Jump to content

Lenehan LK1 Kit speakers Reviews


Lenehan Audio

Recommended Posts

I think so - might have to consign my fanboi tshirt to Vinnies 

Hi Pops
Definitely haven’t forgotten you guys ! I’ve sent one pair out which will ship forward in about 10days and I’ll have a second pair going out midweek . Not sure who’s next cause I’m at home sipping on a red [emoji485]
I’ll be updating early next week .
Mike
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 26/11/2017 at 8:56 AM, niss_man said:

I think I read somewhere before of someone who liked to use an average of his measurements 0-45deg to create a flat response crossover as he thought they sounded the best. Can't remember where I read that though.

 

I think its was Mike - but as to why I think I know, but he is the best one to explain it.

 

Thanks

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
I think its was Mike - but as to why I think I know, but he is the best one to explain it.
 
Thanks
Bill
I read it online somewhere a few years back. It means dispersion is even at various angles I'd say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hi Pops
Definitely haven’t forgotten you guys ! I’ve sent one pair out which will ship forward in about 10days and I’ll have a second pair going out midweek . Not sure who’s next cause I’m at home sipping on a red [emoji485]
I’ll be updating early next week .
Mike


“Jokes” - I still have the candy red ML1’s haha. Prob too busy this time of year at the beach dodging sharks anyway :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 hours ago, bhobba said:

 

I think its was Mike - but as to why I think I know, but he is the best one to explain it.

 

Thanks

Bill

The first reflection is always the floor ! But of course this is a constant so can be accounted for in the Xover for a listening distance window .

The next reflection is usually the roof or side walls , the roof is not as constant as the floor but it can still be averaged in the Xover

 

The last two are I believe the most important ! That is the direct sound and the 45 degree off response . 

The 30degree off response usually sums behind  of where the listener is and the 60 degree off usually sums well in front of where the listeners ears are . ( of course this obviously also depends on  loudspeaker toe in or out ) 

45 is quite critical because it defines the power response or dimensional resolution of the loudspeaker in an average room ( no such thing of course I know ) BUT the idea is to give the speaker the best possible average chance . 

Here's a question for the dedicated ! Would you pay to rent a high end system in a high end super tuned room for a night or two  ?  In other words a speaker system with a Xover designed for an exact room with near perfect acoustics .    Mike        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lenehan Audio said:

The first reflection is always the floor ! But of course this is a constant so can be accounted for in the Xover for a listening distance window .

The next reflection is usually the roof or side walls , the roof is not as constant as the floor but it can still be averaged in the Xover

 

The last two are I believe the most important ! That is the direct sound and the 45 degree off response . 

The 30degree off response usually sums behind  of where the listener is and the 60 degree off usually sums well in front of where the listeners ears are . ( of course this obviously also depends on  loudspeaker toe in or out ) 

45 is quite critical because it defines the power response or dimensional resolution of the loudspeaker in an average room ( no such thing of course I know ) BUT the idea is to give the speaker the best possible average chance . 

Here's a question for the dedicated ! Would you pay to rent a high end system in a high end super tuned room for a night or two  ?  In other words a speaker system with a Xover designed for an exact room with near perfect acoustics .    Mike        

What I was talking about was your 45 degree off axis graphs or in basic terms the dispersion or how the speakers beam/do not beam. (posted on the 2nd page of this thread). As you know a speaker will lose its off axis energy when they start to beam and is related to cone diameter. One can design to allow for this ie. allow for a lower crossover point. The thing is one speaker designer may design for an even on axis response and believe that this is the best way of going about things and another designer may design for an even off axis response (45 deg or such). I can see your design is nice and flat 45 degrees off axis without big peaks and dips obviously because of good phase coherency between drivers at the crossover point because of a well designed crossover....but to show the other manufacturers specs at 45 off axis as well and show that they are not as flat makes people think that your ones are the superior product. "Well they are," I can hear you say, but B&W or other manufacturers may design their speakers differently with lots of time and effort, testing, auditions etc and have come to their own conclusion/opinion that their speaker sounds the best. After all it comes down to what the listener likes most. Some will love a B&W others will love the Kef and each one will have different on axis, and off axis plots as a result of many factors.

