I purchased a pair of Linn Kan V a while ago after years with a pair of late serial number Mk1 Kans...They were cheap and fancied a go with them as I adore the Mk1 version..

This later version is a bassier speaker ' but does not have the same tonal balance that put a smile on my face with the Mk1 Kan...The little Mk 1 can sound as good as the Isobarik if partnered with the right gear and on the mk2 stands...I have tried both...There is a crispness with the Mk5 Kan but it does not put a smile on my face like the kan 1...I listen to a lot of high quality radio these days from my computer into a Meridian D/A converter and into a Meridian 502/556 combonation...The Mk5 Kans don't seem to sound much better with better amplification ' but are much easier to drive as previously said...They are on a par and slightly better than some of the recent Dynaudio offerings...Hence the reasonable Ratings..

Come on Linn start building the Later Mk 1 Kans and Isobariks again...They are the stuff of legend in my view...

I am back on the Mk1 Kans now as they seem to have a character that I cannot help likeing....From the 80's a time of experimentation in my younger years...Maybe some of it is nostalgia...???

I purchased a mint pair of Linn Kan V at ebay two months ago. They should replace a vintage pair of Rogers LS 2/A2, that had given me a lot of pleasure.

The system: Revox B 760 Tuner, Naim CD 5i-2, Naim Nait 5i, Linn K20 cable. The Kans are mounted on rigid sound organisation wall stands on four spikes each, about 5 cm off the wall. The room is quite small 3x4 meters (our kitchen).

The difference was immeadeately clear: The Linn Kans are much “faster”, more open and do show a lot of more details than the Rogers LS 2/A2.

They are very cohesive and present the music as “a piece”, tweeter and midbass are acoustcally “together” as it should.

Bass goes deep and “is fast”, maybe a little bit warm, due to the near wall (the instructions recommend 5-15 cm distance to back wall).

The imaging ist exeptionally good, maybe it would still be better if I could give them more space behind them.

Tonal colour seems to be realistic, better and more differentiated than the humble Rogers LS 2/A2 which I would still recommend as a close to wall vintage speaker for nealy “no money”.

So, if you are searching for a speaker that can keep peace in the kitchen and if you don’t mind playing with pre loved toys the Linn Kan V “kan give you a koncert without katastrophe”(free by Steven R. Rochlin).

I was fortunate enough to have made a wise decision way back in 1985 and that was to buy a pair of black Linn Kan I's. They survived many upgrades of amplifiers (from Naim and Linn), turntables, CD players (Arcam, Marantz and Meridian Transport/DAC), cabling and interconnects. I was completely (100%) happy with them and thought I'd keep them forever!

Until, one day about 18 months ago, I encountered a pair of black Kan II's (biwirable) up for sale at a local newsagents via a window ad; - at £400 ($600) including the stands they seemed reasonably priced. I went to look (they were pristine and owned by one guy from new), listen and I was hooked! - I parted with the cash and re-plugged my speaker cable to cater for the bi-wiring and started to listen.

What a revelation! - detail and clarity in the midrange that I'd never heard before, more depth of bass, punchiness and slam of the drums... staggering, absolutely staggering. As quoted by a previous reviewer, the Kans are "a remarkable product" and considering that these speakers are 21 years old they are a testimony to great build quality. In the right set-up, on Kan stands with top quality amplification (ideally as in my Linn pre-power combo or something similar) they are unsurpassable and I've not heard anything better - that includes the similarly sized, modern Linn Katans.

One word of caution to any prospective purchaser of secondhand Kan's though and that is to realise that the later Kan's (mk III onwards) are not a patch on the mk I's and mk II's and in my opinion are not worth paying serious money for. The Mk III. IV and V are decent products but not in the same league.

ps To really make my day, I later sold my immaculate 26 year old mk I's for £300 on e-bay. Though I've noticed recently that they regularly fetch £350-400 and perhaps I should I have kept my mk I's as a long term investment!

sound and build quality; tremendous value on the used market

The reliability of 20 something year old drivers is dependent upon who owned these speakers before you got a hold of them. For example, how hard were they were driven, and how good were the amplifiers being used to drive them.

In a positive situation these Kan's are ready for many more years of faithful service. However, if in fact these speakers were abused, then they may require an expensive overhaul -- that is provided that you can find replacement drivers for them.

I recently (as a matter of fact I wrote the post below this one) posted in regard to my Linn Kan V's and how much I enjoyed them; as well as how there was much hype made over the earlier Linn Kan speakers, which many Kan owners recommended over -- as they put it -- the lowly Linn Kan V.

Having recently taken possession of a pair of black Linn Kan I's, I believe that the comments I made in my earlier post regarding the later Kan V, are even more prevalent now.

