As a fan of tube amps and overly subjective audio reviews, you are a consummate kill-joy to me, BUT I love your reviews! The work you're doing at Audio Sci is very important and appreciated. Thank you for all the time you put into these review.
I'm hardcore on the side of objective measurement and abx testing, and my favorite amplifier is my Cary sla-30 with 10 tubes in it :P I just don't fib to myself about why I like it, and it's because it's not transparent in a way that I find pleasant.
@@Biefstukje I’m a big fan of Amir’s objectivity - and very much distrustful of anyone who make unsubstantiated claims like “different dacs sound different” - because they’re never willing to back it up with blind ABX testing. That said, I think I’d prefer some nice Harbeth speakers over the much better testing Kefs - with a nice tube preamp and A/B amp over the absolute perfection of Hypex ncore. How boring would a Van Gogh be if his paintings were a perfect representation of his subjects? A little chaos and character makes life and art much more interesting. Same with colored audio vs perfectly transparent.
@@AdamsOlympia go watch alpha-audio reviews. Also Real science, way more indept. They measure difference in speaker cables for example, wich you can test fit yourself in the live a/b tests they do and you can download it in high res. They just did ons lasting more then 5 hrs.
I am currently demoing a pair at home in my small 4m by 5m sitting room, with my modest AudioLab 6000a 50W per channel amplifier. These speakers are indeed excellent. I have tried a wide range of musical styles and they reproduce them all well. I have tried spoken voice podcasts too, and they are excellent, very clear. I have heard speakers at twice the price that aren’t as neutral, natural sounding and pleasant as these. I just wish the looks were a bit more conventional. I agree with Amir that the white are beautiful, albeit unconventional. I don’t agree that they need a powerful amplifier, at least not in my modest room at volume levels that suit me. I can even turn the volume up to an uncomfortable level, and they hold together. It is conceivable that my amplifier copes well with transient power well above 50W per channel of course.
This is definitely the best review of the Meta's I've seen on RU-vid. It's exactly my experience having the original Rogers LS 3/5A, the Kefs LS50 and the Meta's. The Meta's are the best so far. I wrote Kef a letter after I've heard the original LS50's. I was impressed and at the same time disappointed in what came to my ears. I asked Kef if I could modify them by changing the crossover and bring the volume of the tweeter a bit down by changing the resistor but they said that it was not possible. (I guess it was for sure, but i didn't change it) The Meta's are far better and for a small or medium listening room they are everything you want if you are using a good amp and a good sub.
these are good enough to fully warrent the investment in subs. I have them with a pair of subs with a high/low pass filter at 80Hz and they are sweet as a peach. This set up replaced my B&W N803's. (original versions)
Same here, my subs arrived a week later than speakers. I was happy without subs untill I tried with. The difference was so obvious even at very moderate volume. Though also could be because of amp. After all it also has less work to do with subs added.
I compared these to the original version with a friend for an evening with mixed results if they better. They are definitely more balanced and natural sounding, but they've lost the contrasty effect the LS50 was known for. This kind of over emphasis of detail and separation, which is hard to explain if you haven't heard it. I describe it as cel shading for sound for those who are familiar with the term. In some songs it's a benefit, but in some not. For our preference something like a Revel M16 was easily better at what the Meta is trying to do.
Not high enough. Crossover as high as you can would be the best way. Couple the sub to the Metas and crossover at 160 - 200hz, it isnt going to be practical but data has shown its the best way. Or get a R3, that midwoofer is crossed over at 400hz or so, so basically no amount of bass would make that mid distort.
Great review btw . Oh also, the center image on any KEF speakers needs to be heard to be believed....it's the signature KEF sound trait that pulls most listeners towards them. I heard the LS50 Metas with a KC62 sub in a nearby store some time ago. It was pure Bliss...listerally nothing like it was my first impression! Made me buy the KEF R7s...
Before anything else: this IS a speaker review! Just how it should be done. I have Kef's iQ1s, although I understand after years of listening to them I'm "used" to how they sound, every time I'm in the mood to buy new speakers, after a few try outs with the candidates I usually end up saying: why bother? Kef's coaxial tech, spoiled other brands for me (and I do understand that are models with the tech that measure horribly).
On a more technical note I always wondered how much the woofer excursion impacts the tweeter's directivity with these. Technically the woofer is also part of the waveguide for the tweeter, but in small speakers there tends to be quite a bit of excursion. I'm sure they have done extensive simulations and optimized the design to the point that this is more or less simply an academic question, but still wonder if there's any discernable impact.
I think once the woofer moves enough to change directivity, you already are hearing the distortion it creates. So likely that dominates. Still, would be good to see some research on this.
Erin’s Audio Corner tested one coaxial (either KEF or Kali) at its max excursion to see impact; I don’t recall but I think it wasn’t too bad but it did impact the frequency response to a visible degree.
I have the original LS50s and people that have listened to both mine and the Meta tell me I should just stay with what I have because it's not much difference. This review makes me think otherwise and I am seriously considering upgrading to the Metas. Thank you for the thorough review which even a newbie can understand, at least a little bit.
