KEF Owners Thread - Page 16 - AVS Forum
First ... 14  15  16 17  18  ... Last
Speakers > KEF Owners Thread
sivadselim's Avatar sivadselim 01:40 PM 09-16-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ActionFlickstr View Post

I am really considering the 5005.2 system..........................

Are you considering that smaller setup for a particular reason? WAF, etc.?

miimura's Avatar miimura 11:15 PM 09-16-2007
Earlier in this thread someone was talking about setting up a Denon reciever to get good bass with his Kef speakers. I have a Rotel 1056, Kef XQ5 fronts, XQ2c Center, XQ1 Surrounds. On the Rotel, I set the fronts to large and the sub to "Max". This sends the full range to the fronts and then uses the sub and its crossover setting to fill in instead of setting a crossover for both the sub (low pass) and the fonts (high pass). This receiver does not have Audyssey or any other auto-setup and I did not play with the manual equalization that is present. However, I did spend quite a bit of time setting the dial on the sub exactly how I wanted it. Very small changes made a big difference in the sound.

I don't know if Denon has a setting equivalent to the Rotel "Max" sub setting, but that gave me the sound I wanted. Anybody know a reason why this isn't a good idea?

- Mike
pbarach's Avatar pbarach 04:09 AM 09-17-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by miimura View Post

I don't know if Denon has a setting equivalent to the Rotel "Max" sub setting, but that gave me the sound I wanted. Anybody know a reason why this isn't a good idea?- Mike

My Denon receiver (3805) and probably some other models do have a setting where the the low frequencies go to all the speakers designated as "large," and they also go to a sub. It would be difficult to get a flat frequency response in the bass if you use this setting, because the more sources of low frequencies you have, the more chances there are to excite room modes and cause bumps in your system's response curve. If that happens, your bass will sound bloated, overbearing, and uncontrolled.

Most discussions of this subject indicate that unless your speakers have a strong response down into the lowest bass (and those KEF's don't), you should set all of your speakers to "small" (with a cutoff at 80 Hz or lower, depending on the speakers) and send all lower frequencies to a sub that you have placed as carefully as possible. Good room treatments are often a big help.
sivadselim's Avatar sivadselim 12:41 PM 09-17-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by miimura View Post

Anybody know a reason why this isn't a good idea?

It depends upon your crossover setting. What crossover setting do you use, miimura? If it's too high, you'll get redundant bass info coming from both the LARGE fronts and the subwoofer, as pbarach points out. However, if you set the crossover low enough, the redundancy can be significantly reduced, but this is really not too much different from setting the fronts to SMALL and using a low crossover. The problem with using a low crossover in either instance with, for example, XQ1s and an XQ2c, is that it may be too low for those speakers.

In the end, you should use the setting you prefer. For some, the "Max", "LFE+Main", "LFE Plus", etc.. setting may work well. For others it may not.
critterjr's Avatar critterjr 12:54 PM 09-17-2007
I've had KEF IQ9s suggested as a possibility for my 2 channel stereo system. And from the specs they look like they might be a good fit. However, I keep seeing references to how KEFs aren't for everyone and that they have a unique sound. I'm wondering if someone could quantify what this means a bit more.
Benniator's Avatar Benniator 01:01 PM 09-17-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by critterjr View Post

I've had KEF IQ9s suggested as a possibility for my 2 channel stereo system. And from the specs they look like they might be a good fit. However, I keep seeing references to how KEFs aren't for everyone and that they have a unique sound. I'm wondering if someone could quantify what this means a bit more.

I liken the sound to someone farting into a tuba. But in a GOOD way.
sivadselim's Avatar sivadselim 01:33 PM 09-17-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by critterjr View Post

However, I keep seeing references to how KEFs aren't for everyone and that they have a unique sound. I'm wondering if someone could quantify what this means a bit more.

They are very "finesse-y" speakers. Not heavy-handed at all. Extremely revealing. Very articulate. They're all about midrange clarity. Some people think they sound bright. Others think they sound recessed. Or that they are lacking in bass. But those of us who like their sound, love them.

Try and audition them if you can.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 09:11 PM 09-17-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by mziegler View Post

I played with the 201/2s tonight...very nice. I'm very curious what the others will think.

Of the speakers we listened to at Curtis', I thought the Kefs still imaged best and remained the most consistent sounding off-axis. But for balance across the frequency range, I preferred the Dynaudios. Tonally, the Dyns were a little closer to the warm sound of my current Kefs than the 201/2s were (which seemed a tad bright by comparison).

Sanjay
Tom_N's Avatar Tom_N 05:15 PM 09-24-2007
Hello everyone,

I recently purchased some XQ1 speakers to use as surrounds. I've also purchased a pair of Sanus stands.

