KEF Q100 Speaker Review

[aarons915]

How much is your listening distance? I am guess you are not using them as nearfield monitors like I do, which reduces the intensity of the presence boost region as the angled FR and sound power don't have it as so pronounced:

View attachment 53904

Right, mine are in a living room setup with no toe-in and I sit around 8-9 ft away.

 

[raistlin65]

I think the famous reputation Q100 has more to do with its great looks than sound.

I think a lot, too, has to do with expectation bias because of the coaxial design. When offering testimonials to people seeking recommendations, I have seen many people on forums lead with how great they (and the Q150s) are because of the technology.

Be interesting to see how the Q150s measure.

 

[amirm]

I think a lot, too, has to do with expectation bias because of the coaxial design. When offering testimonials to people seeking recommendations, I have seen many people on forums lead with how great they (and the Q150s) are because of the technology.

Indeed every review I watched started with that and ended with "great imaging." In a live music venue, nothing comes out a single point source....

 

[tuga]

Indeed every review I watched started with that and ended with "great imaging." In a live music venue, nothing comes out a single point source....

That is why stereo was invented.

Speakers are supposed to reproduce a recording as accurately as possible. It's got nothing to do with live sound.

 

[amirm]

Speakers are supposed to reproduce a recording as accurately as possible. It's got nothing to do with live sound.

That's orthogonal to the point I was making.

 

[Schackmannen]

That's orthogonal to the point I was making.

That's a new expression for me, arguments being orthogonal to each other

 

[MZKM]

That's a new expression for me, arguments being orthogonal to each other

The mathematician in me always gets thrown for a loop when I see it used for its other meaning.

 

[jsy]

(I predict 3 font colors at a minimum)

I don't think anyone gave you credit for this. Perfect accuracy

 

[Francis Vaughan]

Razor sharp imaging is a party trick of the mixing of stereophonic recording. Anyone who thinks that any real performance has imaging like that needs to get out more and go to live music. The recording process unavoidably leads to a different overall sound. Just the positioning of the microphones should tell you that.
I go to a lot of concerts, many are recorded for broadcast. So I get to hear them both live and later as a recording. The same concert will have a totally different sonic signature recorded. So much of what the golden eared value is basically invented. They, most of all, need to get out more.

 

[mhardy6647]

There's a fellow on a couple of the hifi fora that does semi-serious amateur audio recording of live music. In the context of this 'imaging' sub-discussion, some of y'all might find his recordings, and approach, interesting. I've tried to be very circumspect in cross-citing forums here, but I'll share a sample link to this thread, strictly FYI and FWIW. No warranty express(ed) or implied.

https://hifihaven.org/index.php?threads/poway-symphony-2019-05-19-beethoven-beethoven.4910/
https://archive.org/details/pso2019-05-19.matrix.2448

 

[bobbooo]

The mathematician in me always gets thrown for a loop

A Möbius loop?

 

[bigjacko]

Interestingly, some people like open baffle because their imaging is not pin point but a bit blurred. They think it is closer to a live concert.

 

[BurgerCheese]

Interestingly, some people like open baffle because their imaging is not pin point but a bit blurred. They think it is closer to a live concert.

https://www.linkwitzlab.com/The_Magic/The_Magic.htm

 

[bigjacko]

https://www.linkwitzlab.com/The_Magic/The_Magic.htm

I know linkwitzlab, open baffle with right setup is good, but due to the reflection the image can never be pin point.

 

[Prana Ferox]

A Möbius loop?

Come on, there's need to make this discussion one-sided

 

[BurgerCheese]

Razor sharp imaging is a party trick of the mixing of stereophonic recording. Anyone who thinks that any real performance has imaging like that needs to get out more and go to live music. The recording process unavoidably leads to a different overall sound. Just the positioning of the microphones should tell you that.
I go to a lot of concerts, many are recorded for broadcast. So I get to hear them both live and later as a recording. The same concert will have a totally different sonic signature recorded. So much of what the golden eared value is basically invented. They, most of all, need to get out more.

Recordings are obviously different from live music, but I assume most people here knows that very few recordings attempts to create a true representation of the live experience. Instead recordings attempt to create some sort of appealing illusion.

I do go to concerts and sometimes I wish that I had just put on a recording at home instead. Concerts these days are filled with talking people, coughing corona patients, screaming babies, noisy candy wrappers, phones, etc. Concerts have horrible SNR.

 

[ROOSKIE]

This reminds me to answer the other question. For listening tests, I am using an amplifier rated at 1000 watts into 4 ohm. Listening space is huge (vaulted ceiling with open floor plan). Seating distance is about 12 feet. And yes, I turn up the volume.

I don't think you have enough power. I easily drive a 80 watt 8ohm/120 4ohm (real power) into clipping at higher volumes with any of the speakers I own that have lower sensitivity and 4ohm or lower dips. Even some with high 80's sensitivity. (crazy loud then though)
For cheap and easy high power testing use a Crown 2502 or 2002. Never even come close to clipping even at ridiculous volumes with any speaker on the 2502. Subjectively I find that amp sounds great. Really. (not a huge believer in expensive amps but I do hear some differences between amps, subtle ones)

 

[ROOSKIE]

That's orthogonal to the point I was making.

I feel you both have good points. I said it earlier but the Q150 in particular has some genuine imaging and especially layering abilities.( I have no specific belief in coaxial designs beyond the ability to provide better vertical dispersion..)
Better than any comparable speaker I have listened to, in some ways it is actually astonishing for this price. I also believe that much of this will be beyond the listening ability of many. Not that say I hear better, just saying this does require a specific way of leaning into its sound. I did not notice it a first and then I realized something extra was there and once I honed in on it it was quite a thing.
Like those pictures with the holographic images imbeded. "The magic eye" images
anyway...

 

[YSC]

I am thinking another thing, their x300a (wireless) basically thane the q100 driver. Rear potted them and make them active with a TI dac inside, would that actually tamed the things a bit as it supposed to have some dsp in it or did kef did that cheaply to milk more money is interesting

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

The second pair of speakers I built, in 1970 used KEF T27 tweeter, B110 mid and B139 bass units.
Obviously the equipment brands one is exposed to, especially at the low price end pretty well entirely depends on where you live.

Or what audio rags you read. As a teen I religiously traveled to Hotalings in Manhattan to purchase all the British hifi publications and Wireless World.
Were the speakers From Falcon or Wimslow Audio?
https://observer.com/2014/02/the-ic...er-hotalings-news-agency-survives-but-barely/