I had just upgraded from the q150, I have about a week of listening so far. The sound is very similar, there is more detail but I do not see it being a worthwhile upgrade for the price.
Also have LS50s and heard Metas in a shop. I wouldn't upgrade unless your amplifier is insufficient to drive LS50s; the Metas seem easier to drive. They'd probably sound good paired with newer cheap class D amps whereas original LS50s would not
I have both and will say that it boils down to upstream equipment, placement and personal taste. They are similar but the Metas a bit more polite sounding. Both are great.
I have a pair of secondhand black edition LS50 originals bought from an owner who upgraded. I am happy with them for my desk and as a close monitor. I drive them with 30+ year old Ion Obelisk 3x Xpac1 integrated. Even better I got them for £400 a pair 👍
The difference is quite noticeable, especially in the higher regions. More balanced, cleaner but above all not ear piercing with some less good recordings as the original LS50 is sometimes too sharp sounding. They can be amazing also, it’s true, you miss that a bit with the Meta’s. Overall I like the Meta’s more, they sound pleasant and clean with every song.
The 3-D graphs can be aesthetically pleasing, slightly. P.S. Especially after the X, Y & Z axis' values have been varied upto the max' in relationship to each other, just to get all sorts of far-out shapes in the landscape, or a flat looking area in front of a tight & even speaker output. If everyone kept to an agreed set of rigid values for these graphs, then fair enougth, but It's in the manufacturer's interest to 'adjust' for the graph's visual outcome, by technically not lying but only adjusting the xyz values, who's scales are not always clear. Everyone seems to like this speaker. I've had a love of qualities that dual concentric speakers give ...since my (£120) s/h 15" Tannoy D.C.s i bought 25"ish ago (built in 1969, according to the time-faded, signed, dated test past labels glued on their rears) but one channel's main (upto 1'Khz) driver suddenly started an unlistenable farty sounding rumbling, surely due to a rubbing of it's "voice-coil in magnetic-gap" ...a familiar sound i once managed to fix on a cheap speaker with a bolted-on magnet, not so here. if they were Tannoy's later foam edged drivers, i may have fixed it?, but 52'yrs perfect from new b4 one cone lost it's alignment, is surely a sign of superb quality engineering.
An alternative to a subwoofer is having the LS50 Metas sitting on vintage floorstander speakers in good condition. I did this with a pair of 1980s Dutch Translator Impact5 speakers that I got for 200 euros. Cheaper even than LS50 stands, this combination takes the same amount of space and it's flexible with toeing in to adjust the speaker combination to the room. Once you get that right, it sounds awesome. Enough room to shine and a good amplifier is needed to pull it off though.
@@MasterofPlay7 I have cheap Sony speakers too, from the 1970s. They were sold at the time as Sony as well as National Panasonic SB-39. Good and still going strong, that's why I still have them and use them in a 2nd system, but they don't come anywhere near the Translator Impact5 / Kef LS50 stack.
@@colanitower you are not pairing them with the right amp, I pair them with the fm300a clone recommended by the German RU-vidr, and they sound surreal, with awesome 3d imaging and excellent instrument positioning
Hi Amir, great video. You stated that you had concerns about the speakers performance at high volumes. Just to clarify, if one was to use a crossover at 80hz or 100hz, would you have still similar concerns at average home theater volumes (sitting at a 3.2 meter distance in a medium sized room)? Thanks in advance!!!
Would be interesting to see measurements on the wireless version. According to Kef it’s frequency response is substantially better (to the extent it can be accomplished), probably audible, and it’s supposed to be phase linear, which I agree with you is probably inaudible, but why not have it when it’s easily done with dsp and technically sweet on top. It’s maximum spl is supposed to be higher, 2 dB if memory serves me. Maybe Kef have managed to squeeze out the frequency irregularities between 1 and 2 kHz, it could definitely be interesting to see?! I have not listened to either the passive or active version but mentally I see them as the loudspeakers variant of Sennheiser’s 600/650. A close to perfect product with limitations in the bass range, at relatively affordable price. Wonderful review, as usual. Thanks.
It certainly makes sense that they could optimize the acoustic design even more with active DSP correction. The question though is how powerful the amplifier is in it. If it runs out of juice as many do in smaller actives, then I would not take that trade off. I can do my own DSP EQ externally for these and not have the power limit. Sill, would be nice to test it and see what is going on with it.
Its time i add a Kef to the stable, and these are it. I have 100hz 12db filters to chop off the low end if i need it and a good pair of subs. Will be very near field. Just picking color now.
Thank you for your reviews outstanding as usual! How many db before it starts to distorts? If I crossed it over at 100Hz with subwoofers, how loud can it play? How does it compare to the R3?
