Small bedroom (~10 m²) nearfield monitoring — iLoud MTM MKII vs Neumann KH80/KH120?

[crocobuxfour]

Hi everyone!

I’m looking for studio monitors for a small bedroom used strictly in nearfield.


Room dimensions are 3.48 × 2.95 × 2.59 m (~10 m², ~26.6 m³). Listening distance will be ~1.0 m. Planned acoustic treatment is basic: 6–8 DIY mineral wool panels (100 × 60 × 10 cm), plus existing furniture (bed, carpet, curtains). No heavy bass trapping beyond that.


I’ve worked for years only on headphones (DT880 / DT1990 with room emulation like Realphones). I want to move ~80% of my work to speakers, mainly for mixing and critical balance decisions. Translation, midrange clarity, transient/phase issues matter more to me than “fun” sound.


I cannot audition monitors locally (only Yamaha HS, jbl, maybe some Mackie..), so this is a blind purchase.


My main dilemma is iLoud MTM MKII vs Neumann KH80 / KH120 (if they can realistically work in a room of this size). Kali IN-5 and ADAM A4V are secondary options.


What I’m trying to understand is the real-world gap in a room like this:

• How do MTM MKII behave in a small, modestly treated room in terms of clarity, resolution, and mix translation?
• Are the common criticisms about MTM low end (artificial / muddy / non-breathing bass) valid in practice, or overstated?
• With Neumann KH, how significant is the improvement over MTM for actual mixing work (midrange definition, transients, phase cues)? Is the difference small, meaningful, or decisive?
• For this room size and treatment level, does KH120 make sense, or is KH80 the more rational choice?

The core question is simple: in practice, are MTM MKII closer to entry-level monitors (Yamaha/JBL/KRK), or do they genuinely approach Neumann/Genelec-level?
And given my constraints, is it smarter to buy MTM now or save significantly more for Neumann?


I’m especially interested in replies based on real experience working in small rooms. Thanks.

 

[staticV3]

The iLoud has poorly controlled directivity (here compared to the KH80, which is identical to KH 120 II in that regard:



This means you'll have to sit within 20° of on axis for neutral direct sound and even then, reflected sound (e.g. ceiling bounce/desk bounce) will be quite colored comapred to Neumann.

Further, despite the iLoud having 50% more woofer area than the KH 80 (19.25in² vs 12.5in²), the MTM loses out in MD and compression:



That being said, you're paying some 40-70% more for the KH80 once you factor in the calibration mic so there is no free lunch.

If you can stomach the price of the KH120 II, then that's the obvious choice though.

MA1 will take care of any small room concerns, and in return you get drastically lower distortion and practically nonexistent compression.

 

[crocobuxfour]

Thanks, that’s very helpful and aligns with what I was suspecting from the measurements.

The point about directivity and reflected sound in a small room makes a lot of sense, especially given my limited treatment.

One thing I’m still trying to gauge is how noticeable the KH80 vs KH120 difference would be at ~1 m listening distance and moderate levels in a room this size. From your experience, does KH120 remain clearly advantageous there, or does KH80 already get most of the way?

 

[Jiraya369]

Kali's IN-5 is an excellent piece of kit, you just have to make sure it's appropriately placed and you have eq'd the room modes out.

This should leave enough money for a subwoofer, get a subwoofer, get a UMIK-1 and calibrate for your room modes and all that. This would lead to a full range response that you can trust for the most part. If there are nulls, use an iem, even a 20 dollar one is good enough for tracking bass. You mix your tracks with your monitors and do checks on your iems.

From my experience, you just need a neutral pair of speakers to be able to get mixes to translate. And also, you just need to go ahead and LEARN them, listen to them, use REFERENCE tracks. Mixing is still a skill, so you need to be able to reference stuff to know what a good mix sounds like.

Main thing about the IN-5 is its decent linearity with good loudness capabilities. And the fact that it is coaxial means you have more vertical wiggle room than typical 2 ways.

If possible I'd still go for a Neumann KH120 II and add a sub later on. But without a sub, I'd pick the IN-5. The Neumanns will have a more focused soundstage but you don't need that for mixing, as long as you know your monitors and their behaviour, which is a learned skill. You have to keep practicing mixing and check on other devices so you know your shortcomings and work on them.

I've used an Adam D3V, Adam T5V and am now using an Ascilab C6B. With eq to taste/for FR oddities, i think they're all quite neutral. After that, all my mixes translate nearly perfectly, except for 100 hz and lower. Around 70-90 hz i have a null and i cant really trust em blindly for 50-70 hz stuff. But I just use my headphones/iems and get great mixes. My mixes have never been better and translation has never been easier. My room is untreated, I have a desk in front of my speakers and there's stuff on the desk all creating oddities. Yet with proper eq things sound and perform great.

