Linn 119 & 150 Loudspeakers

[Spannko]

Details of the new Linn loudspeakers have been released today.

119 From £2500 + £300 for the stands. https://www.linn.co.uk/uk/speakers/119


150 From £5500. https://www.linn.co.uk/uk/speakers/150

[Charlie1]

I think they look pretty neat, especially the 119.

No analogue active option which is a shame for some 109 owners.

[sunbeamgls]

Downward ports on 150 are interesting.
Rearward port on 119 removes one of the 109's more helpful features in small rooms.

[Charlie1]

Not sure my 109s were very much closer to the rear wall than Katans tbh...

[Zee9]

I’m told that the 150’s sound better than the older 242’s.

[martijn1001]

Sure look pretty! 150 only 21KG. Same weight as 140. Mass is a big plus for speakers afaik.

[markiteight]

Sure look pretty! 150 only 21KG. Same weight as 140. Mass is a big plus for speakers afaik.

It's been my experience that there is no correlation between a speaker's mass and its musical performance. Indeed, most speakers that are designed to be as solid, heavy, and sonically inert as possible end up not only dampening resonances, but sucking the life out of the music as well.

[Spannko]

In my experience, the enclosure is the most difficult part of a loudspeaker to design. Despite what the manufacturer’s marketing departments may say, there’s no such thing as an inert enclosure, at any price, and each enclosures resonant character has a significant affect on a loudspeaker’s sound and musicality. (I think the ideal could be an infinitely stiff enclosure of infinitely low mass, which is obviously impossible)*

Increasing mass/stiffness tends to solidify the sound (within limits), but as markiteight suggests, each incremental increase tends to produce a corresponding decrease in musicality. Is it mass or stiffness which causes the problem? For various reasons I think it’s both, with the possibility that stiffness is the greater culprit, contrary to the perceived hifi wisdom, with mass still playing a substantial role. I’m carrying out a few experiments over the coming weeks which will hopefully help me to understand more about the relationship between mass, stiffness and musicality.

* EDIT: This isn’t correct. I’m so used to thinking about box designs, I completely forgot that the ideal is probably an infinitely large, infinitely stiff, infinitely low mass, infinite baffle. All loudspeaker designs are just a workable approximation of this.

[Rutger]

In my experience, the enclosure is the most difficult part of a loudspeaker to design. Despite what the manufacturer’s marketing departments may say, there’s no such thing as an inert enclosure, at any price, and each enclosures resonant character has a significant affect on a loudspeaker’s sound and musicality. I think the ideal could be an infinitely stiff enclosure of infinitely low mass, which is obviously impossible.

Increasing mass/stiffness tends to solidify the sound (within limits), but as markiteight suggests, each incremental increase tends to produce a corresponding decrease in musicality. Is it mass or stiffness which causes the problem? For various reasons I think it’s both, with the possibility that stiffness is the greater culprit, contrary to the perceived hifi wisdom, with mass still playing a substantial role. I’m carrying out a few experiments over the coming weeks which will hopefully help me to understand more about the relationship between mass, stiffness and musicality.

Wise words Spannko.

The box is really the component that affects the sound and musicality very much. It is important to avoid tuning fork colorations that blur the clarity of the pitch, while some coloration (high Q higher in frequency) is good for improving the illusion of a live performance, because the stereo system is a mediocre method and is not close to being able sound as good as a real live performance in a concert hall.

Rounded enclosures like in the flagship 360 are nice which the new 119 and 150 don't have, but I guess the cost would have been higher with such a box.

The 150 model is interesting because it appears to be a true 3-way speaker with a lower crossover frequency between the mid-bass and the woofer than usual for such a speaker. Probably because listening tests have shown that it sounds better. The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !) so it might be a very undertuned bass tube system that behaves almost like a closed box but will have the benefit of the back pressure from the tubes keeping the bass cones in check at very low frequencies. Not 100% sure about this implementation though. I may be wrong on this.

The 119 can be active with the dsp option to have the box closed for faster bass transients ( a kind of Linkwitz transformer for the bass is my guess. )

[El Mero Mero]

The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !)

Where did you find this?

[TMV]

The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !)

Where did you find this?

Should be 38Hz (-6dB)

[Spannko]

Wise words Spannko.

The box is really the component that affects the sound and musicality very much. It is important to avoid tuning fork colorations that blur the clarity of the pitch, while some coloration (high Q higher in frequency) is good for improving the illusion of a live performance, because the stereo system is a mediocre method and is not close to being able sound as good as a real live performance in a concert hall.

