advertisement


A review of the Linn Kan II speakers

davidsrsb said:
The Kan II is supposed to be 6R8 minimum and as it is a sealed design, should not be too cable sensitive.
The MK1 and 2 have very different voicing, the 2 being far more neutral
Click to expand...

Yes indeed, the MkII has a far superior crossover and is excellent.

I strongly disliked the original Kan but loved the MkII.

To the OP, I wouldn't run Kans with thin solid core, even regular 79 strand or 2.5mm figure 8 will work very well.
 
Best Kans I ever heard were a scruffy '86 pair I had on some Kan II stands with an Exposure Super XV. They only sounded amazing in one particular room and I've never heard a pair sound better.

FWIW, I used the standard chunky stranded cabletalk cable that was indistinguishable from the offerings from Naim and Exposure.
 
Robert said:
To the OP, I wouldn't run Kans with thin solid core, even regular 79 strand or 2.5mm figure 8 will work very well.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the suggestion. I am running them with the DNM and really enjoying their sound. However, other cables are also sounding good. Following your 79 strand suggestion....I also have the Virtue audio Nirvana, a thick multi strand copper wire and I'm not finding a significant difference in the Kan 2's behavior, at least significant enough to be able to write about. I do hear the different sound signatures of the cables though.
I'll keep listening.

Since I had my Kan Is, I changed my amplification to a much beefier and more transparent set up. I think there is a great synergy between these components and the Kan IIs. I wish I could have heard my Kan Is with the same set-up. I might have had more success. I ran those on a Quad 909.
 
foxwelljsly said:
Best Kans I ever heard were a scruffy '86 pair I had on some Kan II stands with an Exposure Super XV
Click to expand...
Yes, I ran Farlowe Exposure amplification for more than 20 years and I can see how it would work well with the Kans. I keep wishing I had all my long-gone equipment in a nice neat accessible cupboard, to pull out at will and play around with. Especially since, over time, it has become desirable 'vintage'.
 
foxwelljsly said:
Best Kans I ever heard were a scruffy '86 pair I had on some Kan II stands with an Exposure Super XV. They only sounded amazing in one particular room and I've never heard a pair sound better.
Click to expand...

I ran black Kan 2s on Exposure XV for about 15 years and that was great with Valhalla LP12 - much less so via CD.

Prefer Kan 1s now though and own 2 pairs but always with vinyl. They sound quite differnet to one another but both are more exciting and alive than Kan 2s - I had kustone and non-kustone 2s until recently. In fact, if the OP purchased a kustone pair on ebay then he probably bought mine as they were superb condition.

Lastly, prefer K20 to K200/K400/NAC-A5 but I'm in the minority there :)
 
In fact it was me who bought your kustone Kans Charlie, and they were indeed in lovely condition. But on comparing them to a pair of late mk1s with the flush fitting sockets (ser. nos. 38000 odds)I have sold them on. The earlier ones were light years better. They just boogie along and have far greater presence and dynamics. It was all diluted on the mk2s. In fact so big was the difference I was amazed as it was like listening to two completely different speaker designs, which is strange as they have the same drivers. Will never sell the older pair.
 
Bob B. said:
But on comparing them to a pair of late mk1s with the flush fitting sockets (ser. nos. 38000 odds)I have sold them on
Click to expand...
Bob, My Mk Is were just as you describe, including similar serial numbers, 38XXX. Not successful for me, but I'm glad you have success with them. What amp are you using?
 
I have two pairs of Kans; active Mk 2's down stairs in the main system and passive Mk1's in the office system upstairs. I use Atlas hyper bi-wire in the active system, which is quite expensive, but TBH, I quite like Linn K20 and that's what I use with the Mk 1's.
 
I actually bought the kustone ones with the intention of making them active. But so far ahead were the mk1s I began to wonder why. I thought was it the fact the baffles are different which changed the resonant frequency of the cabinet? Did the kustone also screw things up? Was it because the later ones had gaskets and weren't sealed as well,? In the end I thought I would just keep the pair that makes the most music. Maybe there are huge variables depending on who built them.
 
Bob B. said:
In fact it was me who bought your kustone Kans Charlie, and they were indeed in lovely condition. But on comparing them to a pair of late mk1s with the flush fitting sockets (ser. nos. 38000 odds)I have sold them on. The earlier ones were light years better. They just boogie along and have far greater presence and dynamics. It was all diluted on the mk2s. In fact so big was the difference I was amazed as it was like listening to two completely different speaker designs, which is strange as they have the same drivers. Will never sell the older pair.
Click to expand...
Cool!
Yes, this is exactly my experience too. And it's not just the kustone model. Earlier this year I had the non-kustone and it was the same story. I was very surprised as well.

You have the Kan 1 variant I am yet to try and want to get as well. I have a rosewood pair with original drivers and a teak pair with the updated tweeter only. They sound surprisingly different.
 
That's good to know it is not just the kustone ones Charlie. I will cross all mk2s of my list now. Tbh I have had them all over the last 40 years or so, but it was the first chance I had to compare them. These ones are keepers. I actually bought them on here.
 
Bob B. said:
In fact it was me who bought your kustone Kans Charlie, and they were indeed in lovely condition. But on comparing them to a pair of late mk1s with the flush fitting sockets (ser. nos. 38000 odds)I have sold them on. The earlier ones were light years better. They just boogie along and have far greater presence and dynamics. It was all diluted on the mk2s. In fact so big was the difference I was amazed as it was like listening to two completely different speaker designs, which is strange as they have the same drivers. Will never sell the older pair.
Click to expand...

Didn't the early flush speaker plugs have Scanspeak tweeter, later ones (stick out plugs)inc Mk2 had Hiquphon?
 
ampedup said:
No, I didn't get your pair, but I hope you got a good price for them!
Click to expand...
Based on some of the crazy Kan prices on ebay right now then probably not but it was buy it now and at least I covered my costs.

Glad you're enjoying your Kan 2s so much btw. Have fun!
 
Charlie. Which do you prefer. The rosewood scanspeak pair or the teak hiquiphon pair? I believe the bass unit changed to the longer throw one around ser. 33000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top