in such speakers). If analog is done on very good digital model then it will be very good (with limitations it brings of course). On DSP systems the ADC will still in most cases be a limiting factor and worst performing one. Didn't call anyone in particularly, especially not everyone. SVS Pro series have gimmick A stage and DSP which is even bigger one with three PEQ filters and buggy software. You need two chenels and DSP used on both sides for single crossover. DSP doesn't change physical properties of drivers and time domain remains as it is. You can correct some defects usually caused by use of DSP in the first place but not physics. Cuff (port's response) is there from a air flow and its impact on FR and no you can't really control it. DIY sub has better time domain then KH750, rest is pretty much very similar (thanks to DSP and he used KH750 as model) and yes it's a better driver. By the way those JBL's are from Toole and big brother is LSR-4328P.
It's not about "stereo" bass it never whose. It's about transition frequency in line with physical wave properties for equal loudness compensation and impact of it. Without it you didn't done anything (at least if you ask me). Kali is really bad regarding amplifier stages (avarge at best after rework for class D) and I don't think that will change anytime soon and IN 8 also has a problem with mid range driver isolation from woffer which shows on higher SPL. Of course when it comes to sub's even cheap class D and not really bad inputs SNR it's fine. Seams you have a lot more to learn and time spent to get there is individual.

Edit: you know this can go much nicer way and it's not about your fallen promises or my stubbornness and neither change lows of physics.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

@AwesomeSauce2015 I never told analog crossover is better, on digital one you can do much, much more (if you know how and have good interface which is not the case in such speakers). If analog is done on very good digital model then it will be very good (with limitations it brings of course). On DSP systems the ADC will still in most cases be a limiting factor and worst performing one.

Ok, I must have misunderstood you earlier. I do agree that ADC can be difficult, and I have had concerns about the quality of analog-to-digital conversion in many of these systems myself. I do try to limit the amount of ADC->DAC conversions in my systems, and in-progress updates to my main system are underway to centralize and optimize the DSP processing. (Hopefully in a week or two I may post over in the DIY section about said updates)

SVS Pro series have gimmick A stage and DSP which is even bigger one with three PEQ filters and buggy software. You need two chenels and DSP used on both sides for single crossover.

Yes, it is quite limited, however, in my experience, it is primarily useful for removing any major room mode issues, and is not a substitute for a DSP system for your main speakers. I cannot comment on the buggy software. The main reason I recommend SVS is due to their support team. SVS's after-sales support is truly incredible (unless they have cut it back recently, idk). So, if someone needs support a few years after buying the subwoofer, SVS can usually help them.
But, I personally do prefer JBL subwoofers, and bass drivers, and will probably go DIY for my needs in the future as most of the systems I spec and build already have DSP in place, so I do not need any DSP in the subwoofer itself.

DSP doesn't change physical properties of drivers and time domain remains as it is. You can correct some defects usually caused by use of DSP in the first place but not physics. Cuff (port's response) is there from a air flow and its impact on FR and no you can't really control it.

True, DSP cannot change physical issues. Yes, if I have audible port noise, then that ideally would be corrected with a physical change to the port-box system. However, my point was two fold:
For port chuff (Where air flows through the port and due to turbulence creates noise. This is usually caused around the tuning frequency where air velocities are the highest), you need to fix that through physical changes, or by limiting bass output at that frequency which in turn limits air velocity.
For port resonances (Where higher frequency noise "leaks" through the port, usually seen around 800-1khz on typical, 2-way, speakers), once again that would ideally be fixed in the physical domain, or by using a 3-way design where those frequencies are never seen by the port. However, I can use DSP to correct for the impact on frequency response, but I cannot fix a physical issue with DSP, of course.

DIY sub has better time domain then KH750, rest is pretty much very similar (thanks to DSP and he used KH750 as model) and yes it's a better driver. By the way those JBL's are from Toole and big brother is LSR-4328P.

Valid point, when you DIY a speaker or subwoofer you can optimize for many different variables. While I cannot comment on the audibility of group delay on subwoofer bass, I do agree that lower is generally better, and it is one of the reasons I personally do not spec SVS for my personal systems anymore. (Though for friends, and internet friends, I do spec it due to the aforementioned support and warranty).
The JBLs are interesting, and if you look through my post history you will find that I am a JBL fanboy. I have no doubt that those are good speakers, however I generally recommend new rather than used for professional use cases due to warranty and support. If OP wants to experiment with them then by all means go ahead.