I dont know who you consulted or how you put in the bass traps, but i feel like without measuring a before and after, you're just blindly putting things in, you don't know if it's a net positive or negative. First see the response before the treatment, then fix for it. Get a UMIK-1 to measure stuff.

 

[staticV3]

One thing I’m still trying to gauge is how noticeable the KH80 vs KH120 difference would be at ~1 m listening distance and moderate levels in a room this size. From your experience, does KH120 remain clearly advantageous there, or does KH80 already get most of the way?

At moderate levels, the biggest difference between KH80 and KH120 will be in bass extension:


You can A/B this difference in bass extension using IEMs.

Depending on the content that you want to mix/listen to, this difference can be significant.

In any case, the MA1 or an alternative room correction solution is absolutely vital.

Edit:
Also, KH 80 + two subwoofers (once properly setup) > KH120 II

 

[DanielT]

One more tip, mostly because I think they look cool. The fact that they measure well doesn't hurt either:

Audio Smile LBM Monitor Review

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Audio Smile Little British Monitor (LBM) Active Speaker (Monitor). It was sent to me by the company and costs £529.00 (VAT Excluded). Kit version is available for £349.00. As a woodworker, I appreciate how the baltic birch...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Mnyb's set up with them:

 

[crocobuxfour]

At moderate levels, the biggest difference between KH80 and KH120 will be in bass extension:
View attachment 503836

You can A/B this difference in bass extension using IEMs.

Depending on the content that you want to mix/listen to, this difference can be significant.

In any case, the MA1 or an alternative room correction solution is absolutely vital.

Edit:
Also, KH 80 + two subwoofers (once properly setup) > KH120 II

Thanks, that’s helpful.
But why two subwoofers? In a room this small, wouldn’t a single sub already be enough?
Also, if I already have Sonarworks (mic + software), is MA1 still fundamentally important, or can Sonarworks do the job just as well in this context?

 

[crocobuxfour]

Kali's IN-5 is an excellent piece of kit, you just have to make sure it's appropriately placed and you have eq'd the room modes out.

This should leave enough money for a subwoofer, get a subwoofer, get a UMIK-1 and calibrate for your room modes and all that. This would lead to a full range response that you can trust for the most part. If there are nulls, use an iem, even a 20 dollar one is good enough for tracking bass. You mix your tracks with your monitors and do checks on your iems.

From my experience, you just need a neutral pair of speakers to be able to get mixes to translate. And also, you just need to go ahead and LEARN them, listen to them, use REFERENCE tracks. Mixing is still a skill, so you need to be able to reference stuff to know what a good mix sounds like.

Main thing about the IN-5 is its decent linearity with good loudness capabilities. And the fact that it is coaxial means you have more vertical wiggle room than typical 2 ways.

If possible I'd still go for a Neumann KH120 II and add a sub later on. But without a sub, I'd pick the IN-5. The Neumanns will have a more focused soundstage but you don't need that for mixing, as long as you know your monitors and their behaviour, which is a learned skill. You have to keep practicing mixing and check on other devices so you know your shortcomings and work on them.

I've used an Adam D3V, Adam T5V and am now using an Ascilab C6B. With eq to taste/for FR oddities, i think they're all quite neutral. After that, all my mixes translate nearly perfectly, except for 100 hz and lower. Around 70-90 hz i have a null and i cant really trust em blindly for 50-70 hz stuff. But I just use my headphones/iems and get great mixes. My mixes have never been better and translation has never been easier. My room is untreated, I have a desk in front of my speakers and there's stuff on the desk all creating oddities. Yet with proper eq things sound and perform great.

I dont know who you consulted or how you put in the bass traps, but i feel like without measuring a before and after, you're just blindly putting things in, you don't know if it's a net positive or negative. First see the response before the treatment, then fix for it. Get a UMIK-1 to measure stuff.

Thanks for sharing your experience.
IN-5 do seem like a solid option. I’m just wondering how realistic adding a sub really is in a ~10 m² room without introducing new problems.

 

[crocobuxfour]

One more tip, mostly because I think they look cool. The fact that they measure well doesn't hurt either:

Audio Smile LBM Monitor Review

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Audio Smile Little British Monitor (LBM) Active Speaker (Monitor). It was sent to me by the company and costs £529.00 (VAT Excluded). Kit version is available for £349.00. As a woodworker, I appreciate how the baltic birch...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Mnyb's set up with them:
View attachment 503839View attachment 503840

These actually look really cool I hadn’t come across them before.
From the ASR review they seem very well engineered and the price is definitely attractive for what they offer.


