KEF LS60 Wireless Just Announced

[Vacceo]

That's because the LS50 cannot even come close to keeping up with an R3, which is a very distinct functional difference.

That´s the point. We don´t know if the LS60 will show a similar comparison to the R7.

 

[raest]

This does open up a very weird 3rd possibility, which is that we're looking at an LS50 with KC62-like subwoofers. So that would have a very low crossover, like 150-200hz at the most. The uni-q would remain as a mid-woofer but free of some of the worst constraints. This would be very inferior in mid-bass and mid-range output and distortion to the real 3-way towers, but it would have very good extension as long as you don't want to play loud.

That would also make it a non-competitor to the Blade series entirely, not comparable at all.

i hope you're right so i don't regret my very recent R7 purchase

 

[Vacceo]

i hope you're right so i don't regret my very recent R7 purchase

Whatever the new speakers turn out to be, they don't make your R7's any worse. They will stay performing great.

The existence of the Blade metas do not worsen the performance of my old and faithful IQ's.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

You have better chances to get decent information than us, hence we can go far wilder (and more outrageous!) than you.

Yes. Real knowledge is constraining.

 

[Timcognito]

Come on guys here's the real scoop with KEF $100k+

KEF Delivers High-End Audio System For the Lotus Eletre Hyper-SUV

KEF Delivers High-End Audio System For the New Lotus Eltre Hyper-SUV

us.kef.com

 

[AudioJester]

I find strange that so many people are involved trying to guess something that will be revealed on a plate in a few days.

I don't understand the purpose of that though - to be able to say "i told that first"?

Because its fun and otherwise we will be bored!
Its like sports, speculating who your team will trade for, where they will compete, how they stack up to opposition etc.
Then all will be revealed on trade deadline day and we can commiserate together.

 

[Ron Texas]

That's because the LS50 cannot even come close to keeping up with an R3, which is a very distinct functional difference.

From God's mouth to your ears?

 

[muad]

That's because the LS50 cannot even come close to keeping up with an R3, which is a very distinct functional difference.

And yet I sold the R3s and kept the LS50s...

 

[aarons915]

And yet I sold the R3s and kept the LS50s...

Same here, LS50 to R3 and back to the LS50

 

[Vacceo]

From God's mouth to your ears?

That's only on Auro 3D systems.

 

[Sancus]

And yet I sold the R3s and kept the LS50s...

I'm aware some people prefer the LS50 but that's not relevant to the factual difference in output capability. Doesn't always matter but it does exist.

 

[Ron Texas]

I'm aware some people prefer the LS50 but that's not relevant to the factual difference in output capability. Doesn't always matter but it does exist.

Maximum output isn't everything.

 

[Axo1989]

Maximum output isn't everything. Bashing gear that a lot of members here own is trolling.

Let's see ... "I'm aware some people prefer the LS50" acknowledges different people's preferences ... and "but that's not relevant to the factual difference in output capability" is straightforward. Ergo, not bashing or trolling (at least where 'trolling' ≠ 'preference I disagree with').

 

[ROOSKIE]

Maximum output isn't everything. Bashing gear that a lot of members here own is trolling.

Not sure if you are being serious but I don't see him as bashing anything.
Seems to be defending the R3 as a valid product in the lineup.
I'd agree with him based on my usage of the Q150 vs R3, though I don't have experience with the Meta LS50.

The R3 can easily outpace the Q150 in terms of output and reach, I'd have to suspect the same goes for the LS50.
Of course this is not always important but it does make the R3 a very valid slot filler in the KEF lineup.
A nice big monitor vs a small one is sometimes just the ticket before floor standers or for an easier blend with some configurations of subwoofer(s).

Of course I ended up going with a slightly smaller speaker myself so who knows. The Revel M126be came across as slightly more robust, dynamic and powerful despite being only a 2-way and smaller.
I'd love to try a comparison with the LS50 Meta if I can borrow a set somehow, we will see.

 

[Sancus]

Maximum output isn't everything. Bashing gear that a lot of members here own is trolling.

Making statements of facts about speakers is not bashing or trolling, so not sure if serious..?

I never even said the LS50 are bad(they're not, they're great!), just that they can't keep up with the R3. This is obvious. Same applies to comparing the R3 to R11. And of course it doesn't matter if you don't need that output. It's all very basic stuff, no clue why there's any argument.

 

[dfuller]

Maximum output isn't everything. Bashing gear that a lot of members here own is trolling.

It isn't, but the LF performance of the LS50s is... not great. They're overall good speakers, they're small and look good and their behavior other than their limited LF output is excellent.

It's just that which is an issue. There is no denying that the R3 does better there.

 

[KMO]

The release of the LS50 did not phase out the R3, so I wouldn't be too sure.

To think of it, I haven't seen a multichannel system with ls50's, but I guess it is doable.

I have 7 LS50 Metas here, with a KF92 sub. Optimising for multichannel music, so I want all my speakers the same - I've got a sort of thing about refusing to have better fronts on principle.

And when buying 7 of a speaker (and potentially stands), rather than 2, you become more price sensitive. Can't afford much more than the LS50. R3 on sale, possibly, but not more than that.

Considered the R3, but the LS50 Meta won on a few grounds.

1) Cosmetics
2) Matching stand with bolts
3) Size
4) It functions as a matching centre and fits where I need it
5) Price

 

[Vacceo]

Considering your space, do you think you're missing something? I'm asking because I have listened to the LS50's before, but only in 2.1 configs.

The particular case I listened to was a set to replace a tv soundbar and to me, it worked quite well in a small room.

 

[thewas]

Considered the R3, but the LS50 Meta won on a few grounds.

1) Cosmetics
2) Matching stand with bolts
3) Size
4) It functions as a matching centre and fits where I need it
5) Price

6) Also for people that don't have or want to have EQ the LS50 Meta might have a tad smoother tuning and directivity, which can be seen for example when comparing their PIRs:

same as without EQ the tonality of the R3 is quite smoother than the one of the original LS50.

With EQ they all can be made to sound very similar though.

7) The LS50 have the better engineered enclosures from damping and diffraction point of view, how much that is audible can be longly discussed though.

8) The LS50 might be the more collectable loudspeaker for people who are also collecting "legendary" loudspeakers, like for example the LS3/5a, due to their status/hype in the audiophile world.

Am sure the future R3 Meta with even better tuning will give the LS50 Meta an even harder time though.

 

[McFly]

Wonder if KEF have coordinated a shotgun marketing release with the usual YTers DA, AR, SG all dropping videos on release day. Kef set the bar very high with the LS50, a very WAFable, accommodatable, modern design, good sounding speaker IMO.