advertisement


Kan you name your favourite?

N

novak

pfm Member
So I'm sitting here on this fine evening, enjoying some recently purchase Kan Mk2 Kustone editions on the end of my Naim Nait 1.

Also in the room are some early Kan Mk1 (with the binding posts) as a very viable contender. The traits are quite distinguishable, as many have documented - the Mk1 are intense, lively, edgy, whilst the Mk2 are less so, with a smoother and more relaxed presentation. They're kind of closer to my Harbeth P3ESR in my main system, although not as smooth or refined but hugely enjoyable. So far, my vote out of the two Kan models is going to the Mk2 which may be controversial.

There are a few iterations of the early (Mk1&2) Kans, and I'm wondering what's your favourite vintage and why?
 
My vote out of the Kans I've owned/heard is for the final spec Ku-Stone Kan II. It sounds more normal/less coloured than the MkIs I've heard and definitely better if you listen to any jazz, classical etc. The only caveat is I've never knowingly heard the very early MkI with the Scanspeak tweeter and proper LS3/5A cabs, they have a reputation of being The Ones.
 
As many of you know I love the Kan speaker and have had many of them over the years.

I currently have three sets of MKIs, two in the s/n19XXX and one 16XXX.

I do prefer the MKI, it is so fast and so lively it just draws you in.

Not for everyone and best on rock and pop.

The MKII is more balanced but IMO loses part of the appeal, still a great little speaker though if not a magical one.
 
Having owned most era of Kan at one point in time, i'd say i like them less the younger they are. The best i owned were around serial number 17xxx, my current ones are 41xxx and lastly the Ku Stone version (as well as many others). I think if you like what a Kan does then earlier the better to a degree so long as they are in good order. They were progressively dumbed down to suit Linn amps and to be less demanding. Along the way they lost a little magic, although still very good IMO.
 
Interesting, and I agree the Mk2 are certainly a tame version. I haven't heard a normal set of Mk2, only the Kustone Mk2 which to me sound like a very balanced design in comparison, but still have the thrills.

My Mk1 are serial 012959. I can't find whether they're the very first batch. Any ideas? Seems the history pages don't specify serial numbers for the first two iterations.
 
Kan, introduced 1979, discontinued 1993

KU-STONE Fitted to speakers, units now fitted with gaskets instead of silicone. (Upgrade not retrofittable) Sept.91 48,489/90
Crossover: Revision no. changed to PCAS 134/L4R4 Mar. 1989 42,601/2
Kan II:
Kan II introduced. Incorporates changes to crossover; bi-wired option; change in position of treble unit. Jan. 1989 41,905/6
Crossover: Capacitors improved to Bennic type. Feb. 1988 39,005/6
Bass Unit: Improved performance. Dec. 1985 33,005/6
Sockets: Changed to Linn 4 mm metal socket. Crossover change. Feb. 1985 26,791/2
Treble Unit: Smoother response. Linn logo incorporated on front plate. Crossover revision. May 1984 24,077/8
Crossover: Resistor added in parallel to treble coil. Feb. 1983 20,005/6
Unit Damping: Unit painted with sound deadening material.
Cabinet: Material changed to medite. May 1982 19,153/4
Drive Units: Bass units painted with sound deadening paint - silicone sealant Mar. 1982 18,501/2

Cabinet: Damped with KuStone and drive units are mounted with discrete gaskets instead of mastic. This was the final incarnation of the Kan. Sep 1991 48489
MajorRevision: Kan II introduced: this involved a change to a biwirable crossover (with 4 sockets) and a move in the tweeter positioning (mounted 7mm more forward than before on an substantially improved front baffle). Jan 1989
Bass Unit: Change to new long throw low frequency driver Kef B110B. May 1985
Connections: Changed from binding posts to the new style 4mm sockets. Feb 1985
Tweeters: Change to Hiquphone tweeters, which gave a flatter response. Having the Linn logo printed on the front plate, along with "LINN PRODUCTS" identifies these. The plate also has 2 concentric circles printed on it. May 1984 24077
Cabinets: Changed to Medite cabinet and began doping the B110 with some sticky black mastic for damping purposes. 1982
Introduction: Scanspeak tweeter. Original unmodified KEF B110 bass drivers. Cabinet essentially made of chipboard. The speaker used 4mm binding posts. Pre 1982
 
Thanks, so my Mk1 must be the first version. If so I have the first of the Mk1 and last of the Mk2. Good to know.
 
There is something missing with that list (aside from formatting). As I understand it the first Kans were built into LS3/5A cabs that Linn bought when Chartwell went under, so they'd have been very high quality plywood, certainly not chipboard! These, the first of the Mk1s, have a reputation for being the best of the lot. I wonder if these had the LS3/5A variant of the B110 too? The only Kan 1s I ever had at home were both a fairly late pair with the Hiquphone tweeter, and I preferred my IIs to them.
 
The above Kan history isn't actually totally accurate as 15xxx Kans already have the medite cabinet and B110 chassis painted with damping paint.

