KEF Owners Thread - Page 181

Onkyo TX-NR1010 with xt32 will be better.

Decided when it was time to upgrade that I wanted to run a matched set of speakers for my HT and so to accomodate a vertical standing speaker, I'd need something that would fit below the TV.
The Q300's went to the top of my list after hearing them. I wanted front ported speakers since I didn't want a rear port firing into the center cavity. The blade design with the tweeter and woofer combined also means that the woofer is further up the cabinet than a traditional speaker with seperate tweeter and woofer , which is something that I considered important when trying to get the speaker as close to ear height as practical...



And because I had to buy three pairs, I've used the spare as a center rear. I am very happy with the result.

Having recently heard the Q300 (and compared them to the Q100), the 5.25" Uni-Q is a higher fidelity device than the 6.5" Uni-Q through the midrange. I suspect they have the same tweeter and the same crossover frequency, because the 5.25" sounds much more together to me. (The Q900 has a much stouter tweeter, and lower mid-tweet crossover.) The Q300 sounds like a conventional 7" 2-way, with that midrange mushroom cloud of energy caused by a directivity mismatch between mid and tweeter. I was fairly disappointed with the Q300, though I quite like the Q900 and Q100.

Now, that's not to say someone else, especially someone more used to conventional speakers with midrange polars that look like mushroom clouds (narrowing at the top of the woofer's passband, then wide-the-eff-open at the bottom of the tweeter's passband), won't find the 6.5" models preferable to the 5.25" and 8" models.

Sounds like either you prefer higher distortion, or you didn't set them up properly.

The Onkyo won't sound any different. If you want an improvement, you have to look for a better room correction system than Audyssey. Audyssey (XT or XT32) imposes a "crappy speakers compensation notch" in the midrange. It can only be delete-optioned by springing for Audyssey Pro calibration.

The two "better" options in the reasonably-priced category are ARC, as found in the Anthem MRX receivers, and Trinnov, as found in the discontinued (and somewhat buggy) Sherwood R-972.

I'm currently (and temporarily, until I find or buy something better - KEF makes it hard to stick with them, because one cannot buy R300's or even LS50's individually) running three Q100's up front (along with two KHT-3005SE center channels as surround sides, and KHT-3005SE eggs as surround backs), driven by an Anthem MRX 300. It has plenty of juice for them. Because of ARC, which has a target curve resulting in more natural-sounding bass than Audyssey and does not have the infernal crappy speakers midrange compensation notch, it sounds a whole lot better than any Audyssey box would. (Though the crappy speakers compensation notch would likely improve the Q300/Q700 in room, because the notch is designed to address the midrange mushroom cloud problem found in most home speakers, including those two.)

I'm considering a set of KEF floor-standing speakers.

I've looked at the Q500's which run $1100 for the set.

However, Newegg is selling a set of iQ70's for $400.

I've read from a few sources KEF seemed to miss the mark on the iQ's and the next iteration (the Q's) was a huge step up.

Any opinions on between these two? My goal is good value, so if the Q500's are significantly better, I wouldn't mind splashing. But if the iQ70's can do the job just as well, I see no point in spending the extra $700+...

Thanks!

just auditioned some q900 and they were amazing!!!

My room is 11 x 1 with about 9 feet to listening position. Would they be too big for a room this size? I will be buying an svs sub as well.

If anyones had an opportunity to hear the iQ70 and Klipsch RF series, Id like to hear your impression on the two. I have an opportunity to get used RF62 for $300 but considering the iQ70 new from newegg.

Genuinely curious as to what sources state "miss the mark and Q's are a huge step up"?

It's all relative of course and being speakers are sooo subjective that until you use them in your room, will ultimately be the true test.

I'm looking at replacing my DefTech 7002's.

I saw the KEF Q900's on Accessories for Less.

Due to our seating distance and the low light in that end of the room I don't care too much about blemishes since I'll never see them.

I have no opportunity to audition them but the fact is the bipolar 7002's will not work in our new house so I need something else. $1,350 for a pair is a close wash to what I'd get for my 7002's and I know I need a sub but I've wanted separates for a while.

For the short term a Yamaha Adventage A1000 would be running them but that would get replaced shortly, or I might go with a dedicated amp.

30 percent HT, 70 percent music mostly at moderate volumes since we tend to have something on pretty much all the time if we're home. House is very open from the family room to the upstairs.

How about surrounds and a center?