Upon reflection, the Kan I is a very articulate speaker, however, lacking the bass of the later Kan V. The sonic signature of both speakers, even though they have completely different drivers, is very similar, throwing a wide side stage which belies their diminutive size.

The Kan I's are also less efficient, meaning that your amplifier must work harder to achieve the same sound levels with the I, as it would with the V's.

However, the build quailty of the I is clearly superior, being made out of plywood with a quality veneer finish, instead of the chipboard and veneer covering of the later Kan V.

All in all, these are both superb litte monitors, and musical as all get out when matched with good a quaility source and amplification.

As to which is better, the truth is that they balance one another, given the latter's greater efficiency, and the earlier Kan's superior build quality.

I must also say that as a former owner of two very nice pairs of Rogers LS 3/5A's, that I am surprised that mint pairs of the earlier Kans are selling for a fraction of what excellent examples of the LS 3/5's -- circa the 1980's -- have been selling for on Ebay. Especially since the two were nearly identical in price when sold from new during that period.

In this respect the earlier Kans represent a fantastic value for the savvy audio enthusiast, who for his dollar gets a speaker that plays much louder than an LS3/5A, throws a much larger sound stage, produces better bass, and nearly equals the Rogers arfticulate and transparent midrange.

The Linn Kans, in all of their iterations, continue to be a wonderful sounding near field monitor, and a fantastic value for the penurious audio enthusiast.

Similar Products Used:

Roigers LS 3/5A 15 ohm, 11 ohm, Harbeth HL-P3 ES, Linn Kan V, Creek CLS 10

Excellent midrange and bass. Sounds equally as good with classical, jazz and rock. And as long as it's paired with an excellent source and amplification, the Kan V will bring years of musical enjoyment to both casual and serious listeners alike.

At $500 for the pair, none

Since its inception some 20 plus years ago, the Linn Kan has been manufactuered in at least five different versions, not the least of which is the Kan V.

The Kan V is a terrific little speaker with most if not all of the virtues of the earlier
Kan 1 and II, except that it incorporates Linn's later and more efficient drivers, and is built more to a price point.

Obviously, it would be impossible to sell the Linn Kan for $500 in 2002 (when I purchased mine), when they cose that much in 1986, without making some compromises.

The Kan V is built from chipboard, instead of the plywood that earlier Kan's were made from, and then covered with real wood veneers like cherry, oak, walnut and teak.

However, it easily competes soundwise with the earlier and much less efficient speakers, so that low powered quality amplifiers can drive them quite nicely, and to a surprisingly loud volume

My Kan V's work extremely well with my low power tube amplifiers, which include
Quicksilver Mini Mite 25 wpc monoblocks, and Antique Sound Lab Wave AV 25 mono's. The warmth and articulate nature of these amplifiers absolutely makes the Kan V's sing. And there is little doubt that these amplifiers would not work nearly as well with the less efficient Kan 1 and Kan II's, which would probably clip these amplifiers when attempting to gain any appreciable volume levels.

The difference between the earlier Kan's 83db@1wpc volume level and the Kan V's 88db@1wpc volume level is demonstrable.

Don't be fooled by the cult hyperbole of the earlier Kans' since the Kan V is just as a good, much less expensive, and far more efficent to run.

Customer Service

Haven't Needed It.

Similar Products Used:

Rogers LS3/5A -- 15 and 11 Ohm versions, Harbeth HL-P3ES

smooth highs, good bass descrimination, a very musical speaker

bass could be more refinded a little bit coloration

Yes, there better (Linn) -speakers, I thing Linn Katan is more refinded in the bass area, but it's cost twice as much. However this is very good value for the money, (550 €). I used B&W CDM 1NT, and the B&W has more detail and clarity in the mid but the high wasn't as smooth. This speaker sounds a little husky but that's not a weakness for me. The soundstage is also larger than my Dynaudio Audience 40, and with good electronics ( I use an LFD Mistral amp and Rotel CD-player) the Linn wins. You don't need a sub with this one, bass is more heavy than my Dynaudio's and much more than the B&W's.

Similar Products Used:

B&W CDM 1NT, Dynaudio Audience 40, Mission 732, B&W 601

Clarity, punchiness of bass when coupled to Linn amplification.

None. Component partnering is however, crucial. As is good cabling.

