or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › KEF Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

KEF Owners Thread - Page 184

post #5491 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdg4vfx View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

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 ...

I just noticed something about the R series ... none of them use the 6.25" Uni-Q, they all use a 5" Uni-Q. The one exception is the R100 which uses a 5.25" Uni-Q, same as the LS-50. Wonder if this is related?

I'm not sure there's much difference between 5" and 5.25". I wonder if the baskets are different.

However, note that a 6.5" concentric with a bigger/stouter tweeter wouldn't have the same problem. That's why the Q900 doesn't have the same midrange mushroom cloud pattern. (See Stereophile's measurements.) It has a much stouter tweeter, and crosses it lower. KEF can and has in the past done the same with a 6.5" concentric. See, e.g., polar measurements of the Ref 201/2, or the old Andrew Jones-era Ref Four. Stereophile has measured both. Likewise, my old 12" Tannoy Dual Concentrics didn't have the problem. The reason was that the tweeter was a compression-loaded unit that played down to ~1.4kHz. (Also, the pattern was narrower than on a modern Uni-Q, which means the woofer could play up higher before the tweeter needed to come in to match the woofer's pattern.)

This particular 6.5" concentric (the Q300/Q700 driver) uses what might be the same tweet as the smaller one, and a crossover point too high to allow a directivity match. So the tweeter has a broader pattern at the base of its passband than the woofer, what I call a "midrange mushroom cloud" pattern.

Note that I've not measured the Q300's polar reponse, but in listening to them I clearly heard the, "hi-fi" tells of speakers with midrange pattern discontinuities. The Q100 and Q900 do not. Perhaps smart marketing by KEF, because the Q300's do sound more like standard 7" 2-ways from lesser makers than they sound like KEF's best stuff.)
Edited by DS-21 - 11/19/12 at 6:17am
post #5492 of 6599
I'd love to see if AJ at SoundField Audio could do a passive version of the SAM 1. But take the Q100 Uni-Q and mate it with a smaller, passive mid-woofer. Maybe a 5.25" mid-woofer. That way, you could have a smaller cabinet than the SAM 1, but still have a speaker that could be crossed over at 80hz.... Or maybe not, I'm not a speaker designer, but I'd be very interested in one like that.
post #5493 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by yveletnik View Post

Yeah, R500s are here to stay. no matter how I look at it I just don't see LS50 as a step up from R500s. I would definitely want to hear those one day.
KEF says LS50 driver is a special edition of R100's driver, but R300 and all the R towers have a different driver made only to play down to 500Hz and than u get dedicated woofers from 500Hz down where LS50 has to play that region with the same mid driver.
My guess is that LS50 is not as laid back as R series and in that sense it may be a more accurate speaker, the imaging will probably be better on LS50 since the whole sound comes from 1 point. But towers are towers, if they would make LS50 in tower version I would seriously looked at those:)

Thanks again for your time

Think your are spot on here

As the kef dealer is very far from me i have to buy them based on opinions from others, but i leaning more and more to the R500, and to do it worse for myself you have R900:rolleyes: and as you say floorstander is floorstander. I have used floorstanders for many many years and like it alot, but i am sure both the LS50 and R300 is a very good bookshelf speakers
post #5494 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dftkell View Post

I'd love to see if AJ at SoundField Audio could do a passive version of the SAM 1. But take the Q100 Uni-Q and mate it with a smaller, passive mid-woofer. Maybe a 5.25" mid-woofer. That way, you could have a smaller cabinet than the SAM 1, but still have a speaker that could be crossed over at 80hz.... Or maybe not, I'm not a speaker designer, but I'd be very interested in one like that.

I think he does have a passive variant with two 6.5" woofers, but it's in the same width cabinet.

But it's certainly theoretically possible to do what you're suggesting. And IMO a good idea.
post #5495 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Just saw Stereophile's KEF LS50 review (which means I read the measurements in depth but haven't really bothered with the text).
Looks like an absolutely excellent design.
Wonder if (looks aside) a set of LS50's on narrow side-firing "flanking sub" stands with appropriate filtering would give the mighty KEF Ref 201/2 or Pioneer S-4EX a run for the money.

Is it possible to link to that review?