For the area I have I could do a another Q900 or Q700 horizontally for the center channel.

i love mine to it takes a while for them to break in but once they do they are absolutley fantastic.. enjoy:)

i would go with the kefs i sold my rf 62s about 7 months ago and have never looked back. These are completely different speakers sonicly speaking, the klipschs are good speakers but over time you will get tired of them at least i did:eek:

just give them time to break in and they will really open up i also listen with the grills off, ive had mine for about 5 months and listin to them every weekend and they are just now hitting there stride..

ohh never mined ive got the q 300s but the same rule should apply:D

Those didnt break in:), they still sounded the same when I sold them

since then I had Q900s and now R500s

personally I think Q900 is more accurate than R300 or R500 as the later have bloated base to make them sound bigger, just my personal impression. But I prefer that coloration of the R series:)

I don't think I heard any difference from break in on any of my speakers (except maybe base on Q900s got a bit fuller)

I spent the weekend with the LS50 and I bought them on Monday

I would love to hear them as the feedback on the LS50 is that they are amazing. On the UK forum, AV Forum, recruit who said he never liked Kef speakers started a thread on that forum for those. Dav1dF replaced his R300 5.1 with the LS50s and was blown away. And he has Blades for 2 channel. Feedback from Kef US is also they are really special. Congrats!

Yes they are amazing speakers especially when compared to other speaker the quality of sound / price is outstanding

Perhaps the LS50 will be ADTG's first repeat brand purchase, at least as of late. Just had to put that out there.

I concur. I have them and they are amazing.

Is there a speaker grille for the LS50? I haven’t seen any pictures of it or reference to one in the manual.

I would like to keep them somewhat more protected and hidden when not listening to them. I would hate choosing the R100 over them for this silly reason…

There is no grill to my knowledge. I know they don't come with grills.

Cant the q600 be put in a tv stand with jsut enough room for it and still sound fine?
Edited by Scottyp3 - 10/5/12 at 11:08pm

amen someone out there gets it !

I could no agree more any electrical engineer knows that Just increase gauge size as length goes up. Better yet use the shortest cable you can by putting your amps next to the speakers.

They are studio monitor and don't have any grills The sound of the LS50 is a lot better than the sound of the R100 IMHO. I bought the LS50

Thanks, that's what I expected, but hoped otherwise...

Is the Q300 power hungry? Specs has Amp Requirement: 15-120W which seems pretty high to me.

My amp is the yamaha rx-v473:

Amplifier Section Channel 5.1
Rated Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) 115W (8ohms, 0.9% THD)
Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven) 80W (8ohms, 0.09% THD)
Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms) 110/130/160/-W

So, I guess the Q300 would "like" a more powerful amp. Anyone here driving the Q300 with an amp similar to mine?

thanks

Bought my KEF T205 for $860. Is that a good price considering they are a store display piece. Also is there anything I can check if the speaker are all good and no issues with them. I hooked them up with marantz NR1603 and they all sound good. But just want to see if there is anything else I can/have to check.

Correct LS50 don't have grids I love the look f the driver.

Has anyone done a 9.4 system?

When listening/comparing the Q300 to the Q100 I felt like the Q100 was a bit more even, and maybe even slightly more detailed. Then the same thing happened when I compared the R300 to the R100. I think what I was hearing on the the 300's, both the R and the Q, was a very slight push in the mids that muddied the mids a hint. Not dissing the 300's - both the 100's and the 300's sounded excellent to me and the difference was very, very subtle. And of course a big plus to both the 300's was the extended bass (I'll be using a sub so that advantage is not as important to me).

Just curious - has anyone else heard the same thing?

Unfortunately I heard the Q and the R series on different occasions so I haven't had a chance to compare the two series to each other. I'm a fan of three identical speakers LRC and am leaning towards using either the Q100 or R100 for my front stage. The difference in price between the Q and R series is nearly double hence my second question ...

Is there a significant sq difference between the Q100 and R100? Has anyone had a chance to compare them?

(Still considering the Q300 or R300 so any comparison of those would be welcome also.)

Hello!
I'm thinking of a 5.1 setup using Q300 x4, and hoping to upgrade to 7.1 in the future.

My question is regarding the center, I have read the Q600c will be the best option since it shares the same UniQ driver as the Q300, and the Q200c uses the Q100 driver.
I have also read about people using another Q300 as center (same speaker for LCR)

1- What is the best way to go? Q600c?

Also,
2- Any idea how much the Q600c will suffer being placed next to a wall? (as I understand it is rear ported)
Will 2-3" be enough for the port, or can the port be plugged - heard the Q300 can be plugged to remove the boom in the bass.

3- Which crossover are you guy using with the Q300 and Q100?
A couple of posts I read mention the Q100 is not that good at 80Hz, so they XO it at 100-120Hz

4- Is it overkill to go 5/7 channels using all Q300? Should I use Q300 front and Q100 for surrounds?


Side note:
My first choice was the KHT9000, but for the best price I have found, each cost the same as a pair of Q300, and according to specs and what I read, the Q300 seem to be better.
Any thoughts on that? Am I doing the right thing with Q300 over KHT9000?


Other info
Room is ~1800sq feet
AVR will be a Denon 4311, or a 4520 if I find the money :P
Sub: chose a Rythmik F15 (sealed) - no room for a ported 15", and don't want to lose excursion by going 12"
Used for 80-90% movies, the rest music. (no games)


Thanks!
Edited by Oldemar - 10/16/12 at 4:50pm