It's arguably the best-gen krk rokit to date, but it lacks a lot of what Neuman has to spare: speed of response in transitions, deep, defined bass, and detailed highs. It is not a versus, it is an excitement how much he improved. Thanks for the video .
I wish in these comparisons they would include a low frequency decay chart as well. You can hear how much sloppier the low end is, but when you see the 3D response curve actually charted out, you can really appreciate just how long it takes for some speakers to return to zero when reproducing lower frequencies. The short decay time is why people have preferred the NS10s for decades, even though they may not be the most pleasing to listen to for long periods.
@@PaulEubanks A much-ignored truth about the Ns10 and some passive speakers, the ns10 and the bower & wilkins 802 d2 strike me as the best passive hi-fi speakers for that fast, dynamic response across all frequency ranges and of course the range. half. . namely. so hard to master, but you have to have minimal acoustics in the room. Today I think that history repeats itself with the presonus eris 3.5 due to the genres and sound design of these new generations, as well as its economical price as the yamaha ns10 were at the time. I am not complicated with the low frequencies because for me they are monaural, it is enough for me to listen to them on my sennheiser 650 hd to avoid false hopes that a medium or low cost studio monitor will give the correct response on the lows or lows. medium-low. These Krk rokit g4 do their job although they would be my second reference
If there wasn't so much subjectivity and personal preference in "HIFI", it would probably gradually lead us to monitors like the G. 8020D and the N. KH80 DSP. I feel that these monitors will guide a person to a " Golden Mean" and help reveal the shortcomings of their current favorites. The joke is that these shortcomings may not be relevant to a particular listener, and that's the interesting part :) Thanks for your hard work, DSA.r :)
The Neumann is a better monitor in this case. Much more balanced and precise. The Krk is impressive by how much it does (and how close it gets) for a fraction of the price.
The Rokit takes it this time. And please DS, bring back Metal Head, its not that I like metal at all but that song really showcases what a speaker is really capable of.
Man On Fire works equally well for that IMO. Metal Head is not going anywhere, it will be used intechangeably with Man On Fire just as it was done in the past
@@DSAUDIOreview maybe its just me but Metal Head is a more dynamic and complex track. It also shows how well a pair of speaker is able to pan and fade. Oh well, Man On Fire will do. 😂
This is not a great comparasion! Neumann kh80 is much more expensive speaker then Krk rokit. Rokit is Krk's worst line of speakers:) I've had their Krk V4S4 which is their best lineup and 4inch cone different world to rokit. So try to loan them and compare them again with Neumann kh80. If people already write that Krk is better I'm curious what would they write if they hear real proper pro speaker from Krk :)
The krk has to mich Bass Thats the Problem of every krk speaker Someone People like but i think it’s to much behause you cant reale Producer every Typ of Musik 😊
krk has the right frequency response but missing the depth, its a case of you get what you pay for, krk cannot compete but they do a good job fooling idiots who think they can.
@@jenshuxley The depth of the bass is not identified with the presence of subharmonics or reflections that they generated in old versions; they are appreciated with the time that the reproduction lasts and the dynamic transition that exists in low frequencies.
@Jens Huxley 1 dB or 2 dB make a lot of difference, transitions, dynamics, attack and release . If you do not understand what I mean, find out how sound works and why flat monitors cannot exist in frequencies. I'm not a fan of brands, I only recognize the good and the bad