/Evert
post #5496 of 6599
The LS50 is very intriguing. I just can't get past the looks of that hideous color of the cone. I know, trivial but damn, it's ugly. Wish it would have been silver like on the classy looking R series...
post #5497 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_kjellgren View Post

Is it possible to link to that review?
/Evert

Thinks this is the magazine review and not online review;)
post #5498 of 6599
Anyone by any chance listned to both the LS50's and DefTech SM55's?

/Evert
post #5499 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dftkell View Post

I'd love to see if AJ at SoundField Audio could do a passive version of the SAM 1. But take the Q100 Uni-Q and mate it with a smaller, passive mid-woofer. Maybe a 5.25" mid-woofer. That way, you could have a smaller cabinet than the SAM 1, but still have a speaker that could be crossed over at 80hz.... Or maybe not, I'm not a speaker designer, but I'd be very interested in one like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

I think he does have a passive variant with two 6.5" woofers, but it's in the same width cabinet.
But it's certainly theoretically possible to do what you're suggesting. And IMO a good idea.

I'd be very, very interested a smaller cabinet with a Uni-Q and single 5.25" or 6.5" woofer from SoundField, especially if he could make it smaller (shorter) than R300!
post #5500 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_kjellgren View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Just saw Stereophile's KEF LS50 review (which means I read the measurements in depth but haven't really bothered with the text).
Looks like an absolutely excellent design.
Wonder if (looks aside) a set of LS50's on narrow side-firing "flanking sub" stands with appropriate filtering would give the mighty KEF Ref 201/2 or Pioneer S-4EX a run for the money.

Is it possible to link to that review?

/Evert

Not yet, though I presume it will be on their website at some point in the near future. Then I'm sure someone will link to it in this thread. smile.gif
post #5501 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdg4vfx View Post

I'd be very, very interested a smaller cabinet with a Uni-Q and single 5.25" or 6.5" woofer from SoundField, especially if he could make it smaller (shorter) than R300!

So that maybe it could fit into something like this:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=302-701
post #5502 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallhall View Post

Thanks again for your time
Think your are spot on here
As the kef dealer is very far from me i have to buy them based on opinions from others, but i leaning more and more to the R500, and to do it worse for myself you have R900:rolleyes: and as you say floorstander is floorstander. I have used floorstanders for many many years and like it alot, but i am sure both the LS50 and R300 is a very good bookshelf speakers

I had R300s and they are very good imo and they can play without sub just fine, but R500s are a notable step up, imo again.
My story with KEF was R300s, Q900s, R500. I actually had R300s and Q900 side by side for a while, picked the Q900s but after a while I started missing certain things from the R300s (very distinct clean sound, more punch in the bass), so switched to R500s. Then I had Q900s A/B with R500s for a couple of weeks. I still think that Q900 was the most accurate of the bunch but there is something special about the R series.
Maybe I'll get LS50s for bedroom. I wouldn't be surprised if LS50 in a few years will cost used same as they do now new. So might get it as an investment:). With all the good reviews they get people will still want them after anniversary is over.

p.s. the favorite thing about R series though is the tweeter, just awesome, delicate but very realistic. I was originally going to do dual setup with another pair of celebrated ID speakers (for mellow and acoustic recordings), but had to sell them just because the tweeter on R series is just soooooo much better.
post #5503 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dftkell View Post

So that maybe it could fit into something like this:
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=302-701

Exactly! I'd audition that immediately ; )
post #5504 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by yveletnik View Post

I had R300s and they are very good imo and they can play without sub just fine, but R500s are a notable step up, imo again.
My story with KEF was R300s, Q900s, R500. I actually had R300s and Q900 side by side for a while, picked the Q900s but after a while I started missing certain things from the R300s (very distinct clean sound, more punch in the bass), so switched to R500s. Then I had Q900s A/B with R500s for a couple of weeks. I still think that Q900 was the most accurate of the bunch but there is something special about the R series.
Maybe I'll get LS50s for bedroom. I wouldn't be surprised if LS50 in a few years will cost used same as they do now new. So might get it as an investment:). With all the good reviews they get people will still want them after anniversary is over.
p.s. the favorite thing about R series though is the tweeter, just awesome, delicate but very realistic. I was originally going to do dual setup with another pair of celebrated ID speakers (for mellow and acoustic recordings), but had to sell them just because the tweeter on R series is just soooooo much better.