I just purchased 3xMetas for my home theater - room is about 20x14x9 feet and will be fully treated. With 3 subwoofers (Monolith 15" x 2 and SVS PB2000 12"). Probably going to cross at around 80hz, maybe 100hz Integrated with a minidsp. Going to be drivin by 200wpc Monolith Amp I hope they can fill the room at 75db with +20db peaks. Maybe even 90-110db, but i doubt ill be listening at Reference.
I'm looking for a stereo pair of speakers for my living room. I will never play really loud. Mostly background, occasionally above medium loud. When needed I could buy a sub. The room is approximately 5 x 6 x 2.4 meters (w, l, h) Besides the LS50 meta, could the Neumann KH120 II do a good job in my situation?
Expertly reviewed by a zen master. Amir, your explanations just flowed naturally from a sea of knowledge and experience like a calm stream where everything is harmoniously interconnected. This was a truly beautiful review my friend. That's why I keep referring folks to your channel and website when I see that they ask questions on other dubious YT audio channels to the self anointed all-knowing hosts that give them questionable advice.
Amir -You mentioned that on subjective listening you listen to the 10 tracks again and again for over 1000 times. As per psyco-acoustics wont your ear / brain fill-in for the missed details of the speakers. Even if the speaker is not detailed, if you listen the same track again and again your brain knows what you are expecting to hear and it will fill-in for the missing details of the speaker. Just my thought - i may be wrong in my statement as i am just a novice.
Amir, the level of testing and measuring you do is great and very informative. However, in your reviews you really should elaborate on your listening tests and try to convey to the audience how a product sounds. Measurements are good but that’s not the whole picture. It’s easy to measure a product and then say ‘ yea, it sounds good and as expected’. That doesn’t tell me very much. Things like if you review a dac. What speakers and amps did you use to listen to it though. Did you change amps / speakers during the listening tests and how did that effect the sound? How’s does it recreate the stereo image? Etc ? Etc? There needs to be more than just Measurements.
Hi Amir, How do we offer to send you equipment to test? I live in Spokane but next time I'm in Seattle I could bring over gear you may not have tested like a Monolith amp.
I just discovered this channel! Great review. Amir, based on your findings what is the minimum watt amplifier you might recommend for the speakers? 100 watts perhaps?
That depends entirely on how loud you want to listen. You could use 2 wpc if you’re only listening at 65 db. If you want to push it to 90+ you’re going to be potentially looking at 200 watt peaks.
Thanks, Amir. Would it be of help for us to know your listening track list? I can appreciate that a person's test tracks must be familiar but that doesn't necessarily mean that one's familiar tracks are well recorded. (That is, the sound quality of the music reproduction system can be no better than that of the medium.) Alternatively, would you give a list of well produced media "albums" ... vinyl, if possible, from which we could develop familiar tracks?
Would also like to know this! What I played while demoing them was: Prodigy - Smack my bitch up. No impact and no extension in the base, half of the song simply missing. Thin and hissy with very clear vocal. Second song was Gamma Ray - Send me a Sign (live acoustic version) and the drum kit was thin as paper. There was sense of space since it's a live recording but no kick whatsoever and the big hall sound was missing. Great clarity on guitars, but no weight in the string pulls. Third one was Immolation - Fostering the Divide. When the song starts it should really kick you in the guts but it was.....thin and uneventful. Electric guitars had a fair bite (but were not fatiguing so that's nice)but again....no base, and no backbone in the kick drum what is simply unacceptable for this kind of music. After that I stopped caring because I figured KEF is selling half a speaker for full price. Hard pass.a
@@TheSecondMaker If you have the speakers close to the front wall you'll get a few dbs of boundary gain. Should bring that shelved bass response up. But yeah it's a 5" speaker..
Hey Mr. Amir, I have been lurking in the audio science review forums recently and found this channel. I am only 15 but and I would really like to learn more in depth about making speakers, I am extremely lucky in this day and age to have google but I would also like to learn in places other else than google. If you don't mind me asking, where do you learn information of designing speakers and how to design a good one. I know the basics, the driver, the box, crossover or amp, DSP but the in-depth things is what I want to learn, like the perfect distance between the tweeter and the woofer, how to avoid diffraction, etc. Thank you :)
Get the Floyd Toole book on Sound Reproduction as a first step. I would check your local library or with your school librarian. If your really interested start doing electronics hobbies and knocking out pre-engineering prerequisites in HS.
Here is some advice, use the measurements as a guide only and trust your ears. A perfectly measured speaker will sound like crap. All the best on your journey.
Here is some advice, definitely don't just trust your ears. Very easily fooled ! Audiophiles suffer from this in spades, that's why they buy audiophile fuses.
<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="1007">16:47</a> Is the issue with time domain graphs mostly down to poor measurements? Timing (impulse/transient performance) is a surely a vital part of a loudspeakers performance, isn't it? Anyway, thanks for another great presentation.
Most (all?) issues with timing show up as frequency response issues. If the frequency response is flat and smooth, that is what you will hear. In fact, one is computed from the other.
Nice review. One thought, I"d like to see you listen to both speakers before testing and then listen again post testing. By listening after testing, I wonder if you're creating a mental bias.
