Bi-amping Kan II

We use the Tune Method to evaluate performance

Moderator: Staff

Post Reply
Allan3630
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2021-02-03 09:16

Bi-amping Kan II

Post by Allan3630 »

I am thinking of adding a Klout amplifier to my setup to be used for bi-amping my Kan II speakers.
Does anyone have experience on this and whether it is worth the investment?

Also, I have read the term "quinwiring" used several times in this forum. Can someone explain what this means and what is required?

Thanks!
anthony
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 786
Joined: 2007-02-04 22:39
Location: UK

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by anthony »

Allan3630 wrote: 2021-02-22 05:08 I am thinking of adding a Klout amplifier to my setup to be used for bi-amping my Kan II speakers.
Does anyone have experience on this and whether it is worth the investment?

Also, I have read the term "quinwiring" used several times in this forum. Can someone explain what this means and what is required?

Thanks!
No, not worth the investment.
Quinn wiring is running 5 sets of speaker cables to each speaker, this is only appropriate with 5 way speakers such as akurate 242 or akubarik, and is also a backward step.
Assuming you have the best source, a klimax twin or lejonklou tundra would be a far better idea.
Allan3630
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2021-02-03 09:16

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by Allan3630 »

that is great. Thanks for the quick feedback! That just saved me a bit. I am afraid I cannot afford the Klimax twin. I am not familiar with the Lejonklou Tundra but I guess it is in the same price league.

What about bi-wiring from the one Klout?
I had the kan's bi-wired with kimber cables and then went back to K20 and found the sound, oddly enough, better.
anthony
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 786
Joined: 2007-02-04 22:39
Location: UK

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by anthony »

Allan3630 wrote: 2021-02-22 08:52 that is great. Thanks for the quick feedback! That just saved me a bit. I am afraid I cannot afford the Klimax twin. I am not familiar with the Lejonklou Tundra but I guess it is in the same price league.

What about bi-wiring from the one Klout?
I had the kan's bi-wired with kimber cables and then went back to K20 and found the sound, oddly enough, better.
Im not surprised, k20 is way better than kimber. You should investigate tundra, no it isn't in the same price league, the stereo retails at 2700gbp, s/h versions of latest spec 1700 upwards.
Not over bothered about bi wiring either, it would be more impressive, but less musical.
You could try k400, this is better than k20, it's a bi wire cable, but can be split into two, if you search it on this forum you will find the importance of plugs and soldering, and the length not less than 2.48m can make differences.
rootola
Member
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 2011-05-16 21:58

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by rootola »

In an all Linn LK era system I single and bi-amped with Klouts and thought the second Klout added a fair bit. I lived with that system for a long time and loved it. It was probably excessive and not an optimal spend system wise - but Klouts seem to be pretty stable in price so cost of ownership can be very low.

Later, I added a DS and Chakra Twin non dynamik and I think I remember that as the best marriage overall. Amp wise, it wasn't vastly more expensive second hand than the two Klouts at the time.

Later, solo's were better again with incredible bass depth, but the speed and air of the Twin just seemed to hit the sweet spot.

Before selling the Klouts, I put them back in with the KDS, KK and Kans to demo them to the buyer and I realised how well they held themselves with more recent equipment.

One Klout is a great match however - and Kan II is certainly my favourite version. Of 5 pairs of the years, the Kan II (Kustone) ones are the pair I kept. I do believe each version was an improvement, including build - with the gaskets and improved finish on the rear etc. I have not tried the active Kans however - and Linn don't seem keen to measure Kans for sound optimisation either. Perhaps banned!
KDSM Organik Slim - Solo - Ninka
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by Charlie1 »

I think they only sold a handful of active Kans and don't think the original designer is all that keen on them, so I've kind of stayed away from converting Kan IIs to active - it seems you hear the downsides of the KEF driver all too clearly. My dealer thinks he's knows a collector with a pair but that's the only lead I've ever had and never seen a pair on ebay - I think the terminals are all in-line rather than 2-up / 2-down like the Kan 2.

I've had one pair of Kustone and they were quite boring but, with speakers this old, there's now quite a variation and perhaps they were not very well looked after, although I seem to recall Fredrik thought the same when he once heard a pair. I have now found a decent pair of Kan 2s, after some failed attempts, but they are pre-Kustone. No doubt I'll try some Kustones again some day especially after reading your comments. Agree that Kan IIs sound less quacky. Not had a chance to compare them to my mk 1s but I expect the mk 1s to be more musical. We'll have to see - no doubt I'll put clips up when the time comes.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by Charlie1 »

I did a very brief comparison last night, just using a Planar 2 deck. Found my mk 1s more musical and the mk 2s more neutral as expected. Surprisingly, I thought the timing of the mk 2s was more 'on it'. I know the treble unit is mounted further forward in the Kan 2 and that's supposed to bring the drivers into better time alignment. I guess it worked :)
rootola
Member
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 2011-05-16 21:58

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by rootola »

Thanks - that is interesting information on the Kan listening test.

I kind of enjoy that the Kan is a somewhat divisive speaker - yet, so popular overall. It must have sold pretty well and converted many people to Linn. (It did for me.) Part of their appeal is their 'turn heads' connection they make with a listener and their neat practicality of close to wall placement which in so many homes is non-negotiable.

To be fair, I have not tried all Kan versions within the same system at the same time, so my comparisons are limited in that respect. There are certainly various iterations of Kan 1 too which are surely significant too. I would enjoy doing the full bake-off on different era systems.

Sadly, the current Linn passive speaker range is tiny compared to their extensive amp and DS options. It would be interesting to see if/how they fill this gap in the future. With Selekt housing up to 6 channels of power amp, it would make sense to have 2 or 3 way passive speakers with easy aktiv conversion, suited to surround etc, pitched somewhere above Majik and I guess now in place of the Akurate passives too. (Linn's savings for no longer selling the Akurate passive variants must be minimal and at the cost of product line-up coherence.)

Like many, I've just always wanted to hear a 'super Kan' - the same infinite baffle concept etc but updated to latest spec with no compromise in form or finish. Maybe one for Frederik..
KDSM Organik Slim - Solo - Ninka
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Re: Bi-amping Kan II

Post by Charlie1 »

rootola wrote: 2021-03-03 20:31 Like many, I've just always wanted to hear a 'super Kan' - the same infinite baffle concept etc but updated to latest spec with no compromise in form or finish. Maybe one for Frederik..
Absolutely. Also agree on less drive units especially that super tweeter.
Post Reply