Many thanks for your experiences with kefs.

I am sure you are right about the prices on the LS 50 in the future.

Saw a test on "Cnet" on the R700 and the only complain they had was it lacks deep bass, and i am sure the R500 have less of it, so this worries me abit
post #5505 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallhall View Post

Many thanks for your experiences with kefs.
I am sure you are right about the prices on the LS 50 in the future.
Saw a test on "Cnet" on the R700 and the only complain they had was it lacks deep bass, and i am sure the R500 have less of it, so this worries me abit

2 channel music w/out a sub, yes I believe maybe a bit inadequate, depending on the music. HT with sub(s), guessing pretty awesome whether R500 or R700. I had 103/4s paired with a Def Tech Powerfield 1500 sub that were awesome. I believe from all I have read and from a contact at Kef US, that the R500 and R700s may be the best of the R series and that is saying a lot. If HT is 30% or more of your listening, it will be tough to beat the R series. If music is your primary focus, it will depend on what you listen to whether other options might be better. There are a lot of amazing speakers out there, just believe it is tough to beat the R series for the money.
post #5506 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

2 channel music w/out a sub, yes I believe maybe a bit inadequate, depending on the music. HT with sub(s), guessing pretty awesome whether R500 or R700. I had 103/4s paired with a Def Tech Powerfield 1500 sub that were awesome. I believe from all I have read and from a contact at Kef US, that the R500 and R700s may be the best of the R series and that is saying a lot. If HT is 30% or more of your listening, it will be tough to beat the R series. If music is your primary focus, it will depend on what you listen to whether other options might be better. There are a lot of amazing speakers out there, just believe it is tough to beat the R series for the money.

Thanks for your feedback

Music is my primary listning, and i have decided to go for kef, both for looks and the sq. I have 2 subs, one little kef 3005 and one Infinity kappa "10", so i am sure even the R300 would do great, atleast with sub, but ofcourse i floorstander is better and dont need sub.

My current mainspeakers(out of service because of a blown tweeter) is Infinity kappa 600 with a "10" sidewoofer, and they go looow, so i guess the only Kef R speaker who is compareble to my kappa 600 is the R900?. That said they are very expencive here, and i think R500 is enough for me. To comlicate it even more i think i have to change from MCACC to Audyssey mulit XT32 becouse of the sub eq. The MCACC do i terrible job with the sub

Pardon for my bad english:eek:
post #5507 of 6599
^^^^^^
I did a quick search on the Kappa 600s, could not find any professional reviews but feedback from owners seems very positive. Can you just replace your tweeter?

For more input on the R series and the LS50 I would suggest checking out the Kef "R" Series Part 2 thread on the UK AVForum. Dav1dF and Jules, among others have provided a lot of first hand input on these.
post #5508 of 6599
I just wanted to share that I just hit up the KEF Direct web site, for one of their extended Black Friday deals. I ordered a pair of iQ10 bookshelf speakers, with near future plan to go 7.1 with my existing setup (iQ90 mains, iQ60c center and iQ30 surrounds). For $249 shipped, I couldn't resist. I was tempted to go with a set of iQ70s, but they sold out by the time I decided to place an order.

For those of you looking to add to your systems, or even just get started, the KEF Direct site still has some great deals left.
post #5509 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

^^^^^^
I did a quick search on the Kappa 600s, could not find any professional reviews but feedback from owners seems very positive. Can you just replace your tweeter?
For more input on the R series and the LS50 I would suggest checking out the Kef "R" Series Part 2 thread on the UK AVForum. Dav1dF and Jules, among others have provided a lot of first hand input on these.

Many thanks for your help and advice again

Yes according my dealer they could replace the tweeter. But the speakers is about 10 years old and i want something newer, that said they are still da mn good. I dont know but i also think the Kef R serie is easier to drive than the Infinity.
post #5510 of 6599
post #5511 of 6599
Quick question Re LS50's

I have decided to pick up a pair to try out and use between the PC and Sonos system (have yet to setup the Sonos)

I am looking at a USB DAC / Stereo Amp setup and like the Arcam rDAC and Marantz PM7004 combo. Does this sound like a reasonable setup for the LS50's?