Hello I follow you from Italy your reviews and tests are the best ever what do you think of this matching LOXJIE A30 as an amplifier with these DAYTON AUDIO MK402X speakers. thanks a lot.
@@vonclod123 Defo, and certainly 2 or more. I'm about to build an A/V system using four 12" subs in custom transmission line boxes built into the room. Should be quite seismic. The DIY route is a huge cost saving.
@@kidkong637 I have the regular LS50, love em, and work well with a few different amps. I do play around with the ports, depending on where I'm running them. I use and like my sealed JL sub, I think the Kef sub might be worth checking out..well, I'm sure it it.
Thank you this was quite validating to what I heard in my home with the Wireless II version. In my opinion the sub-woofer is not really an option. They just didn’t sound as full as I wanted. What they did do was truly amazing. In the end, for my wallet though $4k USD (speakers + sub) is more than I want to spend so they went back. As I continue to search I hope I am able to find something really good and less money, or I will learn that the price of greatness is more than I’d planned. One last note, one of the speakers died. Stuff happens but it highlighted just why separates make so much sense.
I paid € 884 in 2014 (mediamarkt) brand new KEF LS 50 2 speakers and used them with a classic old amp Quad 405 and the sound was good. But now i use my original KEF LS 50 with amp Cambridge CXA61, Marantz CD player 6004 (with usb) Sub woofer SVS 1000pro and Rocket 11 speaker cable and my sound is heaven.Is there a difference in sound between the originals and the Metas yes but this difference is so small some music sound better with the Metas and other music sound better with the originals. The originals have more open sound (i like) .The only thing i like about the Metas is the difference in colour you can order and the originals are onlyin black (glossy) .BUT! if you can find the originals you pay € 600 are less and for the Metas you pay € 1500. But i personal will never buy the Metas. Here and there some people claim that disc in the Metas is a sales trick, who knows???
Can you please recommend some power amps that would make sure that LS50 Metas perform superbly? I am thinking Hegel 150/300 or PeachNova 300 ? Would love to hear from you :)
The amount of information about audio Amir dispenses is incomparable to anything else available on the internet. Maybe someday he could design his own speakers? That would be an exciting day! -- The All New Revel Amir Full Tower Speaker!
That's very kind of you. Alas, I am not a speaker designer. That is a different skill than being able to evaluate them. Kind of like a race car driver and engine designer.
Great review! Btw... Here in the EU Kef LS50 meta's have been on sale for 999€ for over two months. I got my pair for 840€ and have been enjoying them a lot. Both audio quality and the design. The satin/matt finish is super nice.
@@pede8000 In the EU all the posted prices include (VAT) tax. All the local shops sold them for 999€ last two months. Now at least one local shop sells them for that price (Mareksound).
That's a good price. Amazon UK has them for 999 and with shipping exchange rate to the US, the total is around $1430. To buy here, it would cost me around $200 more. May I ask where you bought yours? If they are willing to ship internationally, I would totally buy a pair.
Thank You! Are there also measurements of the Wireless LS50 II, are they on the same level or is one model better/worse than the other? Do you plan to also test the wireless version?
I don't currently have one to measure. In general though, once you make a speaker active with DSP, you can do a better job of optimizing it. The drawback often is that the amplification is not as good as external amps so power capability will be limited potentially. I will be on the look out for one to see how it does.
@@AudioScienceReview The amplifiers inside the Wireless II are very powerful, AFAIK they are 250 Watts each. A very interesting competitor that is in the market is the Output Frontier, around 1400 USD and has much better low-end and also has coaxial design.
Thanks Amir. Based on this I bought the Kefs, operating with a sub. Very pleased with the results. I recommend using the S2 stands , bolted down with the spkr, filled with sand , using isolators on all spiked feet like Gaia or AudioBastion ( cheaper alternative ). And good associated amp and DAC. If your rm is small to med size. Excellent results.
@@MT-eb2dx I never used isolators until I watched John Darko’s review on this and after trying them , the diff in sound quality esp in voice and imaging improvement is quite apparent. AudioBastion is cheap - around US100 for 8 isolators so it was an easy decision.
@@RaveyDavey There are 4 screw positions on the base of the speaker that allows you to bolt it to the S2 stands provided ( all screws provided ).The stands are hollow inside , to allow filling with lead and sand to make them heavier. There are RU-vid videos.
My LS50s never performed so well as when I hooked them to my main system with JC1 mono blocks. You have to really push the LS50s to make them crackle. Yeah, I did it too, because the mono blocks were keeping them controlled very well and I wanted to see just how much clean bass these small speakers were capable of. It was impressive in such a big room. For the LS50s to shine their best they need very capable amps and a sweet signal source to start with. I think LS 50s can play much higher than their price point.
These have been on my mind for a while. I'm wondering how well they would work with a Marantz SR-7012 receiver. If I had to purchase an expensive amp just for them, I would be more compelled to consider the Wireless II version.
