Kef vs infinity

Id take the Kef without hesitation.

The Infinity speakers are pretty good but they are a budget speaker. The Kef's are a definite step up. You should definitely notice the better, more detailed sound. I went from pretty decent Polks to the Kef iQs and it was a great upgrade, no doubt about it.

The Kef IQ60c is the ideal match for the IQ30s.

http://www.kefdirect.com/iq60c-center-channel.html Out of stock at the moment but supposedly they are getting more.

Definitely KEF unless your talking about old Infinitys. The Infinitys from the '70s were awesome. Infinity went down the tube after it was sold to Harman in the early '80s.

Wow Infinity is still around?

Neither...look for some good stuff on audiogon and you can usually find a killer deal on there with focal, paradigm and b&w.

Id take the iQ30's still over the Ascend 170's.

Paradigm? Especially their lower end stuff...... take a pass..........B&W, Focal, their low end stuff is nothing special, the IQ Kef's at least use the XQ driver which is one of the nicest drivers Kef has made to date, and its point source, and the older iQ series monitor has a nice entry level cabinet thats tuned to give nice smooth bass to 40hz. FOr the price, he isnt going to find anything that performs any better if he wants ruler flat midrange with excellent imaging.

But your opinion needs to be taken with a grain of salt as you've sold KEF's in the past or at least a big fanboy. Your iQ has been modded as well. The CBM-170 is super flat so why won't you recommend it? Something against ID if I remember...

Yep, sold Kef, also sold B&W,JM Labs, Wilson, Revel, Paradigm, Dunlavy, Vandersteen, Magnepan as well as quite a few others.

Also, I dont own any iQ speakers, modded or otherwise(XQ's are what I have along with a much older Ref series).

Ive actually recommended 170's, I like Ascend products, but a pair of iQ30's for around $400 shipped, vs the 170's for $375 shipped, i'd take the iQ's hands down. As flat as the 170's midrange is, the iQ30 is that much better along with its imaging, and it uses the XQ UniQ driver, its a single pointsource speaker, so it has natural advantages. its bass extension without question is vastly superior as well you will get useable bass down to 40hz out of it, and on top of it, its a front port design, so it will have better placement flexibility without boomy/muddy bass, especially near boundaries. For $25 bucks more, yeah, its a much better bang for the buck speaker. And on top of that, its aesthetically alot more pleasing to look at IMO on top of it all, not the basic "box" look thats the norm.

Would the 170 has any advantage over the iQ30 in regard to near field usage? Actually why would the Q300 be inferior to the older iQ30 aside from uglier cabinet?

The CBM-170SEs are excellent for near field. I can't speak for the IQ30s even though they're great speakers. The OP is looking for 100% HT though right?

If I remember correctly the iQ30's bass sucked so I decided on the Focal 806v instead. If it's for HT then the new KEF Q300 should be more ideal.

If you think the iQ30's bass sucked, then I highly question why you picked up the Chorus speakers in place of em, 5-10hz less extension........and your stating the Q300's are more ideal? Nearly identical extension and response from 50-160hz. Same enclosure volume and port tuning as the 30's, yet its more ideal? OK..............

I upgraded from infinity primus to KEF a few years ago. I went with IQ9s for L/R and the 60c for center. I have been extremely pleased.

42Hz - 40kHz vs 45-40. You got the graph to prove that the bass of the iQ30 is as extended as the Q300? I said sucked, not lacking. Sounded too lean and ain't fast enough to my ears.

Your using worthless "mfg" specs on your assesment. Kef's own specs change without rhyme or reason. THe Original iQ30 specs used to be 40hz-55khz......but it got changed(the top end and bottom end extension). How would the iQ30's extension #'s change when it uses the same XQ driver(especially the top end)? If you notice the "iQ" series(know known as classic Q )mfg specs dont even give a +/- window. BUt on the new Q series it does.