It's not about "stereo" bass it never whose. It's about transition frequency in line with physical wave properties for equal loudness compensation and impact of it. Without it you didn't done anything (at least if you ask me). Kali is really bad regarding amplifier stages (avarge at best after rework for class D) and I don't think that will change anytime soon and IN 8 also has a problem with mid range driver isolation from woffer which shows on higher SPL. Of course when it comes to sub's even cheap class D and not really bad inputs SNR it's fine.

I must have misunderstood you there, I thought you were talking about stereo bass. Yes, using multiple subwoofers is generally better in order to even out response throughout the room. In the case where I only have 1 subwoofer and multiple speakers, I can simply turn up the subwoofer to match the volume of the speakers. But yes, in the systems I design and spec, multiple subwoofers, when possible (and when inside a room), are very useful, and I try to spec multiples when practical.
I cannot comment on Kali's amplifier stages, or any physical design issues with their speakers. Like I said, I have not heard them or worked with them. However, OP did mention that he usually works at around 80dB. This is well within the limits of any of the aforementioned monitors, so unless there is a major design flaw, then I think all of the aforementioned monitors will work fine.

Seams you have a lot more to learn and time spent to get there is individual.

Edit: you know this can go much nicer way and it's not about your fallen promises or my stubbornness and neither change lows of physics.

I am always learning. My expertise is mainly in system design and tuning, where I try to take into account all relevant variables. These include the client's expected system performance, budget, and use case. As well as various constraints such as aesthetic requirements and pre-constructed constraints. I would consider myself to be fairly competent when it comes to designing and tuning audio systems, but I do have my limits.

In this case, since OP wants good bass performance without a subwoofer, then an 8" or bigger woofer is basically a requirement. However, an 8" woofer does not always cross over to a tweeter cleanly, so a 3-way design would be in order. Hence my recommendation for the IN-8. However, if they are not reliable, then that would influence my recommendation more to the previously-mentioned Genelecs or Neumanns, though with those OP would need a subwoofer. As far as picking that subwoofer goes, we can cross that bridge when we get there.

Lastly: My previous post was not intended to be an attack on you as a person, or your beliefs, simply a refutation or counter argument to your points, meant to educate and provide more information. -- It appears that I may have misinterpreted some of your arguments / points, and for that I do apologize. However, I will leave my previous post as-is for posterity's sake...

 

[ZolaIII]

@AwesomeSauce2015 huh uh... Read suport forums regarding bug reports considering BT software. A lot of them but it's not like you will use it on regular bases so not unbearable. Major bass mode issues... It's firs fundamental room refraction and following two are most partly the harmonics from it and that's first three peeks and related deeps. When you deal most partly with first one the rest two are less pronounced, where it will be is related with room length and if its 4.5~5 m so that fundamental is in mid 30's or under 40 Hz you can control use it as reinforcement (similar as how port works). Even very big sub's don't shine in that area so it's really beneficial to use it that way. Neadles to say only first and eventually second peak (if crossed high) will be in subwoofer range. You don't waste perfectly good sub as antimode (or use big bass trap resonator) you can get similar effect by using VBA, read a little about it and see table for calculating those peaks and averaging first to use in FIR filter (VBA - compulsive obsessive audiophile). Rest will be caused by phase shift or concealing and above 60 Hz. You don't correct that with PEQ's but I am certain you already know that. Over 60~70 Hz waves are shorter and don't sum up perfectly so it becomes directive, still wrong to call it stereo bass. If transition point is 100~105 Hz for a correction for psy perceived equal main and lower bass and more excessive boost is in low bass of course (equal loudness normalisation ISO 226 2003 or newer) you move crossover over that point 120~130 Hz for sub's. You don't want it to leek into low mids and it will if you put it low and same driver have to do compensation for it to SPL and mids/lower mids as it's influence extends to let's say 500 Hz even when done separately (but it doesn't leek) on sub's. That's why two sub's and close to or directly under mains so that the 120~130 Hz to 60~70 Hz is not directive. And they sum up perfectly (+6 dB) in under 60~70 Hz to up to +3 above it. If correction is not excessive big for let's say uper 70's dB and higher so only cuple dB boots it won't be very problematic for a same driver to do it all but as it grows (lower SPL) it will.
Again crossovers are the most important part to be done properly. If someone is not capable doing one in two way speaker properly it certainly will do even worse job with multiple instances. Physical separation helps but only regarding cabinet refractions and oscilatons (mid drivers in their own enclosure and isolated or out of cabinet tweeters/super tweaters). If you learned anything or at least are about to then this whosent a waist of time for me.
I won't post pics or urls for either of mentioned as I already did that many times hire. Sorry for sounding harsh in the first place.