That said, given my small room and the fact that this would be a blind purchase, I’m slightly cautious about going with something that’s less common and harder to resell or compare against more established references. Still, interesting suggestion , I’ll read up more on them. Thanks!

 

[Jiraya369]

Thanks for sharing your experience.
IN-5 do seem like a solid option. I’m just wondering how realistic adding a sub really is in a ~10 m² room without introducing new problems.

if there are problems measurements will show it, you can just turn the sub's volume down if the sub is too loud or use eq to turn down room modes. Nothing crazy man just a sub producing sub frequencies, even your speakers will start going deep and introduce problems like room modes.

 

[Ellebob]

A note on subs. If you only care about one listening position then one sub can work. IF and that's a BIG IF. IF your sub and seating are in good locations. Often placing seating and sub for convenience is not good acoustically. You find a good location for the seating which is not in a null and a good location for the sub. Then EQ any peaks. You typically can't EQ dips in the response with some exceptions. EQ is almost always needed whether using one or more subs. So, EQ is not a recommendation because of the one sub.

Using 2 subs will give more uniform bass in a larger listening area for more consistent bass in multiple seating locations. Two subs can be used to solve bass problems with room modes which aren't possible with one sub. That is why 2 or more subs is frequently recommended.

Without subs a speaker that can go to lower frequencies is recommended for most material unless you are listening to only flutes or something like that. You would notice the difference between a KH80 and IN-5/KH120. The MTM is in the middle for low frequency extension. I own the IN-5 and it is one of my favorite speakers. It's a terrific value. I also work in this field and we carry Neumann and Genelec where I work. I would take the KH120 II over the IN-5 but the difference is not as great as it seems. I haven't compared them side by side. The KH120 It is about double the price though and I would put that extra into acoustic treatments or sub. Although the room correction adds some value for the KH120 and MTM. If you are already using other room correction then those are not necessary. If budget is not a concern then get the KH120 II with a KH750 sub (or 2) and the MA-1 room correction.

 

[Liftro]

Kali's IN-5 is an excellent piece of kit, you just have to make sure it's appropriately placed and you have eq'd the room modes out.

This should leave enough money for a subwoofer, get a subwoofer, get a UMIK-1 and calibrate for your room modes and all that. This would lead to a full range response that you can trust for the most part. If there are nulls, use an iem, even a 20 dollar one is good enough for tracking bass. You mix your tracks with your monitors and do checks on your iems.

From my experience, you just need a neutral pair of speakers to be able to get mixes to translate. And also, you just need to go ahead and LEARN them, listen to them, use REFERENCE tracks. Mixing is still a skill, so you need to be able to reference stuff to know what a good mix sounds like.

Main thing about the IN-5 is its decent linearity with good loudness capabilities. And the fact that it is coaxial means you have more vertical wiggle room than typical 2 ways.

If possible I'd still go for a Neumann KH120 II and add a sub later on. But without a sub, I'd pick the IN-5. The Neumanns will have a more focused soundstage but you don't need that for mixing, as long as you know your monitors and their behaviour, which is a learned skill. You have to keep practicing mixing and check on other devices so you know your shortcomings and work on them.

I've used an Adam D3V, Adam T5V and am now using an Ascilab C6B. With eq to taste/for FR oddities, i think they're all quite neutral. After that, all my mixes translate nearly perfectly, except for 100 hz and lower. Around 70-90 hz i have a null and i cant really trust em blindly for 50-70 hz stuff. But I just use my headphones/iems and get great mixes. My mixes have never been better and translation has never been easier. My room is untreated, I have a desk in front of my speakers and there's stuff on the desk all creating oddities. Yet with proper eq things sound and perform great.

I dont know who you consulted or how you put in the bass traps, but i feel like without measuring a before and after, you're just blindly putting things in, you don't know if it's a net positive or negative. First see the response before the treatment, then fix for it. Get a UMIK-1 to measure stuff.

Excuse the off-topic question. How are the Acilabs? How do you connect them? I'm interested in buying a pair, but I'm not sure whether to wait for an active pair or get the passive ones.

 

[crocobuxfour]

The issue for me is that the realistic options above entry-level seem to narrow down to a relatively small group, roughly in ascending price: (maybe Focal Alpha 50 Evo), Kali IN-5, Dynaudio LYD-5, EVE SC204, iLoud MTM MKII, Adam A4V, Neumann KH80, and Genelec 8020, kh120, 8030.

What makes the decision hard is that I don’t have real hands-on experience with monitors yet, and I can’t audition any of these locally. So I don’t really have a solid reference for how large the practical differences are between each step, especially when the price jumps are quite noticeable.

Any insight on which of these represent a meaningful step up in a small, nearfield room like mine, and which differences are more subtle in practice,would be really appreciated.

 

[Jiraya369]

Excuse the off-topic question. How are the Acilabs? How do you connect them? I'm interested in buying a pair, but I'm not sure whether to wait for an active pair or get the passive ones.

it's easy, just got a topping mini300 and some banana plug cables from world'sbestcables. Thick as heck! Just plugged em in there, used trs to xlr to connect from mini300 to my topping dx5 ii dac and bam i was done

The Ascilabs are great speakers, unless you expect strong sub 50hz output or clean 102 db output, you'll be completely satisfied with the sound i think as long as you know what you're getting into. They're narrower than a lot of speakers and primarily target controlled directivity, their main selling point is their supremely smooth soundstage due to the controlled horizontal dispersion. Imaging is razor sharp, it's boringly precise. Feels like wearing headphones but at a much grander scale and with even greater precision!

Based on the C8C data, I can confidently say the F6C is going to be an absolute banger when it comes, A tad expensive and I personally think the C6B is the sweet spot in their whole lineup for most people. Gets loud enough for most things till 3m, gets deep enough for a bookshelf and is well priced.

Whereas the F6Bs is another banger and for nearfield is the better choice imo. Costs around the same as a Neumann KH80 if you account for a Topping Mini300's price. I'd say even then the F6Bs is a better choice IF you get a subwoofer, because it can get louder and holds its composure better overall. Without a sub surprisingly the KH80 holds its own. How Neumann pulled it off is beyond me.

 

[Jiraya369]

The issue for me is that the realistic options above entry-level seem to narrow down to a relatively small group, roughly in ascending price: (maybe Focal Alpha 50 Evo), Kali IN-5, Dynaudio LYD-5, EVE SC204, iLoud MTM MKII, Adam A4V, Neumann KH80, and Genelec 8020, kh120, 8030.

What makes the decision hard is that I don’t have real hands-on experience with monitors yet, and I can’t audition any of these locally. So I don’t really have a solid reference for how large the practical differences are between each step, especially when the price jumps are quite noticeable.

Any insight on which of these represent a meaningful step up in a small, nearfield room like mine, and which differences are more subtle in practice,would be really appreciated.

just neutrality, bass extension, loudness capabilities and the soundstage, that's all that differs. Measurements can inform you of where one speaker performs better over another. Basically, how neutral is it, how low does the bass go, does it distort/compress the sound when pushed in loudness and how is that soundstage? Soundstage matters least because your brain can fill in the gaps. Neumann and Genelec are smooth and controlled, pitch perfect. Go on spinorama and check out the horizontal directivity normalized plot.

Let me give you an example from here, the adam is wide at 60 degrees constantly and then narrows, soundstage will be smooth and constant till 8k and higher frequency will seem to come more from the center if there's a cymbal to the left then the highest highs will be towards the center a little and the rest will be towards the left, neumann is a bit narrower at 50 degrees but everything will be razor sharp, absolutely precisely placed. This is best for people who want to listen to a nice sound, for mixing you can make do with the Adam and Kali quite well as only harmonics lie in the 10k+ region, the main frequencies of 1-8k are well controlled.

At 1m all of them get loud enough. And if the Kali IN-5 is the cheapest, with the addition of a subwoofer would be the best overall choice if you have a proper dac with bass management and eq, and also have a umik-1 to measure and calibrate.

 

[Jiraya369]

erin has a great video here

 

[staticV3]

But why two subwoofers? In a room this small, wouldn’t a single sub already be enough?

More bass sources spread around in the room -> smoother bass response with fewer cancellation nulls.

Also, if I already have Sonarworks (mic + software), is MA1 still fundamentally important, or can Sonarworks do the job just as well in this context?

Sonarworks can do room correction as well. Not sure if it does it as well as MA1, but should be just fine.

 

[crocobuxfour]

just neutrality, bass extension, loudness capabilities and the soundstage, that's all that differs. Measurements can inform you of where one speaker performs better over another. Basically, how neutral is it, how low does the bass go, does it distort/compress the sound when pushed in loudness and how is that soundstage? Soundstage matters least because your brain can fill in the gaps. Neumann and Genelec are smooth and controlled, pitch perfect. Go on spinorama and check out the horizontal directivity normalized plot.