The speakers are very unstable on the stands so I am thinking of purchasing the top plate that Marjorie referenced on page 11 (post #309)

Here is the link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Top_Plate.html

The top plate mentions that it is for speakers with an L bracket.
My speakers do not have an L bracket. I'm just wondering how XQ1 or XQ3 owners have secured their speakers to the top plate?

There seem to be holes in the corner of the top plate. Can you put the speaker's feet through the holes, I don't think that would be secure enough.

Any suggestions?

Thanks for your help,


Tom
miimura's Avatar miimura 09:58 PM 09-24-2007
The factory Kef stands that match the XQ1 come with a "Z" shaped metal bracket that secures the rear foot to the stand. That seems like the best way to me. If you want, I can snap a picture and post it.

- Mike
Tom_N's Avatar Tom_N 04:38 AM 09-25-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by miimura View Post

The factory Kef stands that match the XQ1 come with a "Z" shaped metal bracket that secures the rear foot to the stand. That seems like the best way to me. If you want, I can snap a picture and post it.

- Mike

If you don't mind I'd like to see it and I'm sure some others here would as well.

The only problem is that for my set-up the Kef stands are a little too low, I'd have to find a way to put them on something.

Thanks

Tom
kunrast's Avatar kunrast 10:53 AM 09-25-2007
I am very new the forum and still a NewB as far as HT is concerned. I just picked up a set of the 2005.2 from CC. I thought they sounded great and I needed a small setup for a couple of reasons. I am looking for a receiver to match the speakers. I had them running on a denon avr687 and thought it sounded good - but I had to really crank it to hear the full range of the system. Is this common with these speakers or do I need to go with a receiver that boasts more power? I don't want to drop a lot of money as this is my second system.

Any thoughts?
babylon5fan's Avatar babylon5fan 02:25 PM 09-25-2007
newbie here

have a set of kef 103/4's doing duty as fronts with a crown power base 1. kef q30's as rears with adcom 545II, wharfedale xp2 center channel with a bridged proton receiver(!)--hopefully soon to be a kef uni-q bookshelf, and i have to say i really love the sound...now trying to find a sub to fine tune things
miimura's Avatar miimura 11:20 PM 09-26-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_N View Post

If you don't mind I'd like to see it and I'm sure some others here would as well.

The only problem is that for my set-up the Kef stands are a little too low, I'd have to find a way to put them on something.

Thanks

Tom

This is the top of the Kef XQ1 stand with just the rear foot secured where it would normally be. The front two feet sit in the dimples at the front (wide end) of the stand.

- Mike


sivadselim's Avatar sivadselim 08:38 AM 09-27-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by miimura View Post

This is the top of the Kef XQ1 stand with just the rear foot secured where it would normally be. The front two feet sit in the dimples at the front (wide end) of the stand.

Very nice picture! I never realized that those stands "worked" that way.

Tom_N, I don't think you need that bracket with the SANUS top-plate as there are holes that the speaker's feet fit into.

Try sending a PM to Marjorie. She's very nice and helpful and will most likely answer your question(s). Also, report back what she says or ask her to post the answer in this thread.
Tom_N's Avatar Tom_N 01:48 PM 09-27-2007
Thanks Mike.

I actually PM Marjorie the other day. When she responds I'll post her comments.

I actually got tired of having my speakers on the floor, so I went ahead and ordered the Sanus top plate. Once it comes in I'll post my findings.

Thanks again,

Tom
Tom_N's Avatar Tom_N 02:01 PM 09-27-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunrast View Post

I am very new the forum and still a NewB as far as HT is concerned. I just picked up a set of the 2005.2 from CC. I thought they sounded great and I needed a small setup for a couple of reasons. I am looking for a receiver to match the speakers. I had them running on a denon avr687 and thought it sounded good - but I had to really crank it to hear the full range of the system. Is this common with these speakers or do I need to go with a receiver that boasts more power? I don't want to drop a lot of money as this is my second system.

Any thoughts?

Welcome to the forum.

I'll start by saying that I haven't heard that series.

For what it is worth the cnet review recommend using a good mid-level receiver.

As a general rule the more power the better, but I don't think you would notice that big of a difference going from 75 watts (in your avr 687) to 100 watts a channel, which, as per Kef is the max recommend power handling.

Perhaps someone who has heard those speakers can share their thoughts. But personally, for a second system, I would continue to use your Denon 687.



Tom
sivadselim's Avatar sivadselim 04:47 PM 09-27-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunrast View Post

I am looking for a receiver to match the speakers. I had them running on a denon avr687 and thought it sounded good - but I had to really crank it to hear the full range of the system. Is this common with these speakers or do I need to go with a receiver that boasts more power? I don't want to drop a lot of money as this is my second system.

Any thoughts?

There is not really a receiver "to match the speakers". Any receiver will work with the speakers. As Tom_N pointed out, you will not really realize much of a benefit, especially in output, if you go from your current receiver to one that provides 100w/channel.