Well, I've owned my Linn Kans (I) for 16 years and thought that things must have moved on in that timeline - decided to go "brass in pocket" to audition some speakers. Firstly though, decided that my 7 year old 2-box Meridian CD/DAC was probably still pukka and capable and my Linn pre/power combo (7 years old)was probably still up to the job too.
Cutting the story short after several fruitless attempts by a couple of HiFi dealers to take some money off me (including a Linn dealer)I've kept my brass in my pocket. In short I've not heard ANYTHING under £1000 which has the clarity, punch and presence of these speakers, I've re-learned something that I'd almost forgotten ie why I'd bought them in the first place! They do require caution when it comes to partnering with other equipment though, use substandard Naim NAIT amplification and you have the clarity of the Linn pre/power but you lose the slam and punchiness of the bass (see earlier report in this series)- let's get this clear though bass should be "tight" in nature not remotely boomy and the Kans certainly deliver in this respect. The Linn Kans are still a remarkable product 12 years on.

Similar Products Used:

Various creations designed to extract me of a few hundred pounds!!

Dynamics, speed, detail, midrange, vocals, imaging

bass

I have owned the Kans (Mk 1) for about 15 years. The speakers are beautifully made in a walnut veneer. They are on their original stands which I will change now having heard what the latest sets can do. Recently I thought of upgrading to floor standing speakers. I listened to various models up to £1200. They were very good of course but I soon realised that I didn't need to change my speakers; I have instead upgraded the amp from an Arcam Delta 60 to Naim 72/140. The Kans are a truly remarkable product. They have been through several changes since I bought my pair. I haven't heard the latest models but I auditioned the Naims on a Mrk 1 pair the store had lying around. What they can achieve makes you realise that a really good pair of stand mounted speakers, like Kans, can outstrip very many floor standing speakers. What you want in speakers is detail and realism but - you also want clout when needed. I think most people upgrade to floorstanders in search of the latter but in doing so often lose the former. To really get both you have to spend a small fortune. Naturally, with Kans you don't get the bass - it's physically impossible - but you would be really surprised just how much bass you do get - however - the important thing is that you get enough for the illusion to be complete (which is all it is of course when it comes to sound pressure levels and so on). The sheer physicality of Kans when well amped is extraordinary - there really are sounds hanging in the air. In a smallish listening area the Kans are very hard to beat - if you can't afford a new pair then hunt down a second hand set - throw on something like Jesse Norman singing the Strauss "Four Last Songs" and sit back. I am as addicted as modt of you people to improving my system - but unles I inherit some serious money I shall stick with the Kans for a good time yet - after 15 years I think they are nicely warmed up.

Similar Products Used:

have had different speakers at various times

Timing and phrasing, detailed, holographic imaging, suits the average UK lounge.

Not for bass freaks or very large rooms. Available only in black.

I auditioned the Linn Kan at one of my local audiophile outlets (there are 4 in my small town - Worthing!!) against other top grade small but affordable speakers namely KEFs and B&Ws (ewhich is made locally). I intended to buy either the highly recommended B&W 602s or KEF Q15s, but the dealer insisted I listened to the Kans. They were initially above my budget at the time, but they were the only ones that got my foot tapping. My disinterested wife (dragged along) not only made the comment that these were the best, but also started to subconciously move with the music when the Kans came on.
Installed into my home on sturdy wall brackets and cones, and driven by my old 2nd-hand Naim Nait II, the Kans sounded even better. Now in my previous bachelor life, I have owned expensive serious kit, including a valve monoblock set up with horn loudspeakers. Good as that arrangement was, never was I this close to the music. A drum sounds like a drum, the singer's phrasing and breathing makes her presence so nerve-tingling..... Okay, the soundstage is not so deep, but it is wide and tall, and who the hell cares anyway when the music feels so real! This is a combination I can recommend after 17 years of dabbling in hi-fi and visiting many dealers and shows. Pair up an old Nait 2 with a pair of Kan 3, and the upgrade bug will have been well and truly vaccinated! Five stars 'cos I'm cured!

Similar Products Used:

Musical Fidelity MC2, Mordaunt-Short MS40, Wharfedale Diamond and various Celestions & Missions, even a Lowther Acoustas

compact size, smooth upper-range, great with a subwoofer,

lack of bass makes it less than ideal as a full-range speaker; annoying grills can't be taken on/off easily; low impedance can be tough for some amps

was initally planning on purchasing a pair of kef q15s as a replacement for my trusty k120s. dealer auditioned these and a pair of jpw's as well. lively bright sound is absoutely wonderful. with a well recorded media, these puppies really shine--midbass to highs competitive with a friends kef ref104s!!!

gave my rega brio a bit of trouble (brio isn't good with 4 ohm speakers), but works really with with an h/k avr10 (30wpc--somewhat darker amplifier). and the grills are awful--they looks like a do-rag with a gasket.

all in all, a great product--little on the pricey side, but very good nonetheless.

Similar Products Used:

kef k120, various celestion, boston acoustics hd7