Edit: PS not a fan boy in generally and certainly not JBL's but I give credits to those who and when they deserve them.

 

[alfaholiq]

Thank you all, this is very helpful.

A final question. For a monitors + sub combination, how should I do the measurements?

1. Sound card to the sub(s), from there to monitors by letting the sub doing the crossover, then measure everything as a whole and let the PEQ fix the issues?
2. Use 4 outs from the sound card, each for a separate sub and monitor, then create digital crossovers, then do the final touches with REW measuring it as a whole?
3. If I choose Kali with the sub, should I go to IN5 or IN8 in this case?

 

[ZolaIII]

@alfaholiq 2 after doing crossover treating it as L and R chenel, 1 only if you must for the first time if sub's have fixed point 80 Hz (or variable) high pass.
3. Choose quite class A-B or very good autended so that it has very little load dependance and incresed noise in highs class D amplifier active monitors, for sub's it really doesn't matter and cheap (quality implemented especially regarding capacitors and power supply) class D actually does better (efficiency and so on as this isn't only cuple W).

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

Thank you all, this is very helpful.

A final question. For a monitors + sub combination, how should I do the measurements?

1. Sound card to the sub(s), from there to monitors by letting the sub doing the crossover, then measure everything as a whole and let the PEQ fix the issues?
2. Use 4 outs from the sound card, each for a separate sub and monitor, then create digital crossovers, then do the final touches with REW measuring it as a whole?
3. If I choose Kali with the sub, should I go to IN5 or IN8 in this case?

If the sub can do DSP processing itself, then 1 could be an option, but ideally 2 would be my pick. This is assuming you have a way to simultaneously control all 4 output volumes on your sound card. Ideally, you correct for each individual speaker's performance, and if you have a subwoofer than you correct that as well, and then do the integration. I won't go into multi-sub optimization, because that is a massive "can of worms".

IN-5 vs IN-8: It would really come down to what you need. Personally, I would do the 8" woofer, which would allow for the monitors to handle more of the bass load, and to have an easier time doing it (Like a car with a big V8 vs a tiny 4-cylinder, both can move the car, but one will be working hard and the other will be hardly working).
I know you said previously that a sub isn't ideal, so with the 8" speaker you may not need a subwoofer. However, if you want to get a subwoofer then technically speaking, at your listening levels, the 5" woofer will probably be fine, though if you have space I would still get the bigger IN-8 just to have the 8" woofer.
The usual argument against a bigger woofer is that it supposedly messes with the midrange. However, as the IN-8 and IN-5 are 3-way designs, this is not much of a factor.

 

[AnalogSteph]

IMHO the budget is a bit tight for what you are trying to do. Realistically you want at least a 6.5" job, e.g. Genelec 8040B or ADAM A7V. Those will do 40 Hz at about 5 dB down. The KH120 II is close (7 dB down). The IN-8v2 is about in the middle. Nobody would be scorning you for looking at 8050Bs (basically flat to 40 Hz) or KH150s (2-3 dB down), or a less expensive 3-way like the ADAM A77H (maybe 1 dB down) - except for your wallet, obviously. Yes, covering a few more Hz down there with authority costs you a fair bit extra at some point, no wonder people like 2.1 (2.2) setups.

Not sure whether the Kalis would be my faves in this relatively nearfield application with a decent budget. They are a fantastic value, of course, but being a coax the treble has a few more eccentricities to offer than some more traditional designs.