Vandersteen Kento Carbon

Thanks for posting, Ken. An interesting concept, do like the specs too. Only question I would have, is whether the 400W subs amps suffice in a bigger room and within a more powerful system.

Having been living with a similar concept with in-built powered and side-firing subs for some weeks now, I must say I really do enjoy it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Kuoppis said:
Thanks for posting, Ken. An interesting concept, do like the specs too. Only question I would have, is whether the 400W subs amps suffice in a bigger room and within a more powerful system.

Having been living with a similar concept with in-built powered and side-firing subs for some weeks now, I must say I really do enjoy it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The subwoofer amps as similar to the ones in the Model 7s (which I own). I have never considered them insufficient in my room which is 20W x 27D x 8H.
 
The speaker is MUCH closer to the 7 than my Quatro's. It's not even close. Folks will need to figure out on their own if the amp is powerful enough. I have heard the 7's in my friends room that has great acoustics. The room is open to other rooms and measures 18X20x8 so it's close to your's size wise. It was plenty powerful. I also heard the same system with the sub 9's in it and it was a holy cow moment for me.

The Kento is as special speaker in it's price range (My thoughts). Many will view it as a Quatro due to the cabinet, but he did that in order for folks to fit it into their rooms comfortably, but using the 7's drivers makes the world of difference. The way he's implemented the bass also takes it to a new level. It's special for sure.
 
Looks like Richard may have a winner on the Kento. And, it is not ridiculously priced!
 
The issue with Vandersteen's is that folks don't realize what's inside. Those carbon drivers are custom made and expensive to not just make, but to also match within the tolerances he uses. The cabinets are all a cabinet inside a cabinet for resonance. That's not cheap to do either. On the 7's he uses carbon fiber in the cabinet....again, expensive. Even the components inside the crossovers are hand selected, matched and of high quality.

For those who know him, he's thrifty. He builds his products the same way. He goes for what eh feels is the best sound that can be produced at that price point. When he decided to get into the true high end (Treo up), he was unshackled a bit in his designs, but not as much as many think. If someone else produced the 7's, they would retail for at least 90k and probably more due to mark ups etc...

When he decided to update the 5's (his first non sock speaker), he realized what people wanted was a very high end speaker, that was in line with the rest of his values of offering products that punch well beyond their price range. Seems like he's done that.
 
Ctsooner said:
The speaker is MUCH closer to the 7 than my Quatro's. It's not even close. Folks will need to figure out on their own if the amp is powerful enough. I have heard the 7's in my friends room that has great acoustics. The room is open to other rooms and measures 18X20x8 so it's close to your's size wise. It was plenty powerful. I also heard the same system with the sub 9's in it and it was a holy cow moment for me.

The Kento is as special speaker in it's price range (My thoughts). Many will view it as a Quatro due to the cabinet, but he did that in order for folks to fit it into their rooms comfortably, but using the 7's drivers makes the world of difference. The way he's implemented the bass also takes it to a new level. It's special for sure.
Click to expand...

Just one point of clarification. The Kento only uses one of the Model 7’s drivers, the 4.5 inch midrange. Only that one uses the Carbon-Balsa-Carbon sandwich. None of the other drivers are the same. The Kento’s top 3 drivers appear to be similar to the 5A Carbon, which has been discontinued.

Ken
 
Alpinist said:
Just one point of clarification. The Kento only uses one of the Model 7’s drivers, the 4.5 inch midrange. Only that one uses the Carbon-Balsa-Carbon sandwich. None of the other drivers are the same. The Kento’s top 3 drivers appear to be similar to the 5A Carbon, which has been discontinued.

Ken
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. I was wrong (happens often, good ears, bad memory, lol)... From the site:

The KĒNTO Carbon represents a ground up re-thinking by Richard and Nathan Vandersteen. The answer came in a totally new design at the historic Model 5 price point. This speaker brings together the Model 5A carbon tweeter and the patented Carbon/Balsa core midrange from the Model Seven MK II, the Mid-Bass from the Quatro CT with the all new built-for-Vandersteen side firing pistonic opposing 9" powered bass drivers. The result is a level of adjustability unlike any other speaker. Available uniquely in both wood veneer and painted finishes.
 
