Erin's KEF Blade 2 Meta review.

[CleanSound]

Someone beat me to it again

KEF Blade 2 Meta review by Erin's Audio Corner

Written review isn't online yet, so for now just some screenshots of some important measurements: Real excellence, one of the best passive loudspeakers currently, hope in many years I will be able to afford a used pair. Interesting also that Erin say they are not only objectively in each...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Matias]

KEF Blade 2 Meta review by Erin's Audio Corner

Written review isn't online yet, so for now just some screenshots of some important measurements: Real excellence, one of the best passive loudspeakers currently, hope in many years I will be able to afford a used pair. Interesting also that Erin say they are not only objectively in each...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[dfuller]

So Erin reviewed the KEF Blade 2 Meta, I won't link it here, but you guys can find it on YouTube.

Erin is raving about it, then he showed the data, while it's terrific, but if I'm honest, I was a bit disappointed as it did not match "the best speaker I've heard" rave. In fact, I would say the D&D 8 measures better in many aspects.

Anyone heard the Blade 2 Meta in person? Your thoughts, is it the best speaker ever?

Coincidentally, at the start of his video he made a disclaimer how if someone doesn't find value in his subjective impression, one can skip to the data, I think that is a nod to the discussion in the FR10 thread we recently had.

The DD8C is much higher distortion, and the compression behavior isn't nearly as good.

 

[Purité Audio]

Distortion has to be audible to be an issue.
Keith

 

[AudioKC]

I decided to listen to "Balade 2" via my Kef R11.

And configured Dirac Live Curve to be similar to Blade 2.

Fun experience, punchy upper bass, and quite a good midrange! Actually, I like that flat response from 200 to 1000.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

Yeah, I "heard" the blades once in a showroom with some decent amplification and a digital audio source (of some kind) driving them.
Personally, I felt that the bass was pretty well done, and it sounded very "smooth" and "full". The room acoustics weren't ideal, but I could tell that they were pretty good speakers, and if set up correctly could probably give good imaging.
Now, with the asterisk that I didn't spend much time with them, nor did I really turn it up much, I must say:
They didn't have a super "fun" or energetic sound to them. They had plenty of amplifier behind them, but the music just lacked the "alive-ness" that physically larger (ie: larger midrange, acoustically large baffle) speakers can provide. Now, it's no secret that I am a fan of horn-loaded systems, I am a believer that the higher efficiency, sensitivity, and pattern control of horns does result in something that isn't fully captured in the measurements that we regularly use. (Now, it probably can be measured, we just need to figure out a measurement to show it.)
So, my problem with the blades is (probably) that above the woofer crossover, it's a mini-midrange and baby tweeter... lol. It's a great speaker for "elevator music", it just doesn't tick the boxes that I require of a loudspeaker system.

 

[Chromatischism]

It's a great speaker for "elevator music",

I think you're underselling the speaker a bit.

 

[muad]

Yeah, I "heard" the blades once in a showroom with some decent amplification and a digital audio source (of some kind) driving them.
Personally, I felt that the bass was pretty well done, and it sounded very "smooth" and "full". The room acoustics weren't ideal, but I could tell that they were pretty good speakers, and if set up correctly could probably give good imaging.
Now, with the asterisk that I didn't spend much time with them, nor did I really turn it up much, I must say:
They didn't have a super "fun" or energetic sound to them. They had plenty of amplifier behind them, but the music just lacked the "alive-ness" that physically larger (ie: larger midrange, acoustically large baffle) speakers can provide. Now, it's no secret that I am a fan of horn-loaded systems, I am a believer that the higher efficiency, sensitivity, and pattern control of horns does result in something that isn't fully captured in the measurements that we regularly use. (Now, it probably can be measured, we just need to figure out a measurement to show it.)
So, my problem with the blades is (probably) that above the woofer crossover, it's a mini-midrange and baby tweeter... lol. It's a great speaker for "elevator music", it just doesn't tick the boxes that I require of a loudspeaker system.

Maybe you need a PA speaker?

 

[goat76]

Distortion has to be audible to be an issue.
Keith

Some people are more sensitive to distortion than others. When you start hearing it you can't unhear it. The D&D 8C has high level of distortion.

 

[Keith_W]

They didn't have a super "fun" or energetic sound to them. They had plenty of amplifier behind them, but the music just lacked the "alive-ness" that physically larger (ie: larger midrange, acoustically large baffle) speakers can provide. Now, it's no secret that I am a fan of horn-loaded systems, I am a believer that the higher efficiency, sensitivity, and pattern control of horns does result in something that isn't fully captured in the measurements that we regularly use. (Now, it probably can be measured, we just need to figure out a measurement to show it.)

