KEF Owners Thread - Page 194

Yeah, if they are in great shape, I say go for it.

^^^^Wow those are beautiful speakers !!

Hey what do you guys think of the IQ 30 ?

I disagree with most of the second paragraph above, assuming we're not talking about nearfield listening.

The most important difference is that unless the room is heavily "treated" the Q300 will have some midrange coloration, due to the fact that it does not have consistent midrange directivity. Listen to them next to a speaker with better-controlled midrange directivity (the R300 is a good example, as is the cheaper Q100) and the difference is clear. To be sure, one could prefer either one, and I suspect people used to the sound of 7" 2-ways would prefer the Q300. But the midrange will sound different in a room. (The differences between the R300 and Q100 will be less, because both throw a similarly consistent pattern in the midrange, with less directivity shift than the Q300 exhibits. Ditto the R300 and Q900, because the Q900 has a much larger tweeter and appropriately lower mid-tweet crossover)

The secondary difference is that the R300 should have a bit more scale to its presentation, because it has the separate dedicated woofer.

That said, considering the meager price difference ($100 per speaker MSRP) two R200 "center channels" is a better value than a pair of R300s...

The 4th gen Uni-Q of that Reference series is when the Uni-Q started to get really, really good. Not sure if the bandpass woofers are easy to access if they've gone bad, or if replacement parts are available. That would be my only hesitation. (And if they are available now, I'd go ahead and buy a couple woofers just in case they're not available later.) At the prices those speakers currently go for, if they're in good shape you can't get better sound. And the ones I've seen have been very well-crafted. Very undervalued on the used market.
Edited by DS-21 - 3/8/13 at 4:48am

What is the current gen?

The key word here is "most people", which are probably not exactly very experienced seasoned critical listeners who can exactly pinpoint the difference in midrange directivity.

"Most people" are most likely casual music listeners who probably pay more attention to the actual music content, not differences in midrange pattern. Furthermore, they probably listen to mostly compressed pop/ rock MP3 music streamed from their iPads which aren't precisely the most neutral type.

Sure, more experienced seasoned critical listeners may be able to tell such discrete differences, but probably not most people.
Edited by AcuDefTechGuy - 3/8/13 at 8:54am

11th overall, I think. (The volume products churn more than the top stuff, which makes sense.) But for the Reference line, there have been I think one or two generations since then. (Don't know what changed from 20x to 20x/2, besides delete-optioning the dumb supertweeter.)

Also, keep in mind there was a bit of time when KEF was a bit "lost in the woods," i.e. the "supertweeter era." Basically, that time corresponds to the time between when Andrew Jones left KEF for Infinity, and when KEF poached Mark Dodd from Tannoy. The 4th gen Uni-Qs were very good drivers. The current stuff is also very good.

They won't be able to pinpoint the "why," but my experience tells me that they are consistently able to tell the difference in listening back-to-back between a speaker with correct pattern control, and a speaker with a directivity shift in the midrange. Preference does vary a bit.

I have a question concerning the speaker wire connections of R-series. Some of the R-series feature videos talk about bi-wiring and bi-amping like they are the same thing. The manual talks about "single-wire" connection, "bi-wired" connection and "bi-amped" connection seperately. I'm a bit confused - are the r-series (especially r500) truely active bi-amplifiable or do they rely on passive bi-amping?

Are we talking blinded test showing that people can identify which speaker is the Q300 and which is the Q100?

Or unblinded listening sessions where people can easily say, "Oh, yeah, I can definitely hear a difference" without proving it?

Some people say that it's difficult to DISPROVE physics & mathematics. I get that.

But it's also very difficult to PROVE the human physiology of cerebral interpretation of these physics & mathematics.

LOL Bump to all my good friends here on Avs ; )

I have heard IQ30 s and they were good but I would not consider $360 a good deal used. I paid less then $300 but returned as they were too big to use as heights.

