Kii Three

[Axel]

They have DAC/amps inbuilt. Presumably a separate DAC can be used (and was, as mentioned a couple of posts ago of course) but would be a little pointless bypassing the amps (if even possible).

The Kiis have an analogue input and can be driven by the Pre Out on the D200/400/800

[sleach]

These speakers look like an exciting proposition!

It's sort of hard to see why you would use devialet to feed Kii's. Putzeys is a very talented designer so I'd suggest using his built in DAC and put resources into giving it the best digital signal.

Just my two cents!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wikeeboy]

I'm very excited and intrigued about the Kii's. I hear they are amazing.. the only downfall is whilst the bass is flat to 20hz and sounds great, you don't feel the impact due to the smallish drivers.

As for using a Devialet into the Kii's that would be a pretty bad idea IMO. Using the Devialet analogue out isn't the best way to use it, and sending the Kii an analogue signal is also not the best way to use that!

[GTX]

Listened to a Kii demo at this weekend's Paris audio show. I had high expectations given the press and the excitement from the likes of 6 moons. The demo was properly done in a 6x4 room, speakers 3m away from listening position, fed by an expensive metronome digital player. I listen to 3 main systems at home: Devialet 250 + Lawrence audio double bass, aura note v2 + boenicke w5 SE, 2 phantom silver. Obviously I would not compare the Kii to the first system, abyssal differences both in terms of SQ and price. Compared to the other 2 solutions (respectively 9K and 4K euro), the 10k Kii falls shorts on almost everything except the look (the paint quality is stunning). Sound is flat, very directional, soundstage is limited, bass extended but lacks vividness, the overall experience lacked soul. this was obtained with premium quality cabling as wireless not available yet. Good luck to them but at this stage is not an attractive proposition.

[sleach]

Sound is flat, very directional, soundstage is limited, bass extended but lacks vividness, the overall experience lacked soul.

Thanks for the write-up. Sounds like they might be really well suited for production work - though they would be an expensive option in that market.

I have phantoms so I know how they sound. Could you elaborate on the differences you picked up there? And I'm really interested your thoughts on the Boenickes. Very tempted to invest in a pair for my other system.

[EvPa]

Sounds like they might be really well suited for production work - though they would be an expensive option in that market.

Eh, it's not like some ADAM Audio S7A Mk2s or PMC QB1-As can be had for chump change.

[GTX]

Boenicke w5se (these have a different sub than the normal model, more adapted to larger rooms - amplified with April audio viva 2), compared to phantom...both are very fine, wife friendly, musical solutions. Devialet stronger on dynamics, deeper bass. Boenicke have a larger/better defined soundstage, sound is less analytical/more lushious, great ambience retrieval (probably due to their rear facing tweeter). Speaker setting is critical on both to get the best SQ. both enjoy 1m distance from back wall, Phantom on stand fully toed in to listening position, whilst Boenicke need minor toe in (in my room woofer inside works better but you should try both). One last point, the Boenicke potential with serious amplification is stunning... The Devialet 250 upgrades the performance considerable, I heard it in Munich driven by high end Serbian valve pre/amp and it rivaled my main system across the board.
Enjoy!

[runlonger]

Boenicke w5se (these have a different sub than the normal model, more adapted to larger rooms - amplified with April audio viva 2), compared to phantom...both are very fine, wife friendly, musical solutions. Devialet stronger on dynamics, deeper bass. Boenicke have a larger/better defined soundstage, sound is less analytical/more lushious, great ambience retrieval (probably due to their rear facing tweeter). Speaker setting is critical on both to get the best SQ. both enjoy 1m distance from back wall, Phantom on stand fully toed in to listening position, whilst Boenicke need minor toe in (in my room woofer inside works better but you should try both). One last point, the Boenicke potential with serious amplification is stunning... The Devialet 250 upgrades the performance considerable, I heard it in Munich driven by high end Serbian valve pre/amp and it rivaled my main system across the board.  
Enjoy!

On monday the SAM Profile of Boenicke W5se and W8 will be available :-)

[AaronG]

This is really interesting. I just switched from using a pair of German Physics as my primary speakers to a pair of Grimm LS1s. The Grimms are obviously quite different from the KII's but they share a designer, amplifiers and from the looks of it a tweeter. When I started listening to the Grimms I was both amazed by the amount of detail and horrified by the fact that some of the recordings that sounded so immersive on the GPs sounded so comparatively cold. I realized that what I was responding to was partly the ambient room reflection and midrange forwardness. Listening to really flat speakers is a very different experience. But the reward is that different music, and differently recorded music, sounds very different. With ambient room reflection it all sounds great but it all sort of sounds the same great. There are lots of classical recordings that didn't draw me in before but now are totally captivating because the dynamics and tone color is accurate. And what sounded clinical to me initially now doesn't sound that way at all, but I feel what is emotionally engaging is not a homogenizing artifact of the reproduction system. The KII's may just not be good, but if they are like the Grimms then you have to get used to listening to them on a wide range of music over a period of time. They don't have an immediate wow factor like my Harbeths did, or the GPs, or a whole bunch of other speakers I have listened to. But they are a different league of non-hi fi better (for me).

[Johnnydev]

This is really interesting. I just switched from using a pair of German Physics as my primary speakers to a pair of Grimm LS1s. The Grimms are obviously quite different from the KII's but they share a designer, amplifiers and from the looks of it a tweeter. When I started listening to the Grimms I was both amazed by the amount of detail and horrified by the fact that some of the recordings that sounded so immersive on the GPs sounded so comparatively cold. I realized that what I was responding to was partly the ambient room reflection and midrange forwardness. Listening to really flat speakers is a very different experience. But the reward is that different music, and differently recorded music, sounds very different. With ambient room reflection it all sounds great but it all sort of sounds the same great. There are lots of classical recordings that didn't draw me in before but now are totally captivating because the dynamics and tone color is accurate. And what sounded clinical to me initially now doesn't sound that way at all, but I feel what is emotionally engaging is not a homogenizing artifact of the reproduction system. The KII's may just not be good, but if they are like the Grimms then you have to get used to listening to them on a wide range of music over a period of time. They don't have an immediate wow factor like my Harbeths did, or the GPs, or a whole bunch of other speakers I have listened to. But they are a different league of non-hi fi better (for me).

And you are talking now about a system > 25000 euro or what?