Rounded enclosures like in the flagship 360 are nice which the new 119 and 150 don't have, but I guess the cost would have been higher with such a box.

The 150 model is interesting because it appears to be a true 3-way speaker with a lower crossover frequency between the mid-bass and the woofer than usual for such a speaker. Probably because listening tests have shown that it sounds better. The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !) so it might be a very undertuned bass tube system that behaves almost like a closed box but will have the benefit of the back pressure from the tubes keeping the bass cones in check at very low frequencies. Not 100% sure about this implementation though. I may be wrong on this.

The 119 can be active with the dsp option to have the box closed for faster bass transients ( a kind of Linkwitz transformer for the bass is my guess. )

Thanks Rutger. Can you explain what you mean by tuning fork colourations please. That’s a phrase that I haven’t heard before.

[Rutger]

The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !)

Where did you find this?

Should be 38Hz (-6dB)

Could be correct.
Maybe I got the wrong information.

[Rutger]

Wise words Spannko.

The box is really the component that affects the sound and musicality very much. It is important to avoid tuning fork colorations that blur the clarity of the pitch, while some coloration (high Q higher in frequency) is good for improving the illusion of a live performance, because the stereo system is a mediocre method and is not close to being able sound as good as a real live performance in a concert hall.

Rounded enclosures like in the flagship 360 are nice which the new 119 and 150 don't have, but I guess the cost would have been higher with such a box.

The 150 model is interesting because it appears to be a true 3-way speaker with a lower crossover frequency between the mid-bass and the woofer than usual for such a speaker. Probably because listening tests have shown that it sounds better. The spec is bass from 8 Hz ( !) so it might be a very undertuned bass tube system that behaves almost like a closed box but will have the benefit of the back pressure from the tubes keeping the bass cones in check at very low frequencies. Not 100% sure about this implementation though. I may be wrong on this.

The 119 can be active with the dsp option to have the box closed for faster bass transients ( a kind of Linkwitz transformer for the bass is my guess. )

Thanks Rutger. Can you explain what you mean by tuning fork colourations please. That’s a phrase that I haven’t heard before.

https://www.lejonklou.com/forum/viewtop ... 9&start=75

[Spannko]

Thanks Rutger.

[vicdiaz]

My local dealer has already ordered pairs of 109s and 150s. Waiting to have a listen of the 150s since these may be a good candidate to replace my venerable Exakted aktive AV5140s.

[Tendaberry]

I've heard the 150's passive, fronted by a NG KDSM and powered by a pair of Solo 800's. They were indeed very good, sounding powerful, coherent and tuneful. And this was without fine-tuning the position...

[matthias]

They should do with 110k GBP Linn devices upstream to the speakers.......:-)

[u252agz]

I've heard the 150's passive, fronted by a NG KDSM and powered by a pair of Solo 800's. They were indeed very good, sounding powerful, coherent and tuneful. And this was without fine-tuning the position...

Sounds like they may be a good replacement for my trusty 242s, if I ever have to change.

Is the fit and finish comparable to the 242s - they were always built to a very high standard and my gloss walnut ones still look fantastic 10 years on.

[martijn1001]

I hear an an aluminium plinth is on the way as an upgrade for the 150. Getting curious about these speakers.

[anthony]

I hear an an aluminium plinth is on the way as an upgrade for the 150. Getting curious about these speakers.

Due next year, sound great with standard stands.

[neonmeatedream]

Are there any actual reviews of these speakers yet?

[Spannko]

Here’s another recording of the 150’s

https://youtu.be/8ta685aTa84?si=XFfQTs5Q9_-1tysR

I have to say, after hearing a few of these recordings now, I’m not impressed in the slightest. The new linn sound appears to be very clean, clear, smooth etc, but totally lacking musicality.

[tokenbrit]

Here’s another recording of the 150’s

https://youtu.be/8ta685aTa84?si=XFfQTs5Q9_-1tysR

I have to say, after hearing a few of these recordings now, I’m not impressed in the slightest. The new linn sound appears to be very clean, clear, smooth etc, but totally lacking musicality.

In any of those recordings, have the 150s been fed by anything analogue, or always Linn/DSM?

[matthias]

Here’s another recording of the 150’s
https://youtu.be/8ta685aTa84?si=XFfQTs5Q9_-1tysR

Are you 100% sure that these are in room recordings?