We're not talking about wires or amps here. We're talking about differences in the radiated sound power into the room. Whole different ballgame. The difference is obvious back-to-back, so the question is preference rather than difference.

They are great bookshelf speakers. I am using them as side surrounds, but they are more than capable of holding their own as front mains.

Interesting thread. I've still got the same pair of KEF 107 Reference speakers I bought in 1990 although I have a new Kube for them. They still sound as good as ever. It's nice to stumble onto this thread so many years later and read about the newest speakers from KEF.
Rgrds-Ross:)

Thanks for the reply I decided to upgrade my turntable instead for 2 ch to go with my Ls50's . Thanks again though !

Is it true that Kef uses the same uni-q in the iq series as they did in the xq series? If so then the iq series has got to be a tremendous value for how cheap they are.

Hey guys. Is there a site I can visit which shows the complete range of speakers by year and range in picture form? I have been given a pair and I'd like to identify them. They are in storage but I know exactly what the front cover looks like. Wooden grain boxes, standing approx 4 foot maybe less. front cover is brown mesh with little vertical folds and metal strip one inch wide down each side of mesh

Thanks in advance.

The closest I know is the Kef USA site and go to Kef Museum in choices below.

Hi DS,

How far along do you think the current 3005's are over the set from 3-4 years ago? The previous set does not have the tangerine waveguide. Any true audible differences.

I have an opportunity to buy the older set, in good condition, for $400.

I had been considering buying the set new in white, or the NHT Absolute Zero's in white. But this price is pretty good.

Any thoughts on the current gen vs the previous gen?

Thanks,
Dan

My only experience is with the Tangerine'd SE's. Sorry.

I could be wrong, but IIRC the pre-Tangerine 3005s are older than 3-4 years. More like 6-7 years.

Nope according to KEF

KEF Is proud to announce a new series for home theater: E305. The Eggs have been updated with driver technology coming straight from Q300s. Learn more at the KEF.com

Interesting. While the 3005s are very good and the best in their size-class that I've heard thus far, they've been out for a while and I was wondering when KEF would come out with a quasi-replacement. ("Quasi" because the E305's look like they're between the old 2005 and 3005 size-wise.)

Surprised the sub was downsized compared to the HTB2. The HTB2, for a "designer" type sub, was a very good little flyinh saucer. Also surprised that the Uni-Q's woofer has a ferrite magnet (compared to the 3005's neo) because of the small cabinet volume. Neo has gone up a lot in price, sure, but space is at a premium in an egg.

Not crazy about the silver stands. Hopefully all-black will be an option at a later time. (Also, personally annoyed that they don't look compatible with the 3005 floor stands, but I suspect that won't be an issue for most perspective buyers.)
Edited by DS-21 - 3/14/13 at 3:21am

I fall into the "most people" category, not exactly experienced but a critical listener. There was definitely a difference between the Q300 and the Philharmonics

In a small room where the Q300 were originally intended, at low volume the Q300 were good, but not a lot better than my Mordaunt Short monitors. I had a difficult time with positioning sufficient to provide a sweet spot or evaluate the soundstage they later proved to be capable of in my larger room. IMO these are not the greatest for nearfield listening. In a large room at low volume they were just ok, but once the volume was kicked up above "the wife is in the house" level I was impressed. While I'll stick to the Philharmonics when I really want to enjoy acoustic, live or classical/orchestral recordings, nothing I played on the Kefs disappointed. Bass was really a surprise for their size, and I had no problem with midrange - this may be due to the space, a greatroom with high ceilings and 12" hand-hewn logs, pine-provided room correction. The most discerning reviews I'd read before purchase indicated the only shortcoming was the tweeter, so I was listening for it, relieved to find that transitions were handled well and absent any overly bright characteristics (which I'm sensitive to). Maybe because I went straight to an external 200w amp and bypassed my receiver altogether, I dunno. Overall I was impressed with their ability to deliver detail regardless of genre (at normal listening volume). It's hard not to be nitpicky of several things after adopting Philharmonics as your primary 2-channel speakers, so I'll just skip on past any further remarks on drivers and move right into imaging. OK, maybe I'll fast forward a bit more Truly, imaging was great, nothing to complain about, and the soundstage was both wide and impressively accurate as I walked around the room, not diminishing significantly until well off axis. Lots of fun.

If you listen at low volume, if you plan to sit less than 8' away, if you're sensitive of midrange directivity shift there are probably better speakers out there for $500. Otherwise, these are likely to please. I wanted inexpensive speakers for a room that is seldom used unless I escape with a book, these proved worthy of graduating into the "family listening" room. The cool part is I now get to go speaker shopping again. Yippee!

Partial list of audition tracks, if interested (all FLAC, sorry ADTG )

Sting - Brand New Day/Peter Gabriel - Power of the Heart/Stevie Ray Vaughan - Little Wing/The Verve - Lucky Man/Dave Matthews & Tim Reynolds - #41 (acoustic, Live at Luther College)/Paul Oakenfold - Dread Rock/Rage Against the Machine - Wake Up/Baaba Maal - Ndelorel & Daniibe/Noir Desir - Le Vent Nous Portera/Cherry Poppin' Daddies - Master and Slave/George Gershwin - Pastime Rag No. 3/Henryk Gorecki - Miserere/Rimsky-Korsakov:Scheherazade (London Philharmonic Orchestra)- ...The Sea and Sinbad's Ship/Tchaikovsky - Swan Lake, Op. 20 Act II

Whaaa? No iPad or MacBook ALAC files (Apple Lossless) to AirPlay ?

I'm definitely in the minority compared to most audiophiles because although I have mostly lossless audio files and a big SACD/DVDA collection over the years, now I mainly use my iPad and stream to AppleTV/ AirPlay.

I think the difference is there in speakers, but the gap is wider among different brands than within the same brand, especially within the same line of brand (Q vs Q, R vs R, etc).
Edited by AcuDefTechGuy - 3/14/13 at 8:42am

I have no experience with Airplay, my home is an Apple-free zone. I do use my Android tablet or phone though. Each of my systems has a Logitech Squeezebox that has a very nice app. The configuration with the Kefs is directly connected to a computer, there is also a great foobar app. Every once in a great while I'll hear something in the car and want to replay when I get home, I have a nice little bluetooth speaker for that. I have no idea the quality of Airplay, I would guess it's way better than bluetooth.

The Logitechs are very cool. With one connected to each receiver it allows me to sync the same music to any of three systems. This was how I A-B compared Kef with Philharmonic (kinda - still had to run up and down stairs).

I used to be all-Android also. But Apple has slowly won me over. Now I use the iPad for work (a lot of people/ services use iPad in the hospital), surf the web & forums (AH & AVS), pay credit cards, transfer money, do taxes, buy things, send emails, schedule calendar, task, control my Denon AVRs (absolutely amazing Denon remote) & Panasonic BD, control all my home PCs from remote locations, use as a WiFi keyboard/ mouse for local PC, control my home thermostat, and play MetalStorm (love this game).

With AirPlay or AppleTV, I don't need my HTPC or NAS on at all - just the AVR and my iPad.

It sounds great to me. Depends on the original recording. But I'm sure others may find that AirPlay/ AppleTV's quality is just not good enough.

Lossless is lossless to me, whether it's ALAC or FLAC or WMALossless, or WAV.
Edited by AcuDefTechGuy - 3/14/13 at 8:45am

I'm the same way, though I stream from my MacBook as I don't have an iPad. (Wife does; I actually don't care for it.)

Can't get any better than bit perfect lossless files, as verified by JA in Stereophile. Not, at least, without adding more discrete channels and using them well.

I agree. Apple Lossless (ALAC) is as clean as any other lossless.

Doesn't airplay output at cd quality, 44.1?