A review of the Linn Kan II speakers

[90125]

That would be interesting, also the kind of thing that gives the folk of Waterfoot palpitations.

 

[Charlie_1]

BTW while Kan are always seen with Linn / Naim .. I heard them once with an Exposure integrated XV or XX or something.

The slightly fuller / more laid back nature of the Exposure seemed to suit them - IMO

I had Kan 2s with Expo XV for over 15 years and you're right, it's a good partnership. The XV Super sounds cleaner and more refined up top (probably to cope better with CD) but not sure it is such a good match with Kans.

 

[90125]

I worked in a Hi-Fi shop in the 80's - the Linn sales guys told us the the Kan1 had a dip in the response to match Naim amps, the Kan2 was designed for Linn Amps with no dip.

If that was true .. in general, the Kan 2 should be better with all/most non-Naim amps.

 

[Tony L]

I worked in a Hi-Fi shop in the 80's - the Linn sales guys told us the the Kan1 had a dip in the response to match Naim amps, the Kan2 was designed for Linn Amps with no dip.

If that was true .. in general, the Kan 2 should be better with all/most non-Naim amps.

The problem with that is the Kan I was a moving target. I’d argue the original ones that were built into proper LS3/5A cabinets and had Scanspeak tweeters were a totally different speaker to the far more common MDF cabs and Hiquphon tweeter. Arguably far more different than say a late Kan I and II. I’ve never heard the earliest Kans, but I can see logical arguments why many feel they are the absolute best of breed (LS3/5A ply cabs are clearly superior to MDF and I’m pretty sure I prefer the Scanspeak tweeter as a driver assuming it is the same one in the Naim IBL, SBL etc). I’d like to hear a pair.

 

[stuwils]

I worked in a Hi-Fi shop in the 80's - the Linn sales guys told us the the Kan1 had a dip in the response to match Naim amps, the Kan2 was designed for Linn Amps with no dip.

If that was true .. in general, the Kan 2 should be better with all/most non-Naim amps.

given the simplicity of the crossover there was no tweaking of the response to match naim amps, they just did not bother to tame the rising response of the 110 in order to make the speaker sound more dynamic than the other small monitors
Rgds
Stuart

 

[90125]

..on the subject of the crossover .. I saw a thread that suggested the caps would have gone off by now, making them sound more closed in.

Any experience of re-cappin' the crossover?

Not electrolytic - so I'm not sure there would be much point refreshing them.

 

[Tony L]

If it isn’t an electrolytic I’d leave it be. Even if it’s an electrolytic it may be fine. The problem with Kans is a) getting the grilles off, and b) getting the drivers out. There is a very real risk of damage unless you know exactly what you are doing. Kan IIs are a little easier as the drivers have gaskets rather than being stuck in with a mastic compound, but you still need to get the grilles off (hint: a wide square-edge wallpaper scraper is your friend here). If they work and haven’t been tampered with I’d personally just leave them be.

PS When I had Kan IIs I was persuaded to try a more modern ceramic Linn tweeter. Don’t. It sounds like absolute shite in them! I swiftly put the originals back.

 

[90125]

The problem with Kans is a) getting the grilles off, and b) getting the drivers out. There is a very real risk of damage unless you know exactly what you are doing. Kan IIs are a little easier as the drivers have gaskets rather than being stuck in with a mastic compound, but you still need to get the grilles off (hint: a wide square-edge wallpaper scraper is your friend here.

Yep - Its the risk of damage that really much puts me off.

 

[stuwils]

The ceramic tweeter was 6 ohm so crossover would have needed adjusting or the crossover point would be altered.
Rgds
Stuart

 

[b27]

I had Kan 2s with Expo XV for over 15 years and you're right, it's a good partnership. The XV Super sounds cleaner and more refined up top (probably to cope better with CD) but not sure it is such a good match with Kans.

Bought Kan 2s as replacement for AR18s knowing that the NAD 3020 would also have to be upgraded.
Was hoping I could get away with a Nait or Cambridge A60 but ended up demoing Naim 62/140 against equivalent Exposures.
It was quite close but I went for the Naims.
At the time had LP12/ Ittok / Linn Moving Magnet and the Kans were very dynamic if a little rough in the treble.
Things were tidied up a lot when I later moved to a Moving Coil cartridge with the Kans capable of making some wonder sounds with female vocals.
They were a hard act to follow and I took a long time to find anything I was prepared to upgrade to.
Eventually went for some ex-dem Linn Kabers which for me sound like the Kans bigger brothers (though they needed Naim 262 / HiCap / 250)

Still have the Kans / 62 /140 in the upstairs system, modern digital is just about good enough to play through the Kans.

 

[Charlie_1]

Bought Kan 2s as replacement for AR18s knowing that the NAD 3020 would also have to be upgraded.
Was hoping I could get away with a Nait or Cambridge A60 but ended up demoing Naim 62/140 against equivalent Exposures.
It was quite close but I went for the Naims.
At the time had LP12/ Ittok / Linn Moving Magnet and the Kans were very dynamic if a little rough in the treble.
Things were tidied up a lot when I later moved to a Moving Coil cartridge with the Kans capable of making some wonder sounds with female vocals.
They were a hard act to follow and I took a long time to find anything I was prepared to upgrade to.
Eventually went for some ex-dem Linn Kabers which for me sound like the Kans bigger brothers (though they needed Naim 262 / HiCap / 250)

Still have the Kans / 62 /140 in the upstairs system, modern digital is just about good enough to play through the Kans.

Yeah, it's hard to move on from Kans, which is unusual for a small speaker. Often big brother speakers do what the small ones do plus more, but Kans could always do something that big speakers struggled to do.