@@qua7771 I have a SR-7001 and the LS 50s sounded pretty good on the Marantz. I don't know how close the SR-7012 sounds, but if it is similar it's a good match for the LS50s. The Marantz doesn't have as good bass control (with any speakers) as the other amps/receivers I tested with the LS50s. The B&K 150 watts/ch receiver has better bass, but I preferred the sweeter vocals of the Marantz. The Parasound 150 watt amp has the best bass and most detailed, but can get edgy with the very detailed LS50s on poorer recordings or highly compressed music (music videos or newer recordings). My comment was about what it takes to really make the LS50s shine their best. My desktop system is LS50s (second pair), 45watt Parasound Zamp amp and pre-amp and SMSL SU-8 DAC. It sounds great in a small room where the amp will never be stressed by harder to drive speakers. Unless you want the LS50s Meta, you should be able to find LS50s for a small fraction of what they used to cost. I paid $500 for a pair. They were store demos and in mint condition. LS50s are in a totally different league than any $500 regular priced speakers.
@@gordthor5351 Wow, your reply was near perfect for my question. The Marantz receivers are similar, but the newer ones have a lot of processing, and streaming features that may be a bit of a power soak. Otherwise I think they are on the same level in stereo mode. I'm not sure what you mean by bass control, but I would most likely be using a sub crossed over around 80Hz. I have heard of people giving negative feedback on the LS50's, and always assumed it was due to the amplification they were using. That had be considering a set of used Wireless II's Thanks for the quick reply.
@@gordthor5351 The original LS50 is not available anymore at retailers. I may be able to wait for an opportunistic purchase it one avails itself. There always seems to be a NOS item somewhere. The thing is that this line is so popular, and it's the holiday that instead seeing bargain prices, the prices are all jacked up. I'm seeing used items selling near retail. I might wait a month. Thanks again.
We are interested in measuring the response of the speaker across the full frequency range. Therefore the test signal needs to have flat amplitude across the board. Once you have that response, then you know how the speaker is coloring the music you listen to. Speaker doesn't care if you feed it test tones or music, it does the same thing to both. Now I do listen to speakers with real music to determine how audible the artifacts are that are shown in measurements. So both bases are covered.
Hello there, curious about some of your findings? Do you have any room treatments at all when you take your measurements? You said you are using a 1000w amp and Kef recommends 40-100w for the LS50 Metas. Since you discovered severe clipping at higher volumes, at what volume level did you experience this clipping, was it above the rated 106db? The majority of listeners utilize speakers to create stereo sound by utilizing them in pairs. I know you said you only listened to one speaker to hear the tonality of the speaker better. Do you think you are missing things in this review like imaging and sound stage when only using a single speaker? Lastly where in the room were the speakers placed such as the distance from each wall, overall height, distance to listening position, I would like to understand more about your room and placement strategies. I appreciate the science and measurements, I am just wondering about a few areas not mentioned in this review. Thank you!
He stated that his robot uses "near field" mic placement that largely disregards the room, so that an anechoic chamber (or room treatments) is not required, and that it is in fact better than an anechoic measurement. The software then applies the effective reflectivity of a room drawn from known standards. So much for the tech side. The listening is done critically with one speaker for the reasons he states and of course there will be no, "soundstage" etc. with one speaker as there is no stereo illusion ie both your ears hear the same projected sound. I do believe he addresses listening in other vids. You ask it seems for a description of a room, when in fact that would be useless as it is not your, or anyone else's room. He has a video called ""How Loud is Loud" you might like.
@@johnsmith1474 thanks for your response, and answering some of my questions. I will see if I can find those other videos and hopefully my unanswered questions can receive a bit more clarity.
@@mauanderuk yes and no respectfully. I own them, along with several other speakers, amplifiers, digital analog converters, subwoofers, preamps etc. I do feel they are better paired with a subwoofer for some genres of music such as Electronic music, and some pop, however for many genres of music there is plenty of bass when paired with a proper amplifier, correct positioning and room design. As far as volume levels they can easily be played at loud enough volume levels with zero clipping issues if they are paired up properly, from an amplification standpoint. Volume levels that would be dangerous to ones hearing.