Edit: I have also been looking at the Peachtree Nova 125 as an all in one any thoughts on this would also be much appreciated.
Edited by Concept001 - 12/2/12 at 6:57pm
post #5512 of 6599
Someone asked about dealers in South Florida earlier... I am also trying to find a showroom in South Florida where I can see / hear those speakers. Does anyone know of any?
post #5513 of 6599
John Atkinson's highly positive review of the LS50 in the December issue of Stereophile has now been posted online:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-ls50-anniversary-model-loudspeaker

The measurements -- particularly the cumulative spectral decay and lateral response -- show some solid engineering.

AJ
post #5514 of 6599
Many years ago, I recall being absolutely blown away by some reference series KEF speakers (I believe they would be comparable to the current Reference 207 speakers) that I listened to at an Ultimate Electronics. I've been getting the upgrade bug lately, and I'm wondering if the Q or R series would bring back any memories of that experience, or if there is simply no comparison to those reference speakers.

My current speakers are Mirage OMD (15s in the front, 5s for surround). I don't hate them, but I've always felt they didn't quite live up to the hype. Would the Q or R series KEFs be a considerable upgrade?
post #5515 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

John Atkinson's highly positive review of the LS50 in the December issue of Stereophile has now been posted online:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-ls50-anniversary-model-loudspeaker
The measurements -- particularly the cumulative spectral decay and lateral response -- show some solid engineering.
AJ

Those LS50 measurements look mighty fine. Another winner from KEF...... But could KEF please put some freaking grilles on them already? biggrin.gif
post #5516 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsaville View Post

My current speakers are Mirage OMD (15s in the front, 5s for surround). I don't hate them, but I've always felt they didn't quite live up to the hype. Would the Q or R series KEFs be a considerable upgrade?

Maybe. The KEFs interact with a room very differently than the Mirage bipoles and quasi-omnis. I much prefer KEF's presentation, but you won't get the scale and diffuse imaging that comes from omnis set up well.
post #5517 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsaville View Post

Many years ago, I recall being absolutely blown away by some reference series KEF speakers (I believe they would be comparable to the current Reference 207 speakers) that I listened to at an Ultimate Electronics. I've been getting the upgrade bug lately, and I'm wondering if the Q or R series would bring back any memories of that experience, or if there is simply no comparison to those reference speakers.
My current speakers are Mirage OMD (15s in the front, 5s for surround). I don't hate them, but I've always felt they didn't quite live up to the hype. Would the Q or R series KEFs be a considerable upgrade?

I have been told the R series comes somewhat close to the Reference, excellent Uni-Q but the reference cabinets will do bass more defined. Having owned 103/4s and heard 105/3s, I would go R series as a minimum if you are trying to recreate your experience, R700s if you add a sub. The Q series are good but not going to get you close enough. Just one opinion, perhaps others will weigh in.
post #5518 of 6599
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsaville View Post

Many years ago, I recall being absolutely blown away by some reference series KEF speakers (I believe they would be comparable to the current Reference 207 speakers) that I listened to at an Ultimate Electronics. I've been getting the upgrade bug lately, and I'm wondering if the Q or R series would bring back any memories of that experience, or if there is simply no comparison to those reference speakers.
My current speakers are Mirage OMD (15s in the front, 5s for surround). I don't hate them, but I've always felt they didn't quite live up to the hype. Would the Q or R series KEFs be a considerable upgrade?

I have been told the R series comes somewhat close to the Reference, excellent Uni-Q (better?) but the reference cabinets will do bass more defined. Having owned 103/4s and heard 105/3s, I would go R series as a minimum if you are trying to recreate your experience, R700s if you add a sub. The Q series are good but not going to get you close enough. Just one opinion, perhaps others will weigh in.
post #5519 of 6599
Hi all,

Curious as to what your impressions of the KEF KHT3005 home theatre package are. Costco is offering it with the Kube 2 sub for $899. My intended application is for mixed use music and HT and in our great room with the layout below. The room is 15' x 19' and the TV will be mounted on the left wall. The room is open to the right and the bottom (open concept). Are these speakers big enough for the room?

image.jpg
post #5520 of 6599
Bigoak

I use the same set just now, and they sounds great for both music and movies
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › KEF Owners Thread