How big is your room? How far are each of the speakers from your listening position? Do you have an SPL meter and if so, what SPL are you talking about when you have to "really crank it to hear the full range of the system"?
kunrast's Avatar kunrast 07:22 PM 09-27-2007
Quote:
There is not really a receiver "to match the speakers". Any receiver will work with the speakers. As Tom_N pointed out, you will not really realize much of a benefit, especially in output, if you go from your current receiver to one that provides 100w/channel.

How big is your room? How far are each of the speakers from your listening position? Do you have an SPL meter and if so, what SPL are you talking about when you have to "really crank it to hear the full range of the system"?

Thanks for the replies. I have the L-C-R sitting on top of my entertainment center which sits below my plasma. The distance between the L & R is appx. 42". When I used the mic with my denon avr687 it set the distance at 11'. I do not have a SPL meter. When listening to CD's and watching movies, I often found myself turning the receiver to -9 db's according to the receiver. I guess my ears were searching for the mid range bass. I experimented with the sub crossover and it seemed if I set it at 110 -115, I was getting more of the expected bass range - but I was losing the low end. I guess it's just going to take some more time to really refine it.
HDTV Owner's Avatar HDTV Owner 02:05 PM 09-28-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunrast View Post

I am very new the forum and still a NewB as far as HT is concerned. I just picked up a set of the 2005.2 from CC. IAny thoughts?

I can't tell you what Receiver to buy, but I am very happy with my SANUS speaker stands and the KEF KHT 2005.2 Sattelites.

I took the KEF small integrated stand off my speaker, and used the T-shaped KEF piece with its screw along with the Black rubber ball piece (and screw) to attach the speaker to my SANUS stands using their included L-Bracket and screw. The speaker then becomes just under 4 lbs. and it can be centered directly above the streight part of the SANUS stand so that it is very stable. The SANUS stand pair is about 1/4th of the cost of a pair of KEF stands and the SANUS Silver stand with a black base match the speaker perfectly. I like the shape of the SANUS stand better as it is curved at the top like the BOSE stands vs. the KEF which is streight.
LL
LL
mlazoff's Avatar mlazoff 11:47 PM 10-02-2007
That's a great photo, Mike. Playing off your photo, my Sanus stand with XQ1 top plate differs in three respects:

1) The XQ1 top plate is separate from the stand, easy to assemble but the XQ1 plate replaces the standard plate that accompanied the stand. Yours looks to be all one piece.

2) My plate has no Z or L bracket -- the speaker is not held onto the top plate in any way

3) Instead of dimples, my top plate have holes where the spikes fit into. So my speaker fully sits on the plate with the spikes down through the holes.

I've owned these stands for several months now, and I'm very happy with their stability -- I've tried, and the speakers will not tip over easily. Also, in my living room the KEF XQ silver-colored stands would not work design-wise, whereas my black top and bottom plate and wood center match my black speakers/TV and wood cadenza at the front of the room.

Tom, I hope you got my PM.

Marjorie
mlazoff's Avatar mlazoff 12:55 AM 10-03-2007
Today I had my front XQ5s bi-wired, each speaker with a pair of MIT cables easily 2 inches in diameter each, and the set include a black box (?resistor?) in mid-cable. The point was to convince skeptical me that these cables do improve the sound enough to justify their astronomical price.

I know, I know, these "interconnects make a difference/make no difference" debates are pointless, we each hear what we hear. I was just wondering if anyone in this thread is bi-wiring their KEFs, and if so with what kind of cable, in what kind of system, and with what results.

Thanks,
Marjorie
pbarach's Avatar pbarach 06:16 AM 10-03-2007
I bi-wired my KEF Q7's. I thought I heard a small improvement in midrange clarity, but I'm not sure it's a reliable observation. If it was a real change, then I'd have to say that it was much less audible than the effect of removing the grills (which was a big improvement).
supaman's Avatar supaman 08:48 AM 10-03-2007
any reviews on the sub from the 2005.2 system? i just got the system and am replacing the center channel with the 6000 ace center and am contemplating changing out the sub, but i have actually yet to hear it. Just by looking at the size of sub and amp i am just thinking i will want something more. any reviews would be helpful.
mlazoff's Avatar mlazoff 11:19 AM 10-03-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

I bi-wired my KEF Q7's. I thought I heard a small improvement in midrange clarity, but I'm not sure it's a reliable observation...

What cables did you use, pbarach, and what is your source of power and music?

The cables I'm trying out are MITs and have "MH 750 PLUS S3" written on that unknown black box, and "High Output" on the cable itself. I notice a big difference when listening to HD Radio (Sangean HDT-1X) but less so with CDs (some cheapo Toshiba), both driven by a Yamaha RX-V2700. I'm hearing more low and especially high frequencies, esp with the radio, so the sound is broader, more detailed, and at times actually "beautiful" -- not an adjective I ever used to describe my KEFs before, more like Danish or Italian speakers, if you know what I mean.