 

            Which "polar plot" sounds the best to the listener is what I think it all boils down to (well that and the distortion characteristics of the drivers/speaker).    

 

          When you perform your measurements Mike you gate your measurements to produce a "quasi anechoic measurement" in room( I can see that because of the low frequency drop off). So the 45 degree off axis graphs you showed should not have any floor reflections in them.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, niss_man said:

What I was talking about was your 45 degree off axis graphs or in basic terms the dispersion or how the speakers beam/do not beam. (posted on the 2nd page of this thread). As you know a speaker will lose its off axis energy when they start to beam and is related to cone diameter. One can design to allow for this ie. allow for a lower crossover point. The thing is one speaker designer may design for an even on axis response and believe that this is the best way of going about things and another designer may design for an even off axis response (45 deg or such). I can see your design is nice and flat 45 degrees off axis without big peaks and dips obviously because of good phase coherency between drivers at the crossover point because of a well designed crossover....but to show the other manufacturers specs at 45 off axis as well and show that they are not as flat makes people think that your ones are the superior product. "Well they are," I can hear you say, but B&W or other manufacturers may design their speakers differently with lots of time and effort, testing, auditions etc and have come to their own conclusion/opinion that their speaker sounds the best. After all it comes down to what the listener likes most. Some will love a B&W others will love the Kef and each one will have different on axis, and off axis plots as a result of many factors.

 

            Which "polar plot" sounds the best to the listener is what I think it all boils down to (well that and the distortion characteristics of the drivers/speaker).    

 

          When you perform your measurements Mike you gate your measurements to produce a "quasi anechoic measurement" in room( I can see that because of the low frequency drop off). So the 45 degree off axis graphs you showed should not have any floor reflections in them.   

 

Hi Simon

            Yes indeed they are superior ! And unless there are scientific , acoustical or reasonable arguments to the contrary a speaker with the flattest power response will sound more accurate,musical and real than one with a wild off axis response. 

 

We we are speaking here about dynamic speakers with cone bass drivers and dome tweeters ! And in respect of these speaker types it's the Dome tweeters flare at the bottom of its passband that is the main offender in respect of that hard brash sound that is the signature of most less than 3 dimensional conventional loudspeakers . 

You know what lads I think I might start a new loudspeaker design thread and continue from there :).    Mike 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Mike, is there a 8" driver tucked away inside the box??? The bass is amazing.

Mike's done it again "lads". They're not the last word in definition but my god, are they transparent, disappearing entirely leaving nothing but a typically Lenehan musical and engaging sound.

Definitely a model to add to the stable Mike. As a kit and a finished model.

I think you've refined these drivers to all they are capable of. c3aa21f327ed0990bb5cf6225a7eb761.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Marc
They took forever to get to this level ! I’m feeling a bit guilty for taking so long ??‍♂️
Anyway there’s another pair going out on tour next week
So hopefully I can redeem myself. And yes I think we will offer them as a fully built option . Keep Lisnin Bros
Cheers Mike Lenehan

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 12/6/2017 at 11:12 PM, Lenehan Audio said:

Would you pay to rent a high end system in a high end super tuned room for a night or two  ?  In other words a speaker system with a Xover designed for an exact room with near perfect acoustics .       

On occasion Mike - but only for critical comparisons which you know I love doing.

 

Thanks

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lenehan Audio said:

They took forever to get to this level ! I’m feeling a bit guilty for taking so long ??‍♂️

Mike of course is a perfectionist.

 

That's why it took so long and why he got the results he did.  I thought some later prototypes sounded great, but Mike sat there listening and said - they can be better - and he was right.  He goes through iteration after iteration to get any speaker he makes to the level that satisfies him - and that standard is HIGH.

 

He is doing the same with my Magnesium's, which, fingers crossed he can work on now the Kit speakers are done.   

 

But Mike will never, ever, release any speaker until he is happy its the best he can do - including my Magnesium's.   It takes longer but its worth it.

 

Thanks

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6 December 2017 at 11:12 PM, Lenehan Audio said:

The first reflection is always the floor ! But of course this is a constant so can be accounted for in the Xover for a listening distance window .

The next reflection is usually the roof or side walls , the roof is not as constant as the floor but it can still be averaged in the Xover

 

*Vows to build new house with concave flooring just to throw poor ole Mike a curveball*

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike of course is a perfectionist.
 
That's why it took so long and why he got the results he did.  I thought some later prototypes sounded great, but Mike sat there listening and said - they can be better - and he was right.  He goes through iteration after iteration to get any speaker he makes to the level that satisfies him - and that standard is HIGH.
 
He is doing the same with my Magnesium's, which, fingers crossed he can work on now the Kit speakers are done.   
 
But Mike will never, ever, release any speaker until he is happy its the best he can do - including my Magnesium's.   It takes longer but its worth it.
 
Thanks
Bill


he takes a while to start on your speakers because of those reinfections?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 08/12/2017 at 5:13 PM, Lenehan Audio said:

Thanks Marc
They took forever to get to this level ! I’m feeling a bit guilty for taking so long ??‍♂️
Anyway there’s another pair going out on tour next week
So hopefully I can redeem myself. And yes I think we will offer them as a fully built option . Keep Lisnin Bros
Cheers Mike Lenehan

 

What sort of $$$ are we looking at for the fully built version?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • 3 months later...
On 8/20/2017 at 8:58 PM, Cafad said:

OK, I'll go second.  Things have been a bit disorganized lately as BRMSlash has had to head off to Tassie at short notice which messed up our pre-planning so I've had the little LK1s for a single night (Wednesday) and an afternoon (Thursday) and then sent them off with BRM, and then got them back again Saturday evening so I'm dividing my write up into 3 parts.  The first was the Wednesday/Thursday experience, the second was the Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning amp swapping session and the Third, a direct comparison with my LS-50s, is not quite done yet so it will probably show up later this evening or tomorrow.  

 

Part 1.  Let's test these things out.

 

Very musical in the top end, nice sweet vocals and nicely defined bass.  The speakers have a presence to them that comes across as something of a fast rhythmic feel.  They go deeper in the bass than they probably should, I have to admit I was very surprised, but having said that there is only so much you can do with a small bass driver.  In small rooms or in a near field environment I think many people will be surprised, in larger rooms they are still pretty good but a sub would be a must for home theatre use.

 

They are very revealing of the gear in front of them, changing speaker cables made quite a difference to the LK1s when I was playing around with them.  I swapped from my standard 10AWG cables with jaycar banana plugs on them to the Redgum Audio Pipeline speaker cables and the difference was an enhanced clarity and removal of background hash that improved the listening experience so much that neither I nor BRMSlash was willing to change back again.

 

We started out with the Burson PI-160 on amplification duties and my Consonance cd120 on source duties.  The sound was very good but a little bit on the hard side and just a little bit, well, a bit more “digital” than I am used to (you know, that combination of a bit too crisp, a bit too sharp and a bit too stark to be enjoyable over the long term).   It wasn’t bad at all, quite enjoyable really, but it was noticeable, and what this actually means in the terms of this product test/review is that the LK1s when powered by the Burson sounded like they were being powered by a Burson. 

 

We had limited time available for this first test and while I was trying to decide what amp to try next BRM made the decision for me, since the Burson was sitting on top of Simon’s Zeus Integrated (partly because I was using it prior to the arrival of the LK1 speakers and also partly because it is too heavy to move around unnecessarily).  The difference was quite large, more power down low, more soundstage width and depth and that slight steelishness of the Burson was no longer present.  BRM is something of a fan of Simon’s amp, as am I.

I think the conclusion to come out of this first listening session was that the little LK1 speakers are good enough that they are likely to survive several amp upgrades during their lifetime. 

 

I have yet to determine how they sound with a less than powerful amp, but I will.  I’m also warming up the LS50s for their direct comparison later in the weekend. 

 

Part 2.

I’ve got the LK1s back and decided to do some amp evaluating.  I’ve already given the Burson and the Zeus a run and confirmed that they work rather well but they are on the expensive side, what about amps that are more likely to be used with these little speakers?  Better give a few of the cheaper amps a try.  After all it is one thing to say that you can get good bass out of these little speakers if you feed them 400 watts but it seems unlikely that too many people are going to feed them 400 watts, so let’s take this testing back into the real world shall we (no matter how much fun the 400 watts was, and it was, oh yes, it most certainly was!).

 

So, in order of testing I present:

NuForce Icon:                    The original model.  I was a bit surprised that the Icon gave quite a good vocal performance from the LK1s, it gives fair impact in the bass region too but it doesn’t have the current to follow through with real bass so it left me feeling a bit hollow.  The top end was quite nice but a bit too much glare, in the end I decided I would not like to listen to the Icon long term.

 

Shanling Tempo eA3:     Not bad at all, better bass than the Icon and vocals a touch sweeter.  Still some glare on display in the treble but only about a third as much as the Icon.   Fairly listenable in general but on pop songs that glare really amps up.

 

O-Point OP-150:               Very nice top end and mid range, probably better than the Burson actually.  Quite similar to the Burson tonally, but without the steel.  Bass is also excellent with the O-point.  At this point my old faithful Consonance cd120 started to act up, the front display died and it refused to accept remote control commands.  Bugger!  So I have been forced to move on to my Sansui 917XR.  This player is a slightly better fit for the LK1s as it is just a little warmer than the Consonance.  The difference isn’t huge but it is noticeable. 

 

Indiana Line Puro 800:    Also an excellent listen, maybe 90% as good as the O-Point but it has the bonus of a built in DAC (not quite up to the quality of the Sansui but pretty good none-the-less, less bass and more of an airy quality to the top end on the built in DAC) and a remote.  Pity they don’t make these anymore.

 

JAS Audio Green Power 120:  Nice top end and a decent bottom one, nice clean mid-range too.  A decent listen but not really up to the standards of the Indiana or the O-Point.

 

NAD 3120:           Very nice, I can see why these amps have such a great rep.  Nice clean top end with just a little warmth thrown in.  Vocals almost as sweet as the O-Point.  It also has a bit of an addictive sense of rhythm to it.  Just a bit more fun to listen to than any of the other amps so far, it’s almost hypnotic.

 

Rotel RA820BX:                 Sounds similar to the NAD but a bit warmer and not as much love given to the vocals.  Still a good listen but a slight let down after hearing the NAD.  Still as the very first amp I ever bought the nostalgia value makes up for most of that.

 

(I hope everyone understands that if I didn’t include this last one I would have been kicked out of the club.   And I couldn’t have that.)

 

Sansui Alpha 907:             Nice, all the warmth of the Rotel with the addictive rhythm of the NAD and bass almost as good as the Zeus.  Not a real appropriate test as there aren’t exactly a lot of these Sansui Alphas around.   Vocals maybe not quite as sweet as the O-point but they seem to have a nicer resonance to them.  Yeah, I could definitely recommend a Sansui of pretty much any time period with the LK1s.

 

 

So after all that amp swapping what sort of conclusion can we come to?  I would say that while these new speakers of Mikes react well to some serious power they don’t need more than about 20 watts to sound good.  If prospective buyers already have an amp that that is all well and good but if they don’t (or if for some reason that amp just doesn’t work well with the LK1s) then they don’t have to look any further than a second hand NAD, Indiana Line, Rotel or O-Point to make their new DIY speakers sound very good indeed.

IMG_0595.thumb.JPG.3d18dc6c6da2fd8189abc2ee6909bb3f.JPG

Because without a picture it might not have happened.

Hi I'm trying to find the comaprison with the LS50's cant seem to find, as the kit and the LS50 price on par?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, amisty said:

Hi I'm trying to find the comaprison with the LS50's cant seem to find, as the kit and the LS50 price on par?

I don't think I ever finished that one.  Let me hunt around and see if I can find anything (I'm talking computer files as well as memory here, no promises on either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, BRMSlash said:

We should be able to do another comparison shortly emoji16.png

 

That's if you still have the LS50's. I can't quite remember.

Yep, still got them.  They haven't gone anywhere yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike

 

How do these compare to the original ML1's that I have? 

I'd like a bit more bass but don't want to sacrifice anything else to get it - as you would expect :)

I guess ultimately I need to go up to ML2's down the track. 

 

cheers

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top