advertisement


Linn Kan Mk1 Thoughts

Another example of Kans not being set up as they should be resulting in disappointment.

Get it right they are fun, fast and magical!

That is what all the fuss is about.
 
Have owned a set of Kan1's since new - bought in teh 80's.
I have moved around with them over the years and have learned a few things.

They need a solid wall.
The difference between even gypsum wallboard and lathe and plaster is big, and the leap to a solid brick / cement is massive.
Hard up against wall as mentioned.
KanII stands or SO Wall stands are mandatory.
NO toe in - straight ahead.
Stands need to be tight.
Stands need to be level and NO rocking - must be very solid.
They need a beefy amp.
Mine have been on the end of a Nait 1, 110, 160, 250 and 135's.
The nait, 160 and 135's are/were mine.
The bigger the amp the better with the exception of the 135's. The 250 I feel is better than the 135's. The 135's are tighter and a bit leaner than the 250, hence the voice of the 250 (or 160) seems to match best.
They need a mid-level source at minimum.
They love vinyl and hate any aggressive CD.
Setup can be a bit tedious.
A 1" move can make or break positioning - they can be that picky.
They sound best if after moving them you let them sit and settle for a few minutes.
ie, move them, go have a tea then listen - but only after you have gotten them in the ballpark, otherwise your tea consumption may skyrocket..

Get them right and you will smile until it hurts.
Get them wrong and you will wince because it hurts.

Good luck and have fun!!
 
Mine needed an ever so slight toe in.
But we are talking just a few degrees! Anything more or less sounded completely different.
Fascinating.
 
suzywong said:
Not sure I would agree totally about them sounding "awful" or "hopeless", Tony. I'd done nowt special with mine, but they still sounded pretty damn fine - not perfect, for sure, but not half bad :)
Click to expand...

Surely you had a rear wall directly behind them? They are what is termed a 'half space' design, i.e. they are voiced factoring-in that rear wall bass reinforcement. Move them into free-space and they will sound hopelessly forward and bass-light. They also like their own stands as it is very hard to find other stands that will allow them to go as close to the rear wall as they need to be. Kan stands are designed to allow this flush mounting. There are other things one needs to do, e.g. mounting the speaker plugs at a right-angle, again to facilitate getting them sufficiently close to that back wall. As such they are a speaker with a very tightly defined usage context. FWIW none of this is my opinion, it is how Linn expected their dealers to dem and install them.
 
mykel said:
Have owned a set of Kan1's since new - bought in teh 80's.
I have moved around with them over the years and have learned a few things.

They need a solid wall.
The difference between even gypsum wallboard and lathe and plaster is big, and the leap to a solid brick / cement is massive.
Hard up against wall as mentioned.
KanII stands or SO Wall stands are mandatory.
NO toe in - straight ahead.
Stands need to be tight.
Stands need to be level and NO rocking - must be very solid.
They need a beefy amp.
Mine have been on the end of a Nait 1, 110, 160, 250 and 135's.
The nait, 160 and 135's are/were mine.
The bigger the amp the better with the exception of the 135's. The 250 I feel is better than the 135's. The 135's are tighter and a bit leaner than the 250, hence the voice of the 250 (or 160) seems to match best.
They need a mid-level source at minimum.
They love vinyl and hate any aggressive CD.
Setup can be a bit tedious.
A 1" move can make or break positioning - they can be that picky.
They sound best if after moving them you let them sit and settle for a few minutes.
ie, move them, go have a tea then listen - but only after you have gotten them in the ballpark, otherwise your tea consumption may skyrocket..

Get them right and you will smile until it hurts.
Get them wrong and you will wince because it hurts.

Good luck and have fun!!
Click to expand...

I never fail to be amazed by the things some people will do.
Things are very different with my Spendor BC1s.
The amp. is switched on, a CD or record chosen and I listen to
the music.
 
Don't get me wrong Tony, they sound surprisingly fine away from the wall in my room but feel they are not being used as intended, it feels like they could sound awesome to be honest but i don't really want to throw any money at this in case it doesn't work out, having them close is a no go really in my room but thought i would scratch an itch & have a go, imaging is glorious from these, detail is also top notch, certainly don't sound awful, very clean & expressive with any of my systems in place, bit lean with the Rotel as i expected, Rega added some warmth & smoothness.

The problem i always face is my Castles seem to outperform anything i try in this room, they have all the detail of the kans with extra richness & weight, the Kans are far better at expression though, voices in particular are very good, rhythm is quite addictive too, i did try them close to the wall, bass improved in terms of quantity, but i felt quality suffered a little & they need to be listened to higher up IMO to hear that midrange & top come into focus, the opposite of what i found with some Cura CA5 i had here, needed to be sitting on the floor to get any real focus from them, sound faded a little higher up & became softened out, not with these.