Thanks,
Marjorie
mlazoff's Avatar mlazoff 11:55 AM 10-03-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunrast View Post

I guess my ears were searching for the mid range bass. I experimented with the sub crossover and it seemed if I set it at 110 -115, I was getting more of the expected bass range - but I was losing the low end. I guess it's just going to take some more time to really refine it.

Kunrast, I had a pair of HTS2001.2 eggs, which I used as my rears. Alas, they are what they are, bass-wise. I also tried to increase the bass by raising the crossover to the subwoofer above the traditional 80.

If your system was like mine, I don't think more power will help much -- my NAD was 100 watts/channel -- but you might test it by directing all the Denon's power to the two speakers using the Direct or comparable feature on your receiver. (Temporarily lower your crossover or set you receiver's LFE to your fronts so you don't lose your bass entirely during the experiment.) This way, you can see if the eggs' highs and midrange are significantly more detailed and to your liking to justify a power upgrade.

Marjorie
siuwan's Avatar siuwan 12:13 PM 10-03-2007
Hi all,

I have set aside <$1500 for my first 5.1 HT setup (speakers only). Room size is 14x20x8, with glass windows (10") on one side and an opening (7") to corridor on the other.

I am considering iQ5 for fronts, iQ2c for center and iQ1 for rear. Budget wise, I don't think I can go to iQ7, but I do wonder if iQ6c is worth the extra cash.

btw, I probably need a new TV stand coz the storage space is closed back and from what I was told the rear ported iQ2/6c will not sound the greatest in that kind of environment...

comments and suggestions please?

Thanks in advance

siuwan
pbarach's Avatar pbarach 01:38 PM 10-03-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by siuwan View Post

I am considering iQ5 for fronts, iQ2c for center and iQ1 for rear. Budget wise, I don't think I can go to iQ7, but I do wonder if iQ6c is worth the extra cash.

btw, I probably need a new TV stand coz the storage space is closed back and from what I was told the rear ported iQ2/6c will not sound the greatest in that kind of environment...


Get the best center channel you can afford, because it makes a great difference in the clarity of dialogue.

Concerning your TV stand--I agree that a closed-back stand is not a good idea with the ported center channel. You **could** put the port plug in, which would help, but there would still be a lot of reflected sound coming out of the cubbyhole in which you had the center channel. What I did with a closed-back stand and a KEF ported center was to put in the port plug and fill all of the area behind and on the sides of the center channel with pillows and other absorbent materials. It isn't the best-looking solution, but in my situation that doesn't particularly matter. It made dialog much clearer.
siuwan's Avatar siuwan 02:02 PM 10-03-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbarach View Post

Get the best center channel you can afford, because it makes a great difference in the clarity of dialogue.

Concerning your TV stand--I agree that a closed-back stand is not a good idea with the ported center channel. You **could** put the port plug in, which would help, but there would still be a lot of reflected sound coming out of the cubbyhole in which you had the center channel. What I did with a closed-back stand and a KEF ported center was to put in the port plug and fill all of the area behind and on the sides of the center channel with pillows and other absorbent materials. It isn't the best-looking solution, but in my situation that doesn't particularly matter. It made dialog much clearer.

Thanks for the suggestion. And I just learned from you that a port can be plugged.
Does the port plug come with the center speaker? or is it a DIY project?

I was also reading the spec for iQ2c and iQ6c, and if not mistaken, the difference is two extra bass drivers in iQ6c. I believe midrange is more important for human voice, is that a right statement? I guess I am trying to justify the extra $250 for going to iQ6c.

siuwan
Nymphoniks's Avatar Nymphoniks 03:43 PM 10-03-2007
Sorry to post this question, but I've searched through every old 3005 thread I could find.

I recall reading a few previous posts about 'knocking/punching/pushing out the rubber end' on the nut that holds the speaker wire in place on the back of the 3005 series speakers if one intended to wall mount the satellites. I can't remember why I thought that was a good idea when I read the suggestion and what benefit I would realize from doing that; just remember thinking it would seem like a good thing to do and can't recall the advantage.

Now that I have my speakers and am ready to mount and run wire, of course I can't recall the conversation.

Am I crazy, or do you recall the thread, etc.?

Thanks for any help you can provide.
Tags: Kef , Kef Audio , Kef Bookshelf Speaker , Kef Center Channel Speaker , Kef C4 Subwoofer Black , Kef Q100bl Bookshelf Speaker , Kef Ls50 2 Way Speaker System , Kef Q700wa Floorstanding Speaker , Kef T Series Floor Stand Pair
First ... 14  15  16 17  18  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop