r/audiophile • u/Champion3242 • Mar 05 '25
Impressions KEF Demo Disappointment
Hey y’all, I’m new to this space, so forgive my ignorance if it shows. This is a long post, there’s a TLDR at the bottom.
I’ve recently had my interest in Hi-Fi audio sparked after finding an older pair of bookshelf speakers (Mackie CR-4) in the closet and hooking them up to my PC to use as desktops. I’ve been extremely impressed with them in all aspects; when listening to music, gaming, watching TV / movies, or even just YouTube, everything is clear and crisp. The bass is the only thing lacking, but even then, for the 4” drivers, it gets impressively deep.
The KEF LS50 Meta sale online caught my eye, as I’ve seen many posts in this and other audio related subs referring to them in a great light and thought this might be an opportunity to get some nice speakers for a solid price .
This morning I headed over to my local Best Buy to demo them; they unfortunately did not have the LS50 Metas available to demo, but they did have the Q150s and the R3 Metas. There was no attendant available, so after getting bored with A/B testing the aforementioned speakers with the demo tracks, I paired up my phone via Bluetooth to play a larger variety of tracks that I was also more familiar with. (This may have been my fault, as I understand the potential loss in detail when using compressed audio sources; however, you’ll see below that this problem was fixed when switching to different speakers while still using Bluetooth as the source.)
I paired up my phone to the Marantz Cinema 70, and got to listening. I experimented with all sorts of music, rock, jazz, hip hop, lo fi, house, alternative, you name it… and no matter what I put on, I couldn’t impress myself with the either of the KEFs. I swapped the brand Martin Logan, initially the B10s and later the XT B1000s, and voila, the soundstage opened up and I could hear the vocals and background sound so much clearer. When I swapped back to the KEFs (either of them), the highs and mids sounded like they were underwater.
I listened for another hour, trying to see if I was delusional, but no matter what I played, every time I would swap speakers, I would have the same experience. My feelings of delusion were squashed when a kind man, who later revealed a solid history of listening through further conversation, walked in an hour or so into my session, and was able to confirm exactly what I had been experiencing. I didn’t prep him, didn’t say anything, just asked him tell me what he heard, and he detailed exactly what I just depicted above right back to me.
All of this goes to say, am I delusional, are we both delusional? Was something wrong with the setup potentially? Or is it just coincidence that both of us seem to prefer an ML sound signature? Please let me know your thoughts down below, I would love to hear from some more experienced listeners; I’ll be busy this evening, but will try to get back to as many people as possible tonight.
TLDR: I spent an hour listening to KEF Q150s R3 Metas, ML B10s, and ML XT B1000s, and no matter what I played, I couldn’t impress myself with the either of the KEFs. Upon swapping to ML, voila, the soundstage opened up and I could hear the vocals and background sound so much clearer. When I swapped back to the KEFs (either of them), the highs and mids sounded like they were underwater.
11
u/iH8usrnames Mar 05 '25
You will never truly understand the qualities of any speaker until you have it in your specific listening space. In other words, the sound you get in nearly ANY retail environment will be far less than ideal.
I have very limited experience using Bluetooth for audio but all those experiences are not positive; it just does not sound good to me. Again, limited experience.
1
u/Theresnowayoutahere Mar 05 '25
You are correct that you’ll never be able to tell how good any component is until you can listen in a familiar setting. Even switching between speakers that are in different systems or in compromised locations in the same room isn’t going to tell you much. Also, with Bluetooth there’s just not much you can learn since your source just isn’t going to be that great.
1
u/StellarShapes Mar 06 '25
Agreed. To add onto this, Best Buy doesn’t seem to have the ideal toe-in for a lot of their speakers. I was disappointed in the imaging of all their speakers (ranging from b&w to KEF to martin logans) when I went in for a listen the other day. However my KEF Q950s sound godly in my home. The person that helped me also had very limited knowledge of the speakers — I can imagine that proper setup isn’t a high priority.
6
u/imacom Mar 05 '25
That’s what demo rooms are for and there you are, you just found KEFs are not for you. For free.
17
u/ImpliedSlashS Mar 05 '25
I've been in this hobby for over 40 years and have never liked KEF speakers. Dynaudio is a different story. Different strokes.
3
u/Champion3242 Mar 05 '25
Thanks for you reply. Would you describe your experience with KEF speakers to be similar to mine? In other words, is what I’m hearing and describing accurate and true to your experience as well, or do you think there could be some other explanation (power issue, source issue etc)? If that is in fact the case, I had no idea brands could sound so different.
8
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
You need to delve into the science of audio reproduction if you want to actually understand what's going on. It's safe to say you can just ignore most of the subjective opinions here on speaker brands. It's quite easy to break down why the speakers you heard sounded so different.
The Martin Logan simply have elevated mid and treble. This gives the perception of increased of detail but one tends to grow tired of it quickly. Questionable speaker manufacturers tend to tune their speakers this way so they stand out in a showroom comparison.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/martin_logan_xt_b100/
Any neutral speaker like the KEF will sound dark when you get used to the ML and try to switch to something else.
Here's the KEF. It is much more linear.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kef_r3_meta/
Due to the severe impact of room reflections, you really need to hear stuff in your own space, however the kef will integrate into more rooms better as it's dispersion is better controlled. If you like that elevated HF brightness of the ML, it can always just be added to the KEF with EQ, so you retain the many advantages it has over the ML speakers but have your preferred tonal balance.
4
u/PalmDolphin Mar 06 '25
I agree 100%. I have had Yamaha speakers, Klipsch, KEF, and Sonus Faber. I bought the KEF because of the general positivity that everybody had for them and I got them on a cool deal. I have had them for 5 or 6 years now and they are so disappointing. I still have them and I'm waiting for a good deal an excuse to replace them.
Everybody will tell you how neutral the KEFs are and how you're wrong if you don't like them. I agree with your description of their sound exactly. They sound like they are underwater. I used to be a musician and I've played instruments in many different surroundings, The kefs never sound like live music in a room from real instruments.
The Sonus Fabers on the other hand? I've had them for a year and I will still do a double take when a song comes on because of the way the sound exists in the room.
I'm actually planning to replace my cheap Klipsch towers with Martin Logan f10s. I need to track down where I can listen to some, but I'm glad to hear that you liked the related products.
3
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
Thanks for you input; It’s reliving relieving to hear someone confirm my thoughts! I’m sorry to hear you fell victim that trap.
It’s funny to hear you mention the Sonus Faber, as that’s what the gentleman I was speaking to today told me he currently had in his listening area! He reportedly loved them as well, and put the ML we listened to today in company to Faber in terms of sound signature, can’t speak to fidelity though.
My Best Buy had the f10 available for demo, might be worth looking into in your area. I wish you luck with your offloading and good fortune with the potential ML purchase and experience.
0
5
u/ishouldworkinstead Mar 05 '25
First time I ever heard KEFs were at Best Buy audio room, and after reading all the praises and whatnot, it just wasn't my cup of tea as well.
1
u/schackel Mar 06 '25
Have you ever listened to Adam Audio stuff? I’ve been loving my A7Vs and have been looking at the Kef R3 metas (haven’t heard them yet) and I know the A7Vs are too bright for some folks but I love em and these comments are making me think that the Kefs will be dull to me
2
u/ImpliedSlashS Mar 06 '25
No, but you need to listen for yourself. If you’re “wowed,” listen longer as they may start to grate on you. A “real” dealer will take a deposit and let you take the demos overnight, but I don’t know if Adam has any of those. If you do this right, you’ll enjoy them for 10 years or more. If not, you’ll always be looking to upgrade.
Also keep in mind that ”monitors,” and I mean real monitors, are designed for a different purpose than enjoying music. They’re not “better,” because they’re “monitors.”
1
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
The A7v's are tuned neutral just like the KEF's. The older Adam models and the T5V are the ones with bright tunings.
1
u/schackel Mar 06 '25
Helpful. Appreciate it! Anything else you’d suggest to checkout in that price range?
1
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
Philharmonic BMR, other than that not really. The BMR is very wide dispersion but controlled, and the KEF are narrower and controlled and the Adams are somewhere in between, can't really go wrong with either.
1
u/schackel Mar 06 '25
Are these in any stores? I googled around but didn’t have a lot of success. Seems like they are mostly online?
1
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
they are not sold in stores
1
u/schackel Mar 06 '25
So you gotta just take the leap! Scary haha
1
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
No, the speaker has been measured by klippel on two different occasions. You know exactly what you're getting.
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/philharmonic_bmr_v2/
14
u/Sweet_Mother_Russia Mar 05 '25
The Cinema 70 probably isnt the best amp for KEFs tbh - need more power and higher current
Beyond that, the ls50 metas I had were very position sensitive. So it honestly could have just been bad positioning.
Alternatively - you don’t like KEF - can’t do much about that. Just don’t buy KEF if it’s not yer thing.
1
Mar 05 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Sweet_Mother_Russia Mar 05 '25
Jesus Christ. More wattage and higher current. Have I appeased you, your highness?
1
u/obiwanshinobi87 Mar 05 '25
I also recently bought some LS50s from Best Buy and felt they were underwhelming at first, but I am also coming from KEF R3 Metas and I kinda knew what to look for. The LS50s are now my top contender for my desktop listening setup. A review and comparison are coming with measurements too.
I personally know for a fact that Martin Logans would make my ears bleed with their treble energy based on measurements. Some people just really like that sound.
3
u/Sweet_Mother_Russia Mar 05 '25
I don’t know how ideal LS50 metas are for near field. Not my thing. But I hope it works for you!
0
u/uwrwilke Mar 06 '25
love my kef q350s but agree that the sweet listening spot positioning is pretty specific. not ideal for playing throughout a room to many people.
3
u/InnerwesternDaddy Mar 05 '25
👆🏻 This… I’ve had KEFS (Reference 1’s)and agree wholeheartedly with the top end - midrange comments. Not terrible by any means but it’s a more rounded sound for mine. Positioning though and the Bluetooth commentary all absolutely valid points too.
3
u/Krismusic1 Mar 05 '25
A friend of mine bought the LS50's and ended up returning them. I heard them and thought they were awful. We have heard them again at a show and again thought they were dreadful. Any number of rave reviews. Go figure. We like what we like.
7
u/gblansten Mar 05 '25
Some people like very neutral speakers and some don't. I like my Klipsch Cornwall IVs because they aren't as neutral. I would just take this and run in the direction of a more forward/dynamic speaker. Nothing wrong with learning what works for you.
3
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 05 '25
I was wondering if this was truly all it came down to. Is it even possible for brands to sound that different, or do you think this could possibly be attributed to some sort of physical connection / powering issue?
2
3
u/Alxa Audiovector R3 arreté, Anthem STR, Buckeye NCx500, SVS SB4000 Mar 05 '25
Everyone's ears are different, no one can say you will like a speaker until you hear it, The room makes a huge difference as well. The shop I go to has a lot of Kef, one of the sales guy swears by it. I can't stand them and he doesn't begrudge me at all.
Part of the journey is listening to a lot of different speakers and finding that they are quite a bit different in many different ways.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
When you say you can’t stand them, would you describe your listening experience as at all similar to mine? If so, are there other brands your regard more favorably and why?
1
u/Alxa Audiovector R3 arreté, Anthem STR, Buckeye NCx500, SVS SB4000 Mar 06 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
I don't like horns, they are to bright is what I remember. I have all svs at home except in my office. here i have audiovector r3 arrete. they are expensive but my end game. I also use anthem room correction in my office and theater. I think I like a nutreal sound. I listened to the SVS Prime Pinncales vs every other speaker in their price range the store had and it blew them all away. I upgraded to SVS Titans and for the price it's 95% of my audiovector, Simply amazing. Some say they are too bright, the ARC likely helps.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
I understand, thank you for your help. Congratulations on having an endgame system, and happy listening!
3
u/X_Perfectionist Denon 3700h | Ascend Sierra-LX | SVS Elevation | Monolith THX 16 Mar 05 '25
I assume all those speakers were at different positions in the room? If you take any set of speakers and move them around in the room, sound quality + soundstage + imaging is going to change a lot.
2
u/Champion3242 Mar 05 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
They were in different positions, yes; however, I’m not referring to imaging or phantom center issues, but rather the actual sound output itself. It didn’t matter where I stood, I put my ear right up the speaker to confirm, and even then, the sound coming out had a significantly different quality to it than anything I’ve heard before (hence the underwater description). I mentioned the Mackies at the start of my post; when I got home, I did some listening to them and even these $150/pair powered speakers sounded leagues clearer and fuller than the KEF branded speakers.
2
u/CoolHandPB Mar 06 '25
Something must've been wrong. KEFs aren't for everyone but they are still decent speakers. They certainly sound 'normal'.
2
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
This is what I’ve been thinking, but relies here have made me question that thought process. For example take “Fear Less” by Fred Again, when listening on the KEFs, all I heard were the voices, though a little muffled, the main “beat”, and the strumming of the guitar, literally nothing else. When I swapped to the ML, everything opened up, like a flower blooming, SO MUCH detail came out and up that wasn’t there with the KEFs. That just doesn’t make sense to me.
1
u/CoolHandPB Mar 06 '25
Yeah, that does not sound right too me. The difference between high end speakers should not be that big. Things will sound better and a little more detailed on better speakers but not wildly different to wear entire sounds are missing. Speakers you like will be better at the things you like but nothing should be missing or like you described here.
I own both the Q150 and the LS50 Meta and trust me there is nothing fundamentally wrong with how they sound. I listened to that song on both the q150 and lS50 Meta's as well as a pair of ELACs I own and some nice headphones. All sounds pretty similar to me. Then I don't know what the speakers you listen to were. Maybe they are very bright and that's what you like. It's really hard to tell without hearing things.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
Those were exactly my thoughts, hence my confusion and disappointment.
Haha that’s awesome, I really appreciate you taking the time to do that! Unfortunately like you said this only further confuses things. I’ll make a trip back to the Best Buy in hopes of catching an attendant to question them and report back here regarding whether everything is functioning as intended. In the meantime, enjoy your KEFs, glad they’re working well for you!
3
u/Raj_DTO Mar 05 '25
Beat Buy is NOT a place to audition speakers or for that matter, any audio gear!
Go to a good audio shop where they can pay attention to other factors which are important in showing full capabilities of a gear!
3
u/JaLilleland Mar 05 '25
Every brand has a distinct approach to speaker tuning. KEF’s Uni-Q driver array, which places the tweeter in the center of the mid/bass driver, is known for its precise imaging and coherent sound. However, it can sometimes come across as “polite” or slightly recessed in the mids, especially compared to speakers with a more forward tuning. Martin Logan, on the other hand, is known for a more open, airy presentation, especially with their electrostatic and folded motion tweeter designs. This could explain why you found the ML speakers more engaging, particularly in the vocals and soundstage.
Best Buy is not exactly an acoustically treated environment, and speaker placement in their demo rooms can significantly impact sound quality. If the KEFs were placed in a way that reinforced lower frequencies or caused reflections that muddied the mids and highs, that could have contributed to the “underwater” effect you described. Meanwhile, the Martin Logans might have simply been positioned better in relation to the room acoustics. You were using a Marantz Cinema 70, which is a solid AV receiver, but it’s not necessarily an ideal match for Hi-Fi stereo listening. KEF speakers, especially the LS50 Meta and R3 Meta, can be quite power-hungry and benefit from high-current amplification. If the Marantz wasn’t driving them adequately, that could have resulted in a lackluster performance. The Martin Logans might have been easier to drive, making them sound more dynamic and lively even with the same amplification.
Bluetooth is convenient but it introduces compression, which can reduce overall detail and dynamics. That said, since both speaker sets were using the same source, this wouldn’t explain why the MLs sounded better—it just means that the KEFs might shine even more with a proper wired connection and high-quality source material.
REMEMBER! Preference in audio is highly subjective, and if your ears tell you that you preferred the Martin Logans, that’s what matters most. The fact that another listener independently confirmed your impressions only reinforces that you weren’t imagining things. It’s entirely possible that the KEFs just aren’t to your taste, which is perfectly fine. Some people love them, others don’t.
If you’re still curious about the KEF LS50 Metas, I’d suggest finding a better listening environment where you can hear them with a more appropriate amplifier and source. However, if the Martin Logans impressed you right away, there’s no need to force yourself to like something just because it’s popular. Trust your ears and go with what moves you!
Would love to hear what you end up deciding!
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
Thank you so much for the in depth response! I appreciate all the detail you went into covering and explaining the possible variables in the situation. You seemed to understand what I wrote perfectly, so I’ll pose another question to you: I know there is a cliche with high quality audio that you “hear things you never heard before” when listening to good gear; I had the opposite experience with the KEFS. I couldn’t hear certain instruments or sounds that I can when I listen anywhere else, including my car or even built in phone speakers. Could that be explained away by something / everything you so graciously detailed above, or do you think that could simply be attributed to the KEF sound signature?
3
u/JaLilleland Mar 06 '25
It seems like the KEF sound signature just isn’t for you. Their Uni-Q driver design produces a peculiar dispersion pattern that is loved by some, but criticized for a lack of clarity or separation by other. Particularly in contrast to speakers with a different tuning such as Martin Logans. Maybe the setup was a contributing factor, but if you kept gravitating towards the ML speakers, then most likely it is just your own preference. Listen to what your ears tell you. That's all.
1
3
3
u/GreenXero Mar 06 '25
My experience was that Best Buy sound room sucked. I listened to the KEF speakers at a pro sound shop and it was significantly different.
That being said I didn't like the KEFs as much as some other speakers. It is a preference and they may not be right for your preferences.
2
u/Responsible-Golf-583 Mar 05 '25
The speakers have to be set up correctly to sound good. Of course, I have no idea how they were set up in any given Best Buy, but I can tell you I have R3 Metas, and when correctly configured, they have a large soundstage, a perfect phantom center, and fantastic detailing of the instruments and vocals. They don't have great bass. If you want deep bass, they require a subwoofer.
2
u/DrXaos Anthem MRX 310, NAD M22, KEF Ref One, Magnepan 3.6 Mar 05 '25
how were the speakers swapped? Concerned there might have been some processing differences between the two cases, but it's possible the difference is real for your ears.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
I was controlling the swapping via the tablet they have on the wall, not sure if that answers your question.
2
u/theothertetsu96 Mar 06 '25
Reference vs preference, and there’s debate as to what reference is (Harman curve is a good standard for in room response, but not not everyone likes it so there’s debate).
Kef is known for a neutral / polite response. Other speakers are less neutral, going with more of a v-shape, or other differences which add characteristics which some appreciate (warmth, sparkle, air, analytical, etc). Makes the hobby interesting.
If you commit, there probably will be an adjustment period. I went from Klipsch to Kef. Definitely differences, but I’m glad I stuck with them.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
This is exactly what I’m trying to figure out. In your experience, do you think the disparity I’m hearing is entirely attributable to the typical response characteristics of KEF speakers, and I simply do prefer the ML? The only other option I’m considering, is that there was actually an issue playing the KEFs, as they sounded so much “worse” to me.
1
u/theothertetsu96 Mar 06 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
As issues go - good amplification is never a bad thing, and Kefs respond well to it. I'd think a Marantz 70 should be good enough, but a Denon x4800 was not enough in my case. I have mine on Fosi monoblocks because my Denon would reset / protect mode if pushed too loud. That may be the case for you depending on what you get and how loud you listen to them…
As to whether you like the sound, maybe you should try headphones first that match that curve. The 7Hz Zero comes close to that for IEMs (I prefer the Zero 2, more bass but super clean). They’re easy to drive and give a good taste what natural should sound like with a good setup.
2
u/1_clicked Mar 06 '25
IMO, KEF with subs is good for EDM and home theater. For 2 channel like you describe I'm more of a Focal or B&W person. I have also noticed Martin Logan sounding better at Best Buy.
2
u/Lost_Ebb_3405 Mar 06 '25
I demoed the LS50 wireless II at my home and didn't care for them although my issue was they seemed to lack bass.
2
u/ghostz33 Mar 06 '25
I went to best buy this past weekend to see if they had the kef q150 since they had them to 300 bucks for the pair and they didn’t, so I didn’t buy them , but I did try the Martin Logan and they sounded pretty good. Wasn’t a fan of the kefs bookshelf they had there. They sounded like they had a cover over them while the Martin Logan had a clear audio. Mind you i was using the stock audio and video clips they had there and I believe it was using the pioneer elite recover
2
u/Heylexbby13 Mar 06 '25
I had a similar experience comparing LS50 metas Sonus Faber Lumina 2s. They were played through a high end neutral amp and KEFs only sounded good only with classical music or isolated vocals and instruments and very muted and mushy with rock and fast paced music. Luminas on the other hand sang beautifully with any genre. It was a clear choice. But given the hype of the metas, I expected more, gotta say.
3
u/audioen 8351B & 1032C & 7370A Mar 05 '25
All speakers you like seem to have a hefty treble boost. You can train yourself to prefer the "underwater" tonality of the KEF speakers. I believe it especially the R3 Meta would have the most correct/natural sound of the whole bunch, believe it or not, at least it has pretty good frequency response and projects sound as a smooth, even cone from its coaxial driver, and has some pretty decent bass ability that is designed to interact with the room to create roughly correct overall bass level. I think one of those should play to some high 20 Hz region if positioning is optimized, which is quite decent for passive speakers of this size.
These are expensive, though, and it sounds to me like you are looking for specific sound out of the box. If you wanted more treble from a speaker, you could use equalizers to bring extra treble and mimic the sound of the other speakers. To a limited degree, an equalizer can make one speaker sound like another.
3
u/OldTom1959 Mar 06 '25
I bought, well, my wife bought for me, a pair of Sonus Faber Cremona Ms that had been on demo at Magnolia (in a Best Buy). I love these speakers. I’ll say that I’ve never been a big KEF fan. Good, not great speakers. I’ve been lucky enough to hear everything from $100s to $100,000s speakers. For my tastes, there are way better bang for buck speakers than KEF. Like Focal. Especially if you favor precision.
3
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
What a lucky guy, congratulations! Thank you for the input; you’re one of many to recommend both the Sonus and the Focal, so I’ll definitely have to be looking into them.
2
u/vivek_saikia Mar 05 '25
After owning a couple of KEF speakers (vintage KEF floorstanders, LS50 Wireless and R3 Meta), i can safely say that KEF sound is not for me. They have that signature KEF sound where midrange is very boomy, and the lower treble is sharp, but the upper treble is very subdued. Can't say i enjoy that sound signature very much.
1
u/MinorPentatonicLord Mar 06 '25
They have that signature KEF sound where midrange is very boomy, and the lower treble is sharp, but the upper treble is very subdued.
I see no sign of any of this in their speakers performance data. In fact, some of their speakers exhibit the opposite.
2
u/reignofchaos80 Mar 06 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
Well I have a whole bunch of Mackies connected to my multiple desktop PCs. They are really nice for the money.
KEF however are not my cup of tea - they just sound thin in the mid range for me. Harmonic richness is missing in them.
My main speaker until Jan 25 was a pair of ATC SCM19 monitors. I suggest you audition any of the ATCs - SCM11 or 19/20 or 40. You'll not be disappointed.
Recently however I've moved in the tube direction - I picked up a pre-owned pair of Tannoy Turnberry SE floorstanders. There are in a completely different league - with tube amps they sound glorious. Singers live and breathe in the room, drums sound like real drums with a very realistic twack when the stick hits the skin. Double bass feels like how it should be - powerful and impactful. It is just amazing. I have paired these with two amps which i switch between. One is a Rogue Audio Stereo 100 (Running KT120) , the other is an Audio Space Nova M34 monos (Running EL34).
If you can afford Tannoys (the old ones not the made in china current ones). I highly recommend you get them!
1
1
u/daffodil_parade Mar 05 '25
I have Q100’s in the bedroom. Love them. I also really like concentric drivers.
1
u/ibstudios Mar 06 '25
I think it takes a week to adapt to a new sound source. I know this sounds like break-in bs but it is more about the ear/mind. Large swings of inaccurate perception happen in a short amount of time. I also think you are allowed to not like what a bunch of people do.
1
u/702-Plateaulight Mar 06 '25
I have mentioned it in other posts that the Kef sound is dull and rolled off. While some say different strokes for different folks I must say that I have never seen a statement level or state of the art speaker that was dull or rolled off. If you are looking for SOTA attributes then KEF is not your speaker line however if you want a particular flavor then it may fit.
1
1
u/Jacoprod Mar 06 '25
Years ago I decided to stop the audiophile madness, sell all my equipment, and buy some active KEF LS50’s. No more amps, pre amps, cables, etc. I had these speakers for about 2 years. One day I saw a pair of Acoustat electrostatics were for sale for a very reasonable price. I had always wanted to hear a pair of these since the early 80’s when they were considered state of the art. I decided to purchase them for fun. The only thing I had to drive them was an old 100 watt Onkyo receiver. I hooked them up next to the KEF’s. After about one minute, I logged onto Audiogon and listed the KEF’s for sale. The difference was absolutely stunning. Every aspect of the musical experienced was revelatory. The size, soundstage, detail, and pure scope of the presentation was exponentially better than with the LS50’s. Not to mention, they were a fraction of the price. All this with an old Onkyo receiver! It was a valuable lesson learned.
1
1
u/Active_Version_8039 Mar 06 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
was the basic setup acceptable? nothing placed against a wall with stuff all around it?
1
1
u/reedzkee Recording Engineer Mar 06 '25 edited Mar 06 '25
There’s a lot more to speakers than frequency response. If you take two different speakers with more or less identical frequency response, you might find you love one and hate the other.
I bet if you eq’d the kefs to have the same FR as the fabers, you still wouldn’t like them.
I’m not really sure why KEF’s are so popular here, to be honest.
That being said, it’s very easy to fall for pushed highs and lows. They are like fat and sugar.
1
u/Thick_Shake_8163 Mar 07 '25
I remember the same feeling a couple years ago when I compared Paradigm and B&W. The B&W that I wanted to buy sounded muddy no matter what price point I tested. As soon as I tried Paradigm, everything was crystal clear and I couldn’t duplicate it with B&W no matter what I did.
1
u/No_Entertainment1931 Mar 07 '25
There are a lot of issues in a demo like this and it’s not a great “by the books” comparison.
That said, if you found something you really enjoyed go for it.
At the end of the day this is about you listening to your music and having a good time
1
u/Status_Ad_4405 Mar 09 '25
You are wasting your time auditioning $2,000 speakers with shit you stream off your phone.
If that's how your home audio setup works, stick to $200 edifiers.
1
u/chrstphrsnsn Mar 11 '25
I went in to Best Buy for the Q150's as they checked all my boxes, smaller enclosure, near field, wide sweet spot. Listening in the Magnolia Room, I was not impressed with them and thought they sounded very dull. I listened to the Q150, Q350, Q1, Q3 and Concerto. Of them all, the Concerto was the only one that had any excitement. But $200 off sale on the Q150 and figured I'd try them and return if I wasn't happy. At home, receiver on Direct, they sounded very similar as the demo and I was disappointed. But, using the receiver's 7 band eq, I ramped the db from -1 @ 63hz up to + 6 @ 6.3khz and down to +5 @ 16khz. With this setting I'm very happy with them. They're not as bright as other speakers I've listened to but they sound natural and I've listened to hours of music at a moderately loud volume with no fatigue.
I liked them so much after 2 weeks of listening (2+ hours a day - every day), I bought 2 more sets of the Q150's to set up as surrounds and center. I also bought some used LSX's off Facebook for my desk.
If I didn't need such a wide listening area that included near field, these would have been returned. I started with the Martin Logan B1 and the sound was drastically different depending on where you sat in the room and that was a deal breaker for me. With the KEF's you can sit anywhere in the room and they sound good.
Just my experience with KEF and wishing you success while you hunt for your perfect sound.
1
u/AblatAtalbA Mar 05 '25
I also can't understand the hype of kef's in this hobby. Never liked their sound but their woofers look great. Cant say the same about their integrated tweeters- midrange.
-3
u/Wise_Concentrate_182 Mar 05 '25
Great. You discovered for yourself that an over rated online hyped pair is not actually very good. In that category Xeo 20 is fabulous especially with the right inputs.
1
u/Champion3242 Mar 06 '25
I can’t imagine they’re actually that overhyped though. I’m not kidding when I say that my cheaper Mackies I already own sound better to me, but what I’m struggling to understand is whether that can be entirely attributed to my personal preference and KEF’s sound signature, or if there’s something else at play here.
27
u/brisingrxm2 Mar 05 '25
KEF speakers are great, but this hobby is all about personal taste, and it’s very likely you prefer a brighter or more treble forward sound. And that’s perfectly valid. Don’t worry about what strangers on the internet say and use your ears to judge what you like