I am yet to hear the Blades, I am waiting for the dealer to get them in then i'll go and listen. So I can't comment on your listening impression. But I do agree with your comments about horns. I am not sure what is not being measured. There is a certain sense of scale and drama with a good horn speaker. I just don't know what measurement it correlates to. I have found a measurement which might explain it here, but I am not sure if I have drawn the correct conclusion or not. Anyway that's off topic.

So, my problem with the blades is (probably) that above the woofer crossover, it's a mini-midrange and baby tweeter... lol. It's a great speaker for "elevator music", it just doesn't tick the boxes that I require of a loudspeaker system.

Come now, if you put them in an elevator you won't have room for people

 

[AudioKC]

Yeah, I "heard" the blades once in a showroom with some decent amplification and a digital audio source (of some kind) driving them.
Personally, I felt that the bass was pretty well done, and it sounded very "smooth" and "full". The room acoustics weren't ideal, but I could tell that they were pretty good speakers, and if set up correctly could probably give good imaging.
Now, with the asterisk that I didn't spend much time with them, nor did I really turn it up much, I must say:
They didn't have a super "fun" or energetic sound to them. They had plenty of amplifier behind them, but the music just lacked the "alive-ness" that physically larger (ie: larger midrange, acoustically large baffle) speakers can provide. Now, it's no secret that I am a fan of horn-loaded systems, I am a believer that the higher efficiency, sensitivity, and pattern control of horns does result in something that isn't fully captured in the measurements that we regularly use. (Now, it probably can be measured, we just need to figure out a measurement to show it.)
So, my problem with the blades is (probably) that above the woofer crossover, it's a mini-midrange and baby tweeter... lol. It's a great speaker for "elevator music", it just doesn't tick the boxes that I require of a loudspeaker system.

Sounds to me that you like directivity mismatch, which makes speakers “alive”.

I heard many times from people that speakers with great directivity not fun for them. Plus Kef is has quite narrow horizontal directivity which can make them sound smaller than other speakers.

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

Sounds to me that you like directivity mismatch, which makes speakers “alive”.

I heard many times from people that speakers with great directivity not fun for them. Plus Kef is has quite narrow horizontal directivity which can make them sound smaller than other speakers.

That is possible, I can't refute or support it, however.
Though, I do find that KEF's Q950 towers have the "alive-ness" to some extent. Generally, I have attributed my experiences with this sound effect to having larger / more efficient tweeters and midrange drivers.
I can't find any spins of the Q950, but I would presume that KEF would have good directivity on the Q950, though based off the 2.2khz listed crossover it may very well have a directivity dip.
Personally, I subscribe to the theory of Greg Timbers, that efficiency / sensitivity, and dynamics are very important for a loudspeaker system to have that "real" sound.
Thermal and other dynamic compression, to me, does make a difference in the listening experience. Maybe because I am used to the sound of PA systems, or maybe it's just what I like, but I do find that I can identify when a system has good dynamics or not.

So yeah, I do probably "need" what most on this forum would consider a "PA" speaker. Of course, I'm still keeping my Q100s on my desk, as in my current living condition they are barely working hard, the room is so small that 70db sounds quite loud, and the room is also so acoustically bad that they sound about as good as anything else would here...

 

[moonlight rainbow dream]

[...]
Now, with the asterisk that I didn't spend much time with them, nor did I really turn it up much, I must say:
[...]

 

[AwesomeSauce2015]

I had them at a reasonable volume level, I wasn't trying to test the system like that one time I accidentally maxed out a pair of Q550s when comparing them with something else. I wasn't trying to disturb everyone else in the store, nor was I trying to break anything. It's just that in that listening test, they weren't as enjoyable to me as say the JBL HDI-3800s with a pair of subs, even when both were run at what I would consider "reasonable volume levels".
Now, when I get a chance to crank a speaker system that can actually handle it, I do tend to correlate louder with better / more fun of a sound, given that the sound system can actually handle it.
So maybe the blades would have performed better (in my subjective test) had I turned up the volume higher, but I don't think so for the reasons I outlined above.

 

[capslock]

Since the other Erin / Blade 2 Meta thread is closed, and I didn't have time to read through all 30 pages of pertinent and not so pertinent posts, excuse my asking two simple questions:

- Do the Blade 1 Meta and Blade 2 Meta use the same Uni-Q driver?

- Are there any full Klippel reviews of a first generation blade out there? Or for that matter any other high quality dispersion and distrotion measurement?

Thanks

 

[AOR]

Since the other Erin / Blade 2 Meta thread is closed, and I didn't have time to read through all 30 pages of pertinent and not so pertinent posts, excuse my asking two simple questions:

- Do the Blade 1 Meta and Blade 2 Meta use the same Uni-Q driver?

- Are there any full Klippel reviews of a first generation blade out there? Or for that matter any other high quality dispersion and distrotion measurement?

Thanks, .

Yes, the Blade 1 Meta and Blade 2 Meta use the same UniQ.

