Advice between Kef R3 Meta or Buchardt S400 MKII ?

[YSC]

Hm so is this a psychoacoustics thing? Cause the hf will still remain at the same level

partly, coz that our brain can kind of identify as anechoically bass shy speaker in a room. and more importantly, the music is mixed with anechoic flat speaker in a treated room, which results in the tilting down curve similar to toole/harman's, and to cater the audience, the mix will be using similar profile as a baseline to do so, so you artifically get an in room flat curve will make it bright

 

[Ellebob]

What other speakers in the r3 price range would you recommend that sounded better to you?

Good question! I had to think about this a bit! My immediate thoughts when I seen this question off the top of my head were Neumann 120, Genelec 8330, Mackie 824 and maybe even a Kali IN-5/8 or JBL 308 I might choose over Kef R3.

Darn, then I realized I had to think passive speaker. Without being able to listen again and compare the Paradigm Founder 40 and Revel Performa3 M106 were the only ones I would probably choose over the R3 off the top of my head. After some thinking there are others I would consider but would definitely want to listen or listen again. Those would be Focal Aria 906, Elac DBR62 and Martin Logan XT-B100. Now what I would choose personally and what I recommend to customers is different and that is based off experience of doing this 25+ years.

Where I work we do not have a showroom so we don't do customer demos too often. We will demo speakers or let customers take speakers home to demo if it happens we have something in stock. That's why I recommend to customers to go to dealers with showrooms and listen to see what they prefer. I know some of these dealers will also let customers try speakers at home. I often recommend a number of brands/ models to listen in their price range but they are often not speakers I would personally choose. I will typically tell them to look at B&W, Sonus Faber, Revel, Paradigm, Elac, Monitor Audio, Focal, Kef and others and will tell them dealers relatively close (within a 100 miles) that have decent inventory to demo. In my experience most customers have chose speakers that I personally wouldn't, often ones that don't measure well. It could be aesthetics, it could be they have good sales persons, or whatever reason. That's why I think Harman's studies are missing some variables because this has happened almost everytime. This is why I recommend people try speakers first and don't go off measurements or reviews alone. YMMV.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Good question! I had to think about this a bit! My immediate thoughts when I seen this question off the top of my head were Neumann 120, Genelec 8330, Mackie 824 and maybe even a Kali IN-5/8 or JBL 308 I might choose over Kef R3.

Darn, then I realized I had to think passive speaker. Without being able to listen again and compare the Paradigm Founder 40 and Revel Performa3 M106 were the only ones I would probably choose over the R3 off the top of my head. After some thinking there are others I would consider but would definitely want to listen or listen again. Those would be Focal Aria 906, Elac DBR62 and Martin Logan XT-B100. Now what I would choose personally and what I recommend to customers is different and that is based off experience of doing this 25+ years.

Where I work we do not have a showroom so we don't do customer demos too often. We will demo speakers or let customers take speakers home to demo if it happens we have something in stock. That's why I recommend to customers to go to dealers with showrooms and listen to see what they prefer. I know some of these dealers will also let customers try speakers at home. I often recommend a number of brands/ models to listen in their price range but they are often not speakers I would personally choose. I will typically tell them to look at B&W, Sonus Faber, Revel, Paradigm, Elac, Monitor Audio, Focal, Kef and others and will tell them dealers relatively close (within a 100 miles) that have decent inventory to demo. In my experience most customers have chose speakers that I personally wouldn't, often ones that don't measure well. It could be aesthetics, it could be they have good sales persons, or whatever reason. That's why I think Harman's studies are missing some variables because this has happened almost everytime. This is why I recommend people try speakers first and don't go off measurements or reviews alone. YMMV.

Imho, the main problem is…
You think the harman study alone is what you have to learn, but its not..
In the end is kind of complicated understand the whole thing.

For example, the harman curve alone tell you something very important, you may have to like or dislike it. Because, the study also tell you 25% of the people will prefer a brighter sound and 25% of the people will prefer a smoother sound. (If I remember the % correctly).
Also measurements, tell you flaws of the speakers, a good example is the r3 by amir. The speaker got recommended even with the room mode problem just because measurements tell you is a great speakers, that speaker was one of the early speakers review, in fact if you followed the whole review, members pointed to “add the small edit “ because he talk about that room mode in later pages/post.
I dont think measurements are missing anything, often people said that but never point what.
There harman curve is just a preference, just like narrow vs wide directivity. You have to choose.

Also demos in the store are worthless, is much better demos at home, because the user will hear his room in the end, with his problem, but the other problem if the guy has enough time to optimize the placement and correct the bass response.
For example a cancellation in the bass could lead to a brighter sound experience. At this day, i havent see any store with acoustic treatment, even in big ones.
Another problem is for example, the guy likes smooth speakers but the r3 as i showed is not a smooth speaker.
Edit: Also he pointed the volume thing, but there is something called fletcher curve, your ears listen different at different volume level. Some active speakers fix this problem but passive ones dont change his FR at volume variation.

 

[Ellebob]

Imho, the main problem is…
You think the harman study alone is what you have to learn, but its not..

Actually, this is pretty far from the truth. In fact people that know me will tell you I am always reading various studies I have an AES memebership and often looking at material on there. I mention this study because it is the one people are most familiar with it on forums and put so much emphasis on it and the Harman curve. Flethcer (and Munson) have good studies as well especially for the 1930s. Although a lot of the volume curves have been updated since then with an ISO standard in the early 2000s.