I have a buyer for them & one on standby so no funds lost, all good, glad i tried them.
 
Not dissapointment Gaius, IMO, after experimentation, too much is made of the position thing, all rooms are different & react to speakers very differently due to furnishings, size & shape, to be honest i have purchased something else so the funds will come in handy,

Certainly not dissapointed, see my post above, just feel someone who really wants to set these up as intended will have more joy, i'm fine with my Castle speakers for now but would highly recommend anyone wanting to try a pair, detail is to die for that's for sure, lot's of it & clean as a whistle, i can certainly see what the fuss is about, similar to when i tried a Naim Nait 2 amp, believe the hype on both accounts IMO.
 
One thing to note with Linn Kans is that no pair seems to sound similar. I've had three pairs: 12xxx serials, 15xxx and 31xxx, and all have sounded quite different. I'd say that the Kan folklore is true and the speaker to get is the Scanspeak one and that means pre-24xxx serials. Even 12xxx and 15xxx have different crossovers (Elcap vs Alcap) and cabinet materials (chipboard vs mdf), so they sound different. The chipboard cabinet ones are more lively and I guess the most Kan-like Kans. 15xxx are more refined. 31xxx have the somewhat hollow and nasal quality to vocals usually mentioned by Kan-haters. They have Hiquphons and Wycon caps. Scanspeak Kans have much better bass than the later one and actually weight almost 500g more, even thought the cabinet has identical measurements. This means the mdf on earlier Kans is heavier. I'm currently waiting for a delivery of 10xxx serial Kans and these are the earliest I've seen on ebay (from 1979 or 1980). Interesting to hear how they compare. So far I've liked the 12xxx best.

Kans require a very meticulous care in positioning and even 2mm differences from the rear wall make a difference. They also seem to work the best in rooms where most ported speakers (even small ones) cause boomy bass and they seem to like lively room vs. heavily damped room. So, in many ways they work where normal hifi speakers shouldn't. I love them, they have such a weight in their sound and play very loudly without giving up or congesting, something many larger ported speakers can't do. And they do like CD source too, it just has to be one of the better Naims. ;)
 
@ Ragaman, glad you had a chance to dip your toes in the water, you won't have heard them at their best but you've had a glimpse of what they are about, your comparison with the Nait 2 is spot on, both the Nait and Kan totally justifying the hype they get.

ATB with your system. :)
 
Tony L said:
If you can't get them hard against a rear wall and preferably on Kan II stands then forget it, they are going to sound awful! This is a speaker with a really tightly defined operating environment. When correctly set up they can sound surprisingly good, but cock any aspect up and they will sound pretty hopeless.
Click to expand...

Also they were voiced with analogue sources, I never think they do much that well (even within their limits) with digital and are certainly not tolerant of peaky recordings of which there are too many these days. I don't know if the prices compare, allowing for inflation - what would they cost these days? But with limited space needing a sealed box I'd take Harbeth P3s every time.

Ragaman, the 'vitriol' is probably just a response to the hype. Audio Note speakers are good in confined spaces too.
 
How do Linn speakers since compare in terms of musical enjoyment, i imagine some things may have moved on but after sampling a little of what they are capable of i doubt many newer models by Linn would have the same initial open mouthed response to hearing them for the first time, i was taken aback at the sheer detail on offer, loudness too when compared to my 88.5db castles surprised me a little, i set the volume on the amp the same expecting them to be a little quiter as they are around 83 to 85db, depending on where you read, not so, louder in fact & certainly more propulsive.

I agree above that maybe an analogue source could be best though my CD3.5 which arrived today may have worked better being quite meaty & smooth sounding compared to my humble Rotel.

I think the guy who purchased them today will be very happy if he sets them up with the right system.
 
Ragaman said:
How do Linn speakers since compare in terms of musical enjoyment, i imagine some things may have moved on but after sampling a little of what they are capable of i doubt many newer models by Linn would have the same initial open mouthed response to hearing them for the first time, i was taken aback at the sheer detail on offer, loudness too when compared to my 88.5db castles surprised me a little, i set the volume on the amp the same expecting them to be a little quiter as they are around 83 to 85db, depending on where you read, not so, louder in fact & certainly more propulsive.
Click to expand...
That was a long sentence. The simple answer is "variable". Some are very good, even if somewhat flawed. I had the dubious experience of owning the worst Linn loudspeaker ever, the Nexus. It's hard to imagine how the sublime Kaber could have come from the same stable and era as the awful Nexus.
 