I've had four pairs of Kan1's. The best pair was the earliest 10xxx pair with chipboard cabinet, best quality pair of B110s, Scanspeaks, LS3/5 type beech battens and Linn Sara crossover with Elcaps. The second best was a 12xxx pair which was the same except it had dedicated Linn Kan crossover board with Elcaps and regular wood battens (note that LS3/5 designers tested different kind of battens). These chipboard Kans are the most exciting and lively. They also do not have that much colouration IMO (compared to average Kans). The 15xxx Kans have the dampening tweaks, Alcap caps and medite cabinet. These have more rounded presentation, but they also go deeper in the bass and with little bit more impact. They aren't as lively, fast and transparent though. The 31xxx pair I had has a medite cabinet, but is 0,5kg lighter, so the medite is of poorer quality. They also have poorer quality B110 (you can see that just by comparing the looks), Hiquphon tweeters, Wycon caps and sockets instead of binding posts. The whole cabinet inside is painted by black tar paint. These Kans are clearly coloured and lack any decent bass. Still pretty exciting though, but get nowhere near where a good pair can go. All my Kans have had a different kind of wool stuffing, so this also can influence the sound.

All pre-silicon sealed Kans probably leak around the baffle edges as the pre-silicone sealer, a yellow mastic, tends to crack as it ages, so they greatly benefit from sealing the baffle edges from the outside. After this, the quality (and quantity) of bass is astounding. It's a big sound with zero overhang. There is nothing like a properly sealed chipboard Kan in good nick.
 
OracleFi said:
The above Kan history isn't actually totally accurate as 15xxx Kans already have the medite cabinet and B110 chassis painted with damping paint.

I've had four pairs of Kan1's. The best pair was the earliest 10xxx pair with chipboard cabinet, best quality pair of B110s, Scanspeaks, LS3/5 type beech battens and Linn Sara crossover with Elcaps. The second best was a 12xxx pair which was the same except it had dedicated Linn Kan crossover board with Elcaps and regular wood battens (note that LS3/5 designers tested different kind of battens). These chipboard Kans are the most exciting and lively. They also do not have that much colouration IMO (compared to average Kans). The 15xxx Kans have the dampening tweaks, Alcap caps and medite cabinet. These have more rounded presentation, but they also go deeper in the bass and with little bit more impact. They aren't as lively, fast and transparent though. The 31xxx pair I had has a medite cabinet, but is 0,5kg lighter, so the medite is of poorer quality. They also have poorer quality B110 (you can see that just by comparing the looks), Hiquphon tweeters, Wycon caps and sockets instead of binding posts. The whole cabinet inside is painted by black tar paint. These Kans are clearly coloured and lack any decent bass. Still pretty exciting though, but get nowhere near where a good pair can go. All my Kans have had a different kind of wool stuffing, so this also can influence the sound.

All pre-silicon sealed Kans probably leak around the baffle edges as the pre-silicone sealer, a yellow mastic, tends to crack as it ages, so they greatly benefit from sealing the baffle edges from the outside. After this, the quality (and quantity) of bass is astounding. It's a big sound with zero overhang. There is nothing like a properly sealed chipboard Kan in good nick.
Click to expand...

Thanks, useful info!
 
Talking about Kan vintages, I decided to update an early mk1 pair with modern drive units.

I changed the bass units to new Falcon B110s and tweeters to new Hiquphon OW1s. I have to say that these transform Kan to something even more special if also less vintage sounding. Especially the tweeters are absolutely great and go very well with the Falcons. I originally had Falcons with the original Scanspeak tweeters and it sounded good, but somewhat odd, especially with vocals. I wouldn't recommend changing the bass units to new B110s if you do not also change the tweeters. I also did the Linn tweaks to the new Falcon B110s just to be sure. I don't know if these really change the sound as they appear to be quite minor, just some cooling holes to the inside cone and few plates of aluminium to the chassis.

End result is the Kan sound with more neutral balance and more weight to the sound. I didn't touch the crossover however as I believe the old black Elcaps are somewhat responsible for the original exciting early Kan sound and even the later blue Alcaps tend to civilize the Kan somewhat. An effect I don't particularly care for.
 
Late Kan II just before the KuStone thing.
Compared them to the later one-on-one and prefered the earlier version.
 
OracleFi said:
All pre-silicon sealed Kans probably leak around the baffle edges as the pre-silicone sealer, a yellow mastic, tends to crack as it ages, so they greatly benefit from sealing the baffle edges from the outside.
Click to expand...

Ah, I wonder if this is why mine don't sound as good as they once did.

Tim
 
onlyconnect said:
Ah, I wonder if this is why mine don't sound as good as they once did.

Tim
Click to expand...

You can actually test this quite easily. Use a vacuum cleaner and hold it at the edge of the baffle (hold it in different places) for some time. Do not touch the drivers. If the bass unit moves inwards because of the suction, the edges leak. The later Kans used a silicone sealant, so these might not suffer as much. The yellow mastic used in early mk1 Kans definately hardens and cracks, and as such developes leaks. Sealing improves the sound considerably, especially bass weight.
 
Having owned Kans mk1 in the past I found them playing way beyond their measurements - very involving playback - only that bass (what bass? :D) was a bit dissapointing ...




... maybe I should add that previous speakers were Keltiks :p
 
A few months on, still enjoying both the early Mk 1 and late Mk 2 Kustone.

Really not sure which I like best. I think the Kustone get the most airtime, but an occasional blast on the Mk 1 brings you to the edge of your seat a bit more. Really depends on the mood, and the taste for black ash vs teak!

I might move a pair on at some point. Currently have 4 sets of speakers - Harbeth P3ESR, two sets of Kans and Royd Minstrel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top