KEF's New Tech is Real

[oivavoi]

And the white paper of their new LS50 models incorporating those is now also online
https://us.kef.com/pub/media/wysiwyg/ls50/20-KEF-LS50-Collection-WhitePapers.pdf

Very impressive! Doesn't seem like fluff to me.

KEF also essentially says that active speakers is an inherently superior design. Which makes me ask why there is still no active version of the blade, for example...

 

[Ilkless]

Very impressive! Doesn't seem like fluff to me.

KEF also essentially says that active speakers is an inherently superior design. Which makes me ask why there is still no active version of the blade, for example...

Also, why all that pesky streaming and wireless stuff in the LS50W inflating the cost. There's a market for amplification and crossover-only active LS50 in the studio monitor market IMO, competing with Neumann and Genelec.

 

[killdozzer]

Very impressive! Doesn't seem like fluff to me.

KEF also essentially says that active speakers is an inherently superior design. Which makes me ask why there is still no active version of the blade, for example...

It's a guess, but price point?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Hi,

Unlike many technologies trumpeted in hi-fi, I can say that I've seen KEF's new absorber tech first-hand and it's "real." What do I mean by real? It actually works. Search around -- you'll find the AES paper on it. I've also talked to the designers, and now even have a speaker here to measure. It also shows something interesting -- there was definitely something to the tapered tube technology that was invented by Laurence Dickie and pioneered in the Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus. KEF's MAT is essentially that done the KEF way.

Here's our new KEF video:

As for the tapered-tube technology, a day after we shot the KEF video, I interviewed Laurence Dickie:

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!

Brilliant! A superb bit of lateral thinking engineering.
I am used to single frequency absorbers (crankshaft "dampers" for example) but this is splendid.

 

[oivavoi]

It's a guess, but price point?

Perhaps. I also think that the people who have traditionally bought extremely expensive speakers like the Blade might be wedded to the traditional idea of separate amplifiers, etc. But that can easily be solved by just providing the speakers with an external DSP/crossover, and ask customers to bring their own overpriced amplifiers.

 

[killdozzer]

Perhaps. I also think that the people who have traditionally bought extremely expensive speakers like the Blade might be wedded to the traditional idea of separate amplifiers, etc. But that can easily be solved by just providing the speakers with an external DSP/crossover, and ask customers to bring their own overpriced amplifiers.

You wouldn't...

I can tell you what I see as a problem with active, maybe it helps, maybe you haven't heard this one by now. It's the limited number of inputs. Which of course can be dealt with by a pre-amp, but then it deffeats the purpose of eliminating boxes.

I'm not about expensive collector's items and still I wouldn't get active. Very few have phono in (I know, I know, I'm not even a vinyl-head, but I want to keep mine) let alone expect MM/MC on an active speaker.

 

[Vini darko]

It's a guess, but price point?

Uk prices are around £1000 for the passive and £2.200 for the active. So more than double

 

[killdozzer]

Uk prices are around £1000 for the passive and £2.200 for the active. So more than double

I was in fact talking about what I think is the reason KEF didn't make active Blades. Because I think the price would go through the roof!

 

[Vini darko]

I was in fact talking about what I think is the reason KEF didn't make active Blades. Because I think the price would go through the roof!

Yeah you're right.

 

[TimVG]

I used to play with this tech as a kid

 

[thewas]

I also think that the people who have traditionally bought extremely expensive speakers like the Blade might be wedded to the traditional idea of separate amplifiers, etc.

I also think this is by far the main reason.

 

[sfdoddsy]

So, who's gonna be buying these to send to Amir?

I realise this is a gag, but I’ve seen many other similar posts and am wondering why.

The whole point of measurements is that they are objective and repeatable.

The measurements of the original LS50 as shown in KEF’s White Paper, onthis site, on Soundstage, on Stereophile, on Nextweb, on others are pretty much consistent.

Ditto Amir’s measurements of various Revels, Genelecs and Neumanns compared to other objective sites.

they weren’t, then there is an obvious issue.

His subjective opinions may be idiosyncratic, but the measurements aren’t.

I’d much rather see Amir measure speakers that have not been measured by other independent sites.

Like he did with the Selah. And the BMR.

 

[Absolute]

I was in fact talking about what I think is the reason KEF didn't make active Blades. Because I think the price would go through the roof!

No reason it should send the price through the roof. The cost of purify-modules (or cheaper Pascal/Ice) would be nothing compared to the insane amount of time and effort needed to adjust passive crossovers, drivers and placements to perfection. A few amplifier modules and a dsp-board would be free lunch in comparison.

The ridiculous pricing of audio needs to stop. There's nothing advanced or high-tech with active speakers, it's just a few mouse clicks deciding crossover-slopes and a few PEQs to smooth the response of the drivers/cabinet combo, and hopefully some time alignment as well for show.
All a company needs to decide is whether or not this should be a complete package with amplifiers and all the hassle with built-in amplifiers or just supply the dsp-box externally.

I'm surprised the latter one is nowhere to be seen in the audiophile world.