I can't speak for Vandersteen but wouldn't it go without saying if an amp is matched to the speakers there's no need for thousands of watts? Wouldn't woofer size be more important? class D power is pretty cheap and if the speakers needed 1000 wpc it probably wouldn't add much to the bottom line.
 
Kuoppis said:
Headroom.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Richard would never use a Class D amp I don't believe. Yes, his dream was basically an active speaker so that he can match the speaker to the amp to maximize both. He has to be careful not to piss off the electronic companies (I assume), but he wanted to give us his vision of sound at various price points. I don't listen at high volume, but I demand dynamics like most do. I'll be hearing them in a very large room this weekend and will let you know my thoughts.

Some won't feel they are big enough to fill their rooms and that's fine. I would say that adding a couple of his subs would fix that problem and with the ability on all the subs to use the 11 band EQ, you can literally dial in the below 100hz music to be perfectly smooth in any room. If you can afford the Sub 9's over the Sub 3, that would be even better. Plenty of dynamics there, lol.

I've been thinking about getting a pair of sub 3's for my loft as it's so open, I feel it would take it to another level.
 
What I recently learned, was that there is another reason to have an active bass/ subs in your speakers, or power them separately either internally or externally. It’s more than just the mere need for power.

Reason is that the impedance differences between tweeters and mids vs. woofers is significant, especially in larger speakers. Therefore, the amp has to fulfill very different loads in parallel, when powering the top and low end at the same time. This will always yield a suboptimal result.

In a conclusion, bi-amping through either a partly powered speaker or separate power amps for the tweeters/ mids and woofers will always yield better results.

Whether the bi-amping is achieved through a more or less powerful amp, is another question. But I would look at separate subs and compare. These are typically very highly powered compared to regular amps (500-3000W), as amplifying the bass yields a lower impedance. Depending on how much power you have on tap results just in more or less headroom in the bass.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Kuoppis said:
What I recently learned, was that there is another reason to have an active bass/ subs in your speakers, or power them separately either internally or externally. It’s more than just the mere need for power.

Reason is that the impedance differences between tweeters and mids vs. woofers is significant, especially in larger speakers. Therefore, the amp has to fulfill very different loads in parallel, when powering the top and low end at the same time. This will always yield a suboptimal result.

In a conclusion, bi-amping through either a partly powered speaker or separate power amps for the tweeters/ mids and woofers will always yield better results.

Whether the bi-amping is achieved through a more or less powerful amp, is another question. But I would look at separate subs and compare. These are typically very highly powered compared to regular amps (500-3000W), as amplifying the bass yields a lower impedance. Depending on how much power you have on tap results just in more or less headroom in the bass.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Wow, a great way to put it. I simple terms, the main amp works MUCH less as it won't have to work under 100hz where it has to work it's hardest. In addition with the way Vandersteen designed the subs, it takes on the same sound as your main amp for better integration.

Bottom line is that it's a great way to implement speaker/amps working together for cohesion.

You guys are fun to read and learn from. Thanks.
 
Ctsooner said:
Wow, a great way to put it. I simple terms, the main amp works MUCH less as it won't have to work under 100hz where it has to work it's hardest.
Click to expand...

That’s exactly right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Alpinist said:
Vandersteen has come out with a new loudspeaker replacing the 5A Carbon. The Kento Carbon looks like a bigger Quatro with a similar configuration. I believe the drivers are the same as the 5A Carbon had.

Ken

https://vandersteen.com/products/?dir=kento-carbon
Click to expand...

I heard the new KĒNTO Carbon at RMAF 2019 a few months ago.

It sounded very nice.

I'd enjoy listening to and getting to know the KĒNTO Carbon again in a more familiar environment.

Dre
 
Dre_J said:
I heard the new KĒNTO Carbon at RMAF 2019 a few months ago.

It sounded very nice.

I'd enjoy listening to and getting to know the KĒNTO Carbon again in a more familiar environment.