 

[AOR]

Since the other Erin / Blade 2 Meta thread is closed, and I didn't have time to read through all 30 pages of pertinent and not so pertinent posts, excuse my asking two simple questions:

- Do the Blade 1 Meta and Blade 2 Meta use the same Uni-Q driver?

- Are there any full Klippel reviews of a first generation blade out there? Or for that matter any other high quality dispersion and distrotion measurement?

Thanks

Some comparisons of Blade and Blade Meta can be found in the Blade and Reference Meta whitepaper, including directivity comparisons and distortion source comparisons.

https://assets.kef.com/product-support/blade/blade-reference-white-paper-en.pdf

 

[capslock]

Thanks! What a treasure trove of information. I only skimmed the pictures and graphs. The work on the MF motor is impressive. This is in many ways similar to the Purifi motor design, e.g. the use of an extra neodymium magnet to stabilize flux. The reduction in MF distortion at 90 dB/1 m from 0.2% to 0.1% is impressive, but 0.1% is not class leading.

The other thing I learned is that Blade Meta and Reference Meta apparently use the same Uni Q. All comparisons are to the 2014 Reference, so there is never any comparision to the original Blade Uni Q. Was ist similar to the Reference or did it already have the advanced motor of the current Blade / Reference?

 

[AOR]

Thanks! What a treasure trove of information. I only skimmed the pictures and graphs. The work on the MF motor is impressive. This is in many ways similar to the Purifi motor design, e.g. the use of an extra neodymium magnet to stabilize flux. The reduction in MF distortion at 90 dB/1 m from 0.2% to 0.1% is impressive, but 0.1% is not class leading.

The other thing I learned is that Blade Meta and Reference Meta apparently use the same Uni Q. All comparisons are to the 2014 Reference, so there is never any comparision to the original Blade Uni Q. Was ist similar to the Reference or did it already have the advanced motor of the current Blade / Reference?

No worries. Many of our recent product releases have accompanying white papers. These can often be found floating around ASR. Failing that the support page on the KEF website has a more comprehensive list. They're written by development engineers and training engineers, with a little beautification from others, so the info can be taken as "canon".

Our UniQs all use two ring magnets, and instead of the Purifi approach of using a steel top hat for flux linearisation; and a neo core for inductance reduction, we use a dual gap and a copper washer. This works to reduce flux modulation, inductance, and (by varying the exact washer geometry) the inductance modulation. There are some companies using approaches that I would consider better, in terms of potential for lower distortion. However, many of these use patented technologies and/or are unsuitable for use in a UniQ, where much of the core need be empty and the pole piece be relatively clean (for a tweeter to be placed on top).

One company, in my opinion, that makes some very interesting designs, at least in terms of loudspeaker motors, is Borresen. Their dual gap, iron-free motor has the potential to be one of the lowest distortion designs on the market. I don't know if their speakers are ever measured publicly, but I'd love to see just how well they perform on paper.

Back to your other question, and away from my ramblings on speaker design...

The original blade motor was significantly different from the pre-meta reference motor. It used a concept called "nodal drive", whereby the voice coil has half the diameter of the diaphragm, effectively cancelling the first breakup mode. The idea is great, but having such a large voice coil (roughly 2") on an MF introduced a world of other issues that are difficult to deal with, such as: higher cost, higher moving mass, higher inductance. After the blade, the pre-meta reference was developed, and it was decided that dropping the nodal drive was preferable. This coupling technology was replaced with a rubber decoupler. This acts as a mechanical low pass, attenuating the peak caused by the breakup. The decoupler is found in pretty much all KEF products today.

 

[Ciobi69]

Yeah, I "heard" the blades once in a showroom with some decent amplification and a digital audio source (of some kind) driving them.
Personally, I felt that the bass was pretty well done, and it sounded very "smooth" and "full". The room acoustics weren't ideal, but I could tell that they were pretty good speakers, and if set up correctly could probably give good imaging.
Now, with the asterisk that I didn't spend much time with them, nor did I really turn it up much, I must say:
They didn't have a super "fun" or energetic sound to them. They had plenty of amplifier behind them, but the music just lacked the "alive-ness" that physically larger (ie: larger midrange, acoustically large baffle) speakers can provide. Now, it's no secret that I am a fan of horn-loaded systems, I am a believer that the higher efficiency, sensitivity, and pattern control of horns does result in something that isn't fully captured in the measurements that we regularly use. (Now, it probably can be measured, we just need to figure out a measurement to show it.)
So, my problem with the blades is (probably) that above the woofer crossover, it's a mini-midrange and baby tweeter... lol. It's a great speaker for "elevator music", it just doesn't tick the boxes that I require of a loudspeaker system.

The mini mid range and tweeter is quite impressive i have it myself on the blade 2 and you go very well high with volume