best monitors I ever heard

[gabriel g.]

are the Neumann KH 120 A.
Only heard them in the shop but I was blown away!!!!!

Switched between them and adam a7x and the Adams sounded like they were scooped around 500hz with like 10dB !!!

Have to listen to them in the studio to give a "real" review.

 

[gabriel g.]

They are a bit re-designed afaik but its basicly a new version of the klein und hummel, thats why the name KH

I think I found my next GAS

 

[Ermz]

That's awesome. I remember loving the O300s, and if these are a souped up version, they can probably dominate the world (well, they won't because everyone is too cheap and will buy HS-80s instead).

 

[Lasse Lammert]

They are a bit re-designed afaik but its basicly a new version of the klein und hummel, thats why the name KH

I think I found my next GAS

I wouldn't bet on it, but I'm pretty sure Neumann just bought the brand name, still the same speakers.
the 120 are the "smaller" brothers of the 300, right?
might get a set one day

 

[gabriel g.]

That's awesome. I remember loving the O300s, and if these are a souped up version, they can probably dominate the world (well, they won't because everyone is too cheap and will buy HS-80s instead).

They are not that expensive for high-end near fields.

Pair is around 1300€
Its a lot cheaper then Opals for example

 

[gabriel g.]

I wouldn't bet on it, but I'm pretty sure Neumann just bought the brand name, still the same speakers.
the 120 are the "smaller" brothers of the 300, right?
might get a set one day

check this out lasse:

http://www.thomann.de/de/prod_review_23704_AR_255902.html

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

That's awesome. I remember loving the O300s, and if these are a souped up version, they can probably dominate the world (well, they won't because everyone is too cheap and will buy HS-80s instead).

They're not a newer model of the O300's, but the smaller ones. The KH120's are about 1200€ a pair and carry a 5.25" woofer.

 

[Ermz]

Oh right, so the Opals are still better. Carry on then.

 

[gabriel g.]

Oh right, so the Opals are still better. Carry on then.

wouldnt say better, would say different

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

Discussing which high-end monitors (let's say 2k per pair and upwards) are better than others is almost as constructive as dipping your cock in hot sauce and frying it on a pan. I was hitting my head against the wall when trying to get a good image of different options by reading reviews and comments: Opals are hifi-sounding shit / Opals are the best monitors ever / Opals have crap build quality / Twins have no low end whatsoever / Twins are the best monitors ever / Twins will spontaneously combust after four hours of use / You won't get anything better than 8050's with the money and so on and so on.

The truth is, when you get to the high-end stuff, there really isn't anything you could call crap, but still everyone has a completely different opinion. Some swear by Genelecs, and I personally can't stand working on them even though the 8050's (for example) are unarguably good monitors, whereas I like stuff like Dynaudio BM15's a lot more even though they're not exactly THE monitors.

I decided to just try some pairs out and settle for the first one that feels right to me.

 

[::XeS::]

And it's also difficult to judge a set of monitors in a store..and also for few weeks. You need months to learn your monitors

 

[gabriel g.]

And it's also difficult to judge a set of monitors in a store..and also for few weeks. You need months to learn your monitors

absolutly true

BUT

if you hear monitors side by side in the same room you get a picture of what some monitor can do and the what the other cant do

 

[Soundlurker]

Switched between them and adam a7x and the Adams sounded like they were scooped around 500hz with like 10dB !!!

Uhm..?? I'd say the A7s are anything but scooped so I imagine the A7x aren't either.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

It's probably the impression caused by the lack of low-mid details. The frequency response curve doesn't mean everything. Or anything, considering all good monitors have a more or less flat frequency response

 

[Soundlurker]

I didn't mention frequency curves, I'm talking about the sound. There's plenty of low mid detail in the A7s, IMO. Saying something like 10db more in the Neumanns would mean when you play music it sounds like wind passing through a pipe.

 

[Ermz]

if you hear monitors side by side in the same room you get a picture of what some monitor can do and the what the other cant do

That can be misleading too.

One of our 'revered' pro audio stores here in Melbourne have a specially 'treated' listening room. Basically you're in a corner... IN the bass trap. The Opals sounded absolutely hideous on anything but 1/4 space mode in there... the Dynaudio monitors with tiny drivers and no sub response all sounded way better.

I tried the same monitors in 2 larger 'untreated' places, and the difference was humongous.

 

[gabriel g.]

I didn't mention frequency curves, I'm talking about the sound. There's plenty of low mid detail in the A7s, IMO. Saying something like 10db more in the Neumanns would mean when you play music it sounds like wind passing through a pipe.

maybe the mid cut was a misleading example.
The Neumanns sounded honest and open. Extremly detailed with an awsome stereo-image, an awsome impulse response and extremly 3D.

The adam a7x sounded flat but not that detailed, and sounded "coloured" compared to the neumann.
they doesnt reproduce the sound that honest and open sounding like the Neumann did.

 

[gabriel g.]

That can be misleading too.

One of our 'revered' pro audio stores here in Melbourne have a specially 'treated' listening room. Basically you're in a corner... IN the bass trap. The Opals sounded absolutely hideous on anything but 1/4 space mode in there... the Dynaudio monitors with tiny drivers and no sub response all sounded way better.

I tried the same monitors in 2 larger 'untreated' places, and the difference was humongous.

Before I would buy any monitors I would listen to them in my studio where I know the room and its sound inside out.

I know exactly what you mean

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

I didn't mention frequency curves, I'm talking about the sound. There's plenty of low mid detail in the A7s, IMO. Saying something like 10db more in the Neumanns would mean when you play music it sounds like wind passing through a pipe.

I said "the impression caused by the lack of low-mid details", not "the A7's have a dip in the mids", suggesting Gabriel probably used a poor expression when describing the difference between the two monitors.

And yes, I have worked with A7's, and no, the way they project the low-mid and low frequency regions is nowhere near as accurate and detailed as some higher-grade monitors. They are definitely nice for their price and good bang for the buck, but there's a reason why they cost a fragment of S3X's, Barefoots, Opals, 8050's and so on.

 

[Ermz]

I've always found ADAM mid response a bit weird when put side by side with what I'd consider 'high-tier' nearfields (Focal Twins, O300s, Opals). Something about them doesn't strike me as transparent. It feels like they're coming from the NS-10 school of thought, where if you blast enough obnoxious mids in your face, you'll be inclined to EQ them out of your mixes.

The response of Klein & Hummel monitors is utterly gorgeous though. I've not listened to the O300s right next to Opals, but between those two monitors I'm in bliss. The O300s were absolutely pants-blowing when I first heard them. They don't have the same kick and edge as the Opals (nor the headroom), but in terms of sheer neutrality they are astounding.