Either way, the spec extension differences is a supposed 3hz difference(Assuming the rate the different series the same way which I doubt knowing Kef). BUt regardless, do you think you can tell the difference between 3hz? Don't kid yourself. Simply put, the enclosure volume, port diameter and length, and midrange/bass surface area is basically identical. THey are the same type of front port tuned monitor, they both are identical in extension basically. THe difference is negligible to the point that you will need testing equipment to tell or see a small difference. Because you won't hear it.

The iQ30 and Q300 sound nearly identical in reality.......the only small difference I heard between the 2 is that the new Q300 isnt quite as smooth un EQ'd in the upper midrange and treble region. But with a small amount of EQing they will sound identical.....to the point where you could run a Q300 for the left channel, and an iQ30 for the right and never know you mixed the 2 together other than a visual que.

And if the bass wasn't "fast" enough for you, and or lean, it most likely meant you had a "suckout" / dip / room mode starting around 120-240hz........either that or I wonder if you had the speakers polartiy reversed to one side..........because the description you give is common with someone crossing the positive and nagive wires accidentally to one side. Becuase Ive never ever heard anyone complain about the iQ30's bass. Its quite tight, accurate and full bodied without question.....at least it is when its set up right.

It's tough for anyone to say what speaker you will like. The KEF's should be better but it doesn't mean you'll like them better. Room acoustics, your preference and even the recever powering them (mostly depending on which room eq it uses) will have an effect on how each speaker will sound.

I currently have a pair of Infinity Beta 20's, Revel M12's and Swan Diva 2.1's and I'm going round and round on which ones to keep, if any. All things considered, the Beta's currently have the edge. What does it all mean? You won't know if the KEF's are better for you until you have them in your house. They should be better then the 162's but you never know.

BTW, I prefer a slightly brighter speaker for HT than for music. This might give the KEF's a bit of a lead as Infinty's tend to be on the soft and warm side, IMO of course.

If you can purchase the KEFs with a 30-day guarantee you could try them out at home and decide. That's probably the best way to audition.

I've heard the Primus P16x speakers but not the KEF model. The Primus is a very well-balanced speaker for the price. I doubt there would be enough of a difference to justify the upgrade cost. Just my sense of things after hearing the Primus often enough and based upon reading about these two speakers before and and the range of opinions out there regarding their respective performance characteristics. The Primus might be budget priced and not especially exciting looking, but my understanding is that it has a strong design foundation, much of it trickle-downed from the knowledge attained from higher end models within the Harman speaker family (Revel, etc.). Within this particular thread, the recommendations are coming in more strongly for the KEF, but that's not always the case. In terms of aesthetics, the Primus is fairly generic looking (though not ugly by any means), while the KEF is certainly a more unique, handsome design, IMO.

If you can do a 30 day trial with the KEFs like postrokfan suggested, that might be the best course of action. I highly doubt you'll be able to gain the sort of absolute assurance to make the "upgrade" based upon the comments of others here. Especially as one person's "significant" is another's "a little better" and there is no way of knowing ahead of time which camp you are likely to fall into. Frankly, I suspect you would see a more dramatic improvement by adding a second or third subwoofer (if you don't already have multiple subs) or improving the room acoustics either with upgrades in EQ software (Audyssey XT32, etc.) or physical room treatments.

A big +1 on that point.
Those specs have no bearing on how the speaker sounds. It's simply a marketing tool for the gullible.

Which is why I asked if you have the graphs for both...

I probably can....but the graphs would be of response curves in my listening setups/rooms........if some of the pics provided are accurate on your rooms and systems.......it most likely wouldnt even matter.....lot of bare walls, corners, equipment setup based on room decor first/audio second..........I can garentee you will run into alof of peaks and nulls from reflections and modes.........honestly......you should invest in something like an Omnimic2 or similiar.......

^ right, but it'll show areas where the Q300 is more or less compared to the iQ30 so i know what to expect.