Thanks Amir. Can you publish your test track list? I’ll show you mine. 1. Ballad of the runaway horse - Wasserman/Warnes 2. Vivaldi concerto for two flutes- Janet See, Nicholas McGegan, Harmonia Mundi 3. Bach, C Minor violin concerto, Hillary Hahn, Jeffrey Kahane, DGG 4. Bach, Jean Guillou, Organ works, Dorian Records 5. Schubert, Solo Works Piano, Arcadi Volodos, Sony 6. Neil Young, Live at Massey Hall 7. Marcel Peres et Ensemble Organum, Chants de l ‘eglise de Rome, Harmonia Mundi (excuse omitting diacritical signs) 8. Ellington , Nutcracker Suite, CBS 9. Stravinsky, Petrouchka, Le sacre du Printemps, Danon, Leibowitz, Chesky Records, 10. The Eve of the war, Richard Burton as narrator in Jeff Wayne’s adaptation of The war of the worlds. 11.Yonderboi, Riders On The Storm, from the 2000 album “ Shallow And Profound” 12. Rickie Lee Jones, “Show buzz kids” from the 2000 album “It’s Like This” 13. The La’s, eponymous debut, any track
I use KEF R7s and KEF wants customers to keep the speakers straight and not toe in at all. Amir, would this be what we should use KEFs as or as you said we should toe it in so it is on axis to the listening position? Thanks
The second post in the review thread shows you the response at different angles: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-ls50-meta-review-speaker.25574/post-871427 If you look at the yellow line at 30 degree, you see that it causes a shelving down from mid to high frequencies. That would deviate from flat on-axis response that research says is most preferred. So I am not going to follow the manual. That said, the spatial effects change fair bit with setup so feel free to experiment. But if you are asking me, the answer is point the speaker at you. Note that the above is for this LS50 Meta. I have not measured the R7 so don't know for sure. Does it sound too bright when you have them pointed at you? If not, that is how I would use them.
@@AudioScienceReview Thanks Amir. The coaxial driver is a meat of the speaker and I believe it behaves similarly on all KEF speakers. In my some REW measurements...I did notice that pointing the speakers at the LP made the slight downward tilt of the FR disappear... meaning I was getting more high FR details. Plus, as you toe these speakers in...some of the spacial information does get affected...in that the sound stage width reduces. Best I suppose is to point towards the LP as you said and keep these speakers maybe 8-10ft apart to get the best of both worlds. Great review btw, I am glad someone knowledgeable about these things is finally coming main stream...we have too much BS reviewers spouting BS without much to back up in terms of research for a long time. Keep it up!
Well, ideally sure but in practice, you want to make sure your sub is not heard and if you cross it that high, it would be. I would personally use 80 to 100 Hz. It is the deep bass that causes the woofer to bottom out.
Thanks for the great evaluation of the LS50 META speakers Amir. Just a a question of perspective if I can. When you say " loud", what does that translate into a Decibel value? Is 85 - 90 dB loud for you or you mean, well over 95 dB? I am asking this as the term "loud" is very different from one listener to another. Always enjoy your in depth evaluation of components! 🙂
Loudness has both average and peak. Measuring peak is not easy so I don't have a number for you. But if I were to guess, I would say it is north of 100 dB.
I always pick 80 Hz unless there is a really good reason to go with something else. Higher frequencies risk localizing the sub so you don't want to go there unless you have to.
@@AudioScienceReview I normally do 80, but I saw how the distortion on this was at 100, so thought maybe it was worth doing since the sub and speakers are close.
Wondering why you consider impulse tests for time/phase un-important? You said "I show them because some audiophiles like to look at the pretty charts" or something to that effect. SOME audiophiles understand what the tests means. Music is all about timing. Most speakers, as shown here, destroy time and phase as compared to the original wave file. I would argue time coherence is equally as important as frequency response, off axis response. CD players operate on clocks on the order of picoseconds. Reviewers complain about jitter. A 4th order crossover speaker adds 360 degrees of phase shift (time delay) to the original wave form. Or one full cycle. What this means is the tweeter may be moving OUT, the woofer is sucking IN. The drivers do not start or stop at the same time. As a recording engineer, I can tell you music is NOT recorded this way, so why play it back this way? Loudspeakers destroy the original audio signal more than any other component in the record or playback chain. You seem to consider that un-important. Reviewers NEVER discuss it. Why do you feel that way?
Perhaps, for two reasons : first, the flaw is inherent in all loudspeakers. So it's treated as a given. Second, short of having dog hearing, you simply cannot hear it except at extremely loud volume levels, where it comes thru as distortion.
@@stevenholt5484 It is NOT inherent in all loudspeakers. And, square wave (or step function) is the best test signal yet devised for predicting musical fidelity in a loudspeaker. The square wave, after all, is simply the mathematical summation of an infinite number of phase-matched sine waves in a specific frequency progression. As such, any transducer that passes a clean square wave is eminently qualified to perform well on any musical signal it will ever encounter. It is VERY easily heard. I'll agree MOST speakers have time smear, not all. 1st order designs can be time coherent. The output of a crossover network is a vector sum with real and imaginary components in polar coordinates. What you have in a 1st order at the crossover freq is one vector at .707, +45, and the other at .707, -45, which adds to unity in vector space with a combined phase shift of zero. But because the vectors rotate together with frequency, they are always 90 degrees apart, and they always add to unity voltage and zero phase in vector space, no matter what the frequency. To say it differently, the combined output of the two drivers is always unity at zero phase, even though the two vectors are always 90 degrees apart. This is difficult to conceptualize, but the math behind it is relatively simple. Which is why I questioned a guy who calls his channel "Audio SCIENCE review" says it's not important.
@@daleboylen6427 I don't know enough about this to give you an intelligent response, but I can suggest you start your own YT channel, or post a video, discussing this. Just to give an example, what speakers are 'time coherent'?