James said:
That was a long sentence. The simple answer is "variable". Some are very good, even if somewhat flawed. I had the dubious experience of owning the worst Linn loudspeaker ever, the Nexus. It's hard to imagine how the sublime Kaber could have come from the same stable and era as the awful Nexus.
Click to expand...

Hurrah someone else who likes the Kaber! Owned the Brik and the Kan very properly, OCD set up and kanned both on account of them being a bit krap really.
 
SteveS1 said:
Also they were voiced with analogue sources, I never think they do much that well (even within their limits) with digital and are certainly not tolerant of peaky recordings of which there are too many these days. I don't know if the prices compare, allowing for inflation - what would they cost these days? But with limited space needing a sealed box I'd take Harbeth P3s every time.
Click to expand...

Yes, I remember a friend popping round with an early budget Philips CD player and a Prince CD and it stripping the paint of the walls. Just awful, though when I got my first CD player, a Rotel RCD965BX, it sounded fine, very similar to my Xerxes to be honest. Rest of system was 62/HiCap/140 at that stage, would have been late '80s. The Kans were MkIIs on MkII stands in the regulation black ash, as was the Xerxes, which even had a black lid. I had a psychopathic black cat to match. I really enjoyed that system, it was about the max I could get away with in a pretty crappy flat without being too much of a PITA to the neighbours. It sounded great on the predominantly indie/Peel/Kraut/electronica type stuff I was into at the time.
 
"Flat Earth", baby!

BTW, whatever happened to FE? I still sort of consider myself in that camp (i.e., I couldn't care less about soundstaging, and 'the groove' is almost everything), despite not owning a turntable.
 
bhazen said:
BTW, whatever happened to FE? I still sort of consider myself in that camp (i.e., I couldn't care less about soundstaging, and 'the groove' is almost everything), despite not owning a turntable.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for others but for me I've found other kit that I feel more natural and real. I found the classic flat earth stuff great fun when I was predominantly a rock fan, it was great with a propulsive 4/4 beat, but throw something slower or more angular at it and I found it far less convincing. I'm now rather suspicious of kit that sounds 'rushed' even if that can be really exciting on certain music. My "problem" is my musical taste is really wide, I'm equally at home with classical, jazz, avant garde as well as rock, soul, funk, reggae, electronica etc etc. I found the Kan system above great on the stuff I was listening to at that time (SST, 4AD, Rough Trade, Warp etc) but fell apart if I threw some classical at it. It was just terrible on opera etc, though not too bad on small scale string quartets etc. I guess I now view jazz as my musical centre-point and go from there in one direction to rock etc and in the other to classical, as such the system seems able to do all things as neither extreme is too much of a stretch. It's not a huge studio monitor thing either (I have Lockwood Tannoys), my little JR149s on the end of a Leak tube amp do a good job across genres too.

PS Sound-staging is all part of realism, so I want that too! I actually got a pretty decent stereo image out of my Linn/Naim kit, heretic that I am.
 
Miles Davis/ Sketches of Spain from Miles Davis
+ a Braun L620 that cost me 30€ in the bay (cost 800 German Mark once)

listen to that against the Kan & you understand what Keith means

I don't wanna spoil any fun, I have the Kan in Walnut, black ash and rosewood + stands
Since 90. (26 years now)

The Kan do very convincing what they do, esp if it suits them well.
Jez once said my Isobariks are shit, kept me wondering what he meant.
Bc you can say whatever you like about him,,,he does know a thing or two.
Either way, I know now bc those 30€ thingees put away my Iso w/o any effort too with the sketches. (ona ExpoX against my 82 3-powersupplys 3amp active ..)
Well, hm. Ok the don't do it with Ramstein, Daft Punk and Wishyouwerehere..sure..


The thing is there's a lot happening inbetween the size of the tweeter and mid of the Iso (or Kan)...they don't get, can't get.
And it's also not possible to tune a chainsaw by upgrading to make it fit for performing something fine like a heart transplant.

There's some things they will ever fail on.
And -of course- some they are really good at the same..

30€ speakers. putting apart a firm believe of 26 years.
I had to go down again when I went to bed and collect my chin from the floor which was still laying where it had dropped to. :)

Either way, it's fun...and learning, or not...but fun.
Cheers. T
 
Ha! Tony, I have your "problem" too. :)

Since getting into hifi, my source has been CD decks - not an LP12 or Rega Planar 3. And I need good instrumental timbre... example: an acoustic guitar must have some 'wood' about it, not just the steely sound of strings scraped by a plectrum.

My current Naim/Russell K setup renders most music pretty convincingly, happy to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top