Dre
Click to expand...


Thanks for sharing. I got to spend a lot of time with them last weekend. They are an amazing speaker. They filled a fairly large room and weren't even close to being taxed. Richard said they would fill most rooms with ease. They won't have the quantity of bass that the 5's had, but the quality is the best I've heard at that price point in ages. If you like the Vandersteen sounds, then you will LOVE these.

As for the tweeter question, it's the same tweeter that the 7 has other then tolerances. Richard therefore is just honest in saying that it's a different tweeter. They are matched within tight tolerances pair wise also. This is the reason they are so much closer to the 7's sound than the Quatro's sound. I love how he integrated the plinths also. It's a really nice look for the cabinet and it raises it to the level that he wanted. I personally have 3" granite plinths for my Quatro's.

It's a very special speaker and there is a lot going on that makes it sound so great.
 
Ctsooner said:
Thanks for sharing. I got to spend a lot of time with them last weekend. They are an amazing speaker. They filled a fairly large room and weren't even close to being taxed. Richard said they would fill most rooms with ease. They won't have the quantity of bass that the 5's had, but the quality is the best I've heard at that price point in ages. If you like the Vandersteen sounds, then you will LOVE these.

As for the tweeter question, it's the same tweeter that the 7 has other then tolerances. Richard therefore is just honest in saying that it's a different tweeter. They are matched within tight tolerances pair wise also. This is the reason they are so much closer to the 7's sound than the Quatro's sound. I love how he integrated the plinths also. It's a really nice look for the cabinet and it raises it to the level that he wanted. I personally have 3" granite plinths for my Quatro's.

It's a very special speaker and there is a lot going on that makes it sound so great.
Click to expand...

Sorry but it is not the same tweeter as the Model 7, which has the patented perfect piston carbon/balsa/carbon sandwich tweeter. The only driver that is the same as the Model 7 is the 4.5 inch midrange driver according to the specs. I agree with everything else you wrote though.

Best,
Ken
 
Alpinist said:
Sorry but not the same tweeter as the Model 7, which has a carbon/balsa/carbon sandwich. The only driver that is the same as the Model 7 is the 4.5 inch midrange driver according to the specs. I agree with the rest of your comments though.

Best,
Ken
Click to expand...

I miss understood what Richard told me a few years ago about the 5's. My bad. Thanks for straightening me out. Regardless, it's much much close to the 7's. :)
 
Last edited:
The Vandersteen room at axpona 2019 was packed the friday I was there, considering the show actually took some time to fill up. I remember listening to a demo of the 2ce, ci? 1990 version and another customer was completely taken by their sound. I didn't dislike them , but I also didn't think they were going to bring the house down playing "Temple of the dogs or RHCP. My biggest struggle during my upgrade was finding speakers that didn't favor a particular 'type' of music. I eventually found my speakers, but, having interest in this hobby I would like to ask you guys do these new Vandy's do it all? Are they the speakers to go from marvin gaye to ZZ top with stops in between. tia Steve
 
steve59 said:
The Vandersteen room at axpona 2019 was packed the friday I was there, considering the show actually took some time to fill up. I remember listening to a demo of the 2ce, ci? 1990 version and another customer was completely taken by their sound. I didn't dislike them , but I also didn't think they were going to bring the house down playing "Temple of the dogs or RHCP. My biggest struggle during my upgrade was finding speakers that didn't favor a particular 'type' of music. I eventually found my speakers, but, having interest in this hobby I would like to ask you guys do these new Vandy's do it all? Are they the speakers to go from marvin gaye to ZZ top with stops in between. tia Steve
Click to expand...

There is no question any of the new Vandersteen’s are built to play virtually any music available. A great speaker Hass to be able to go from Broc to acid rock to hard rock to classical to jazz to blues to vocals etc. If this speaker can’t play everything personally it’s not designed properly. You’re just looking for the truth and what the recording is giving you. The problem with many of the rock recordings of years past are that the guys on the boards didn’t always care about sound for a good sound system they were trying to make it sound good for FM radio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top