Let me give you an example from here, the adam is wide at 60 degrees constantly and then narrows, soundstage will be smooth and constant till 8k and higher frequency will seem to come more from the center if there's a cymbal to the left then the highest highs will be towards the center a little and the rest will be towards the left, neumann is a bit narrower at 50 degrees but everything will be razor sharp, absolutely precisely placed. This is best for people who want to listen to a nice sound, for mixing you can make do with the Adam and Kali quite well as only harmonics lie in the 10k+ region, the main frequencies of 1-8k are well controlled.
View attachment 503861

At 1m all of them get loud enough. And if the Kali IN-5 is the cheapest, with the addition of a subwoofer would be the best overall choice if you have a proper dac with bass management and eq, and also have a umik-1 to measure and calibrate.

Thanks, this is genuinely very helpful. Your explanation really helped me frame what actually matters in practice. I’ve also spent some time looking at different models across price ranges using spinorama data, and it was interesting to see how much things can vary from model to model, including some lower-priced speakers measuring better than more expensive ones.

Given all this, I’m still trying to place the iLoud MTM MKII in the bigger picture. On paper they’re appealing for my situation: very compact, easy to place on a desk, can be aimed precisely at the ears, and they include their own calibration mic, all at a mid-level price. At the same time, I’m aware their spinorama isn’t exactly exemplary, which makes me wonder how problematic that actually is in real-world use.

In practice though, how “good enough” are they really for critical mixing? Where would you place MTM MKII relative to the other options we discussed... Neumann/Genelec on one end, Adam A4V / Kali IN-5 in the middle, and the cheaper entry-level monitors on the other? And how large is that gap in real-world use, especially in terms of phase behavior, clarity, and translation, rather than specs alone?

 

[crocobuxfour]

I’d also be very interested in hearing more opinions on this last question, especially from people who’ve actually worked on the iLoud MTM MKII and can place them realistically for critical mixing, in terms of how far they are from the mid-tier and high-end options in real-world use.

 

[Jiraya369]

Thanks, this is genuinely very helpful. Your explanation really helped me frame what actually matters in practice. I’ve also spent some time looking at different models across price ranges using spinorama data, and it was interesting to see how much things can vary from model to model, including some lower-priced speakers measuring better than more expensive ones.

Given all this, I’m still trying to place the iLoud MTM MKII in the bigger picture. On paper they’re appealing for my situation: very compact, easy to place on a desk, can be aimed precisely at the ears, and they include their own calibration mic, all at a mid-level price. At the same time, I’m aware their spinorama isn’t exactly exemplary, which makes me wonder how problematic that actually is in real-world use.

In practice though, how “good enough” are they really for critical mixing? Where would you place MTM MKII relative to the other options we discussed... Neumann/Genelec on one end, Adam A4V / Kali IN-5 in the middle, and the cheaper entry-level monitors on the other? And how large is that gap in real-world use, especially in terms of phase behavior, clarity, and translation, rather than specs alone?

I used an Adam D3V, T5V and now am using the Ascilab C6B. My translations were similar across all of them, nothing really matters that much in the nearfield apart from neutrality. I had to eq them all, i did it by ear and didnt get a mic till the C6B and it was relatively neutral, so my eq was doing its job. That's all calibration is really. And in the nearfield, you dont have to worry too much about reflections either I think, I personally had no issue in a bedroom with white walls, ceiling and wooden floors.

If you're closer than 1m, i'd suggest the Adam D3V or the Kali IN-5, this is because the D3V is small and the IN-5 has the midrange/tweeter at the same spot, meaning the directional frequencies will seem to come from the same place. When I used my Adam T5V at 0.8m and lower distances, I felt the voices coming from the woofer/a lower height than the upper frequencies and it really bothered me.

As for the iLoud, i personally think it's a little overpriced for what it is. The Adam D3V does exactly what it does at a far cheaper price and has smoother horizontal dispersion. You can literally get the Adam D3V, a UMIK-1 and get a better experience imo. If you really like the look go for em! None of em are bad choices for mixing if you can calibrate the response. For example I put in a wide peak at 8khz for the D3V and a high shelf filter for the T5V, that resulted in a fairly linear and neutral response. That's it really.

You just need to hear the frequencies (low end extension) without coloration (neutral response) and hopefully no additional oddity ruining it (weird reflections and especially distortion/compression).

Don't think too much about it, your skills will end up being the problem before any of these monitors. Mixing is a skill, an art, gotta practice practice practice.