@@stevenholt5484 Only a 1st order crossover design can be time coherent. What you have in a 1st order at the crossover freq is one vector at .707, +45, and the other at .707, -45, which adds to unity in vector space with a combined phase shift of zero. But because the vectors rotate together with frequency, they are always 90 degrees apart, and they always add to unity voltage and zero phase in vector space, no matter what the frequency. To say it differently, the combined output of the two drivers is always unity at zero phase, even though the two vectors are always 90 degrees apart. This is difficult to conceptualize, but the math behind it is relatively simple. For obvious reasons, this is called a constant-voltage minimum-phase transfer function, and the first-order is the only crossover type that has this characteristic. I should note that this presumes identical drivers mounted very closely together and resistive loading, which is hard to achieve in the real world. But with some effort, one can come close, and the effort is well rewarded in the listening. In a first-order, both drivers are at zero phase in their PASSbands, and at 90 degrees in their STOPbands. (Close, anyway. The only places either of them truly reach 0 or 90 is at DC and at infinity, both of which are well outside the audioband.) However, when either driver is at 90, the output amplitude is ZERO, by definition, so it contributes nothing to the sound. Its major contribution comes within its PASSband, where its phase is close to zero. Now, in beween DC and infinity, both drivers make a contribution depending on the frequency relative to the crossover frequency. In a first-order, they are ALWAYS 90 degrees out of phase, regardless of the frequency, and they ALWAYS sum to unity and zero phase. If this isn't clear, you need to look into the math (including complex variables and vector addition). At the crossover point, for example, one driver is at .707, +45, and the other is at .707, -45, as I stated previously. Due to the fact that this is vector addition, they sum to unity at zero phase. And they do this not only at the crossover frequency, but at every single point from DC to infinity. The first-order is the only crossover that does this. If you wish to prove this to yourself, it is easily proved by doing some math. If you want to avoid the math, it can still be proved by simply drawing sine waves. First, draw a single sine wave with amplitude of 1.0 and any phase you choose. Next, draw two identical sine waves, each of amplitude .707, one shifted 1/8 wavelength to the left of the original one, and one shifted 1/8 wavelength to the right. Now simply sum their values. What you will find in that the summation is an EXACT replica of the original sine wave, in both phase and amplitude. As long as your ear is equidistant from the two drivers, you will be utterly unable to distinguish the crossover. This is because the output summation IN THE AIR is identical to the original signal (in both time and amplitude), no matter what the frequency. (Again, this is true of the first-order only!) Finding 1st order speakers is hard because it takes a lot of math. Much easier to toss a couple drivers in a box, run a computer program, slap in a 4th order crossover and sell them for $5K a pair.
Figured you didn't want to upset the community with their holy grail babies! That 300-400 dip is pretty interesting though. That resonance leftovers explains the energy dissipation issues that annoys some people's ears. Your reviews are perfect feed for those 35k bitter audiophiles out there, like the Ben Shapiro of Trump supporters... gotta make a living somehow.
I have never witnessed a cabinet of that size handle anything well BUT the upper frequencies with any volume. Buy a subwoofer and give yourself a little headroom.
There were a lot of pseudo-specialists! I wonder if he understands what he’s talking about??? Offer your services to KEF! Teach them to develop correctly!
Here is my review of 8030C: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/genelec-8030c-studio-monitor-review.14795/ The Genelec is a bit more perfect speaker but can't play as loud due to amplifier limitation. Here, you use an external amp so you can pump more power into the speaker. This of course increases the cost more.
I was quite surprised with these as well. I thought they were great speakers for the most part. They tend to fall apart though as you stated. I found some music that I like they would distort at even low volume around 80db. The speaker is just too small to produce much bass and mid all at once. I had them distorting with a sub woofer and crossed them over at around 80 hrz.
@@kaing5074 lol here is what I found about that without much of a search... I think I'm fine. The volume of sounds, the duration of listening, and frequency of exposure to loud sounds all have an impact on hearing. The higher the level of sound and longer the duration, the greater the risk of hearing loss. For example, you can safely listen to a sound level of 80dB for up to 40 hours a week.
I think if I was going to get a speaker that sounded great but couldn't be played loudly, I'd get the $75 Sony Core SS-CS-5 with a crossover upgrade from GR Research. Honestly, I'd just get the XLS Encore for $250. But that would be if I wanted a bookshelf. Since I have great towers, I could only replace them with good towers like the Wharfedale 4.3s which are the same price as the LS50 Metas.
You should get Danny to send me his crossover upgrade for the Sony and I will test them. The stock unit did not do well in my testing: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/sony-ss-cs5-3-way-speaker-review.13562/ Danny's measurements are very limited both in accuracy and completeness so I would not trust them to make critical decisions. But yes, if you can get a tower speaker, go that way. They take up the same space and these days don't cost much more. You get better sensitivity with them as well.
Yes. That is a beauty of coaxial design as shown in the two color directivity graphs. Performance essentially stays the same. The back port only contributes deep bass which is not directional so doesn't matter.