 

[mhardy6647]

So it's a plastic maze. Got it.

But, it's, like, so meta, man!

 

[Ilkless]

No reason it should send the price through the roof. The cost of purify-modules (or cheaper Pascal/Ice) would be nothing compared to the insane amount of time and effort needed to adjust passive crossovers, drivers and placements to perfection. A few amplifier modules and a dsp-board would be free lunch in comparison.

The ridiculous pricing of audio needs to stop. There's nothing advanced or high-tech with active speakers, it's just a few mouse clicks deciding crossover-slopes and a few PEQs to smooth the response of the drivers/cabinet combo, and hopefully some time alignment as well for show.
All a company needs to decide is whether or not this should be a complete package with amplifiers and all the hassle with built-in amplifiers or just supply the dsp-box externally.

I'm surprised the latter one is nowhere to be seen in the audiophile world.

If the market was fair and knowledgeable, foundational innovations like the Genelec coaxials, CBT arrays and Synergy horns would be given the attention and adoption they deserve, rather than the millionth variation of the same design format.

 

[jhaider]

If the market was fair and knowledgeable, foundational innovations like the Genelec coaxials, CBT arrays and Synergy horns would be given the attention and adoption they deserve, rather than the millionth variation of the same design format.

One thing all of those concepts have in common is they are protected IP. So are many of KEF’s coax innovations. So each is realistically only going to have a champion in the license-holder. Of those, only KEF is active in home audio marketing. Harman has deployed CBTs in demos - a well-received CEDIA immersive demo several years back used them for effects/ambience positions, but they have not for whatever reason taken an interest in marketing the configuration for home audio.

 

[oivavoi]

You wouldn't...

I can tell you what I see as a problem with active, maybe it helps, maybe you haven't heard this one by now. It's the limited number of inputs. Which of course can be dealt with by a pre-amp, but then it deffeats the purpose of eliminating boxes.

I'm not about expensive collector's items and still I wouldn't get active. Very few have phono in (I know, I know, I'm not even a vinyl-head, but I want to keep mine) let alone expect MM/MC on an active speaker.

I see your point! I would say that there are two points about active speakers though:
1) Sound
2) Simplicity

One can get the sound benefits with an external active crossover, but not the simplicity. This gives you the possibility of getting all the inputs and flexibility you want though. Like @Absolute I struggle to see why this isn't more common.

With everything onboard - amps, crossover, DSP, preamp - you get the added benefit of simplicity. As you mention one can add a preamp, but this reintroduces comlexity... As an all-digital guy it works for me, at least!

 

[killdozzer]

I see your point! I would say that there are two points about active speakers though:
1) Sound
2) Simplicity

One can get the sound benefits with an external active crossover, but not the simplicity. This gives you the possibility of getting all the inputs and flexibility you want though. Like @Absolute I struggle to see why this isn't more common.

With everything onboard - amps, crossover, DSP, preamp - you get the added benefit of simplicity. As you mention one can add a preamp, but this reintroduces comlexity... As an all-digital guy it works for me, at least!

I'm all for active speakers. I have no problems with that. I just haven't seen ones with a substantial preamp. And yes, this is a non issue for digital and I am 90% digital, but I always miss at least one or two.

Also I've noticed built in amps tend to be stronger than the recommended amp power. Those guys still don't trust us with strong amps!! My old passive LS50 say 25-100w, but the new meta LS50 has 100w just for the tweeter (!!). I guess they take care of any danger with a properly desigend active XO...

 

[richard12511]

I realise this is a gag, but I’ve seen many other similar posts and am wondering why.

The whole point of measurements is that they are objective and repeatable.

The measurements of the original LS50 as shown in KEF’s White Paper, onthis site, on Soundstage, on Stereophile, on Nextweb, on others are pretty much consistent.

Ditto Amir’s measurements of various Revels, Genelecs and Neumanns compared to other objective sites.

they weren’t, then there is an obvious issue.

His subjective opinions may be idiosyncratic, but the measurements aren’t.

I’d much rather see Amir measure speakers that have not been measured by other independent sites.

Like he did with the Selah. And the BMR.

Amir's measurements are much more detailed than what we have so far.

Personally, though, I agree. There are many other speakers I'd rather see measured, but I'm guessing these will be pretty popular.

 

[Frank Dernie]

You wouldn't...

I can tell you what I see as a problem with active, maybe it helps, maybe you haven't heard this one by now. It's the limited number of inputs. Which of course can be dealt with by a pre-amp, but then it deffeats the purpose of eliminating boxes.

I'm not about expensive collector's items and still I wouldn't get active. Very few have phono in (I know, I know, I'm not even a vinyl-head, but I want to keep mine) let alone expect MM/MC on an active speaker.

Agree, longevity and serviceability too.
I have Devialet Phantoms which are from the first production. They are a bit of a pain to use since a computer, phone or tablet is needed to drive them and set volume.
I like them a lot but they already will not run the latest software since they don't have blutooth built in, so they are already "old".
I have had my main speakers 25 years and they still are not "old".