People are also delusional if they think other speaker manufacturers don't do testing including blind testing with the public to find preferences. Most don't show their results or what they come up with for preferences because it is their secret sauce. There are also different preferences for different demographics when you factor things like age and hearing loss. But, many audiophiles tend to be 50+.

As you state it is complicated and there are a lot of variables. Totally agree with you that demos in store are pretty much useless and if using a subwoofer it should be properly set up for comparison of the speakers. If you are not using a sub than including the full bass response is valid. I don't know how many people spend the time to match SPL levels properly and make sure everything is set up properly. There are stores here with acoustic treatment but if that acoustic treatment isn't similar to one's listening environment it won't benefit the evaluation.

One of the recent customers I mentioned in a previous post who was deciding between the R3 and R3 Meta had us come over and calibrate each. I was the calibrator and I only did the calibration below the 300hz for the speakers so he woud have a better idea of the difference between them. This was with an Anthem processor he owned. I was surprised back when Amir measured the R3 he did not EQ below the modal transition region for his room. For this customer I did integrate the sub and we had to compare with and without the sub briefly. At first he didn't want a sub trying to keep a cleaner look. He quickly realized he liked the sound with the sub better. But, that is why I was there as he listened between the speakers. Prior to the R3/R3 Meta comparison we did listen to his older Thiels for a quick comparison against the R3 and he realized they were outclassed and defnitely wanted to upgrade. He chose the R3 with the KC62 sub. He didn't want anything bigger for aesthetic reasons.

Not everybody has measuring equipment or willing to spend the time with it if they do. Many will listen without matching levels and many will change the volume as they listen when comparing speakers. Do you think that invalidates their testing making it pointless to even bring speakers home for comparison? Just curious on your thoughts.

Ps. The other customer that said they sounded like a blanket over them compared to his Utopias is now bringing them to a friends house that has the Aria 906 to give me his impressions to see if he was too harsh on them for their price point. I have been to both their houses and I doubt they will be scientific in their comparisons but hat's OK. I will update here his impressions but don't shoot the messenger.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Many will listen without matching levels and many will change the volume as they listen when comparing speakers. Do you think that invalidates their testing making it pointless to even bring speakers home for comparison? Just curious on your thoughts.

My answer is, it depends.



If someone prefer X instead of Y speaker in his home, its fine. But if are you going to spread your words of ''X speaker is better than Y speaker'' because you did a test like that nope.

 

[CK.]

Good question! I had to think about this a bit! My immediate thoughts when I seen this question off the top of my head were Neumann 120, Genelec 8330, Mackie 824 and maybe even a Kali IN-5/8 or JBL 308 I might choose over Kef R3.

Darn, then I realized I had to think passive speaker. Without being able to listen again and compare the Paradigm Founder 40 and Revel Performa3 M106 were the only ones I would probably choose over the R3 off the top of my head. After some thinking there are others I would consider but would definitely want to listen or listen again. Those would be Focal Aria 906, Elac DBR62 and Martin Logan XT-B100. Now what I would choose personally and what I recommend to customers is different and that is based off experience of doing this 25+ years.

Where I work we do not have a showroom so we don't do customer demos too often. We will demo speakers or let customers take speakers home to demo if it happens we have something in stock. That's why I recommend to customers to go to dealers with showrooms and listen to see what they prefer. I know some of these dealers will also let customers try speakers at home. I often recommend a number of brands/ models to listen in their price range but they are often not speakers I would personally choose. I will typically tell them to look at B&W, Sonus Faber, Revel, Paradigm, Elac, Monitor Audio, Focal, Kef and others and will tell them dealers relatively close (within a 100 miles) that have decent inventory to demo. In my experience most customers have chose speakers that I personally wouldn't, often ones that don't measure well. It could be aesthetics, it could be they have good sales persons, or whatever reason. That's why I think Harman's studies are missing some variables because this has happened almost everytime. This is why I recommend people try speakers first and don't go off measurements or reviews alone. YMMV.

Yeah I mean in my brief experience there is a fine line between enjoyment and frustration in this hobby probably because there are so many variables, different approaches, preferences etc. recently I auditioned a pair of MA silver in the dealershop which I liked but then luckily i was able to audiotion them at home as well and i did not like them i thought they sounded too forward. Then theres also equipment matching and the controversial topics of expensive cables and break-in periods and power cables and what have you. At th end of the day what i am missing as a beginner is a percespective of how much each element in the chain is contributing to good sound percentage-wise, but that could be subjective as well

 

[CK.]

R3 Meta anyday

Dont temp me… actually erin said that of you are able to eq the r3 then they are better valued speakers and thats what i am trying to do in order to save money and use them towards an r6 meta as a center

 

[dominikz]

At th end of the day what i am missing as a beginner is a percespective of how much each element in the chain is contributing to good sound percentage-wise, but that could be subjective as well

I'd give the percentages as:

• 50% loudspeakers (ideally ones with flat on-axis and smooth directivity)
• 20% adding subwoofers
• 30% optimizing speaker/sub placement and integration, adding room EQ

Audio electronics are IMHO a commodity these days, and unless they are truly terribly designed/built (or used out of their operating area) they all sound fine.
When the above is sorted one quickly finds that recordings themselves are usually the bottleneck for good sound quality