Listening to ONE speaker is a review? Just call it the measurements channel since measuring a speaker and listening to ONE doesn't say how it images or sound stages. Sheesh
@@TrannyFluids B&W DM110i (my first 'real' speakers, not high-end but: loud and I loved them), B&W DM2a (give these some space and a stand: still unequaled low and mid-detail and definition, surprisingly easy to drive and that is before you redo the crossover. A true classic), B&W DM601s3, Klipsch RP150m and 6000f (Not neutral or subtle, not pretending to be either, but fun!), a number of Mission speakers, and now: Wharfedale Linton... amps: mainly Harman Kardon PM650 and Yamaha A-S1100.
The problem with these types of reviews, they tend to not promote the hifi industry. I’m all for saying when stuff is rubbish when it is, but to imply that speakers have faults or do have faults when many love them, is like examining the inconsistencies in the chemical ingredients of Gordon Ramsey’s food, yet most others love it. Making it too technical is not what this industry needs to broaden appeal and lower prices and not make hifi about what’s it’s for - MUSIC FOR F SAKE.
That's such a bad way of looking at it. Better analogy is, you have many different wines at a wine tasting and you know the wine industry is full of morons who like every wine and have inconsistent opinions about which wine is good in blinded conditions and make claims about taste of wines which are impossible. Then you offer people the ability to blind test them so they can figure out what they really like without bias, so they can attain greater enjoyment from their wine. Also it's pretty funny you forgot that Gordon's food became great due to technical prowess. Fact of matter is if you like something it's good to make sure it's what you actually like, and if it's actually what you like, being able to describe it in measurements so you can use it as a tool in future shopping trips.
@@BoredErica Gordon is not selling his food on the basis of the chemical make up. He just cooks it well and lets the customers eat it so your reference is misguided there. Technical prowess in cooking ability relates to technical cooking skills not saying that because of the acid quality or water quality of x mushroom it is going to taste rubbish. He goes out and sources good mushrooms. The way to make sure what you like is what you like is based on your senses. In fact why mess with evolution and how we have evolved. The wine analogy doesn’t work because there are plenty of subjective reviewers who reach similar positions and the truth be known, most of those people in the wine world know their stuff, if they are worth their salt. I’ve just commented agreeing to another reviewers review on the same product (on sound quality) when both our views were reached subjectively and independently. The consumers role is to understand that from reading a range of subjective reviews you trust. Coming to a view something is poor is like Ramsey saying the ingredients are bad based on chemical composition despite the fact everyone loves the cooked up food. The measurements approach to hifi comes from mistrust in many reviews which I agree is a very valid reason , but your reply is thick with a view that is why you don’t do subjective reviews - which if I drilled down further comes from this genuine mistrust, otherwise you’d be out there listening to subjective views and equating them to your own listening subjective experience. It doesn’t make it right to disparage a very well regarded speakers not just among audiophiles but punters who are buying, when they don’t measure well. Also who knows whether any of this is accurate. I saw all the amp hoo hah with soundstage and personally I’d prefer to bypass that, as any sensible person would who makes up their own mind. And the way I bypass that is trust my own senses.
Not a great speaker imho. Outclassed by Triangle Esprit Titus EZ which has better imaging, more refined treble, just as good separation and a more controlled less bloated bass. Don't believe the hype I'd say.
Insanely overpriced speaker. They fall apart completely when you move out of the sweet spot so I can't imagine those in a living room when people are moving around. I also could not believe how anemic they sound. Base guitar, kick drums and electronic rhythm instruments will simply be missing with those. Can't fathom what kind of music people that like those listen to.
They are very very nice in my setup. No problem with the "out of sweetspot" thing! Perfect for an apartment/ small room. Maybe not for a large livingroom.
@@pede8000 I was demoing them sitting on a sofa and as soon as I stood up or moved around the highs were completely gone. No go for entertaining/parties - in seating arrangement maybe. They were also pulled out quite a bit into the room and there was a intense fall off bellow like 90Hz. I honestly though the driver was shot. Rock, metal, any kind of electronic music, hip hop, movie scores, classical etc had complete instruments missing. Sounded fine with a sub but for that price it's absurd. I can't watch this "review" with a straight face because the guy is nitpicking measurements to death but is fine with a fact that a 1200€ speaker can't reproduce a kick drum or most of the base guitar.
@@TheSecondMaker Strange. Maybe the speakers were broken. I find it hard to find a bad review from any serious reviewer I'm completely satisfied as well. What did you pair them with?
@@pede8000 What kind of music do you listen to ? The graphs he is showing show a falloff starting at 100Hz. It's at about -15dB where most energy in music is. I paired them with the latest Power Node that's 2x80W and the sales guy said that's a very popular paring. It honestly sounded exactly what the graph shows. Good to hear you like it, but as somebody that frequents music venues and concerts this is nowhere near what music or real instrument sound like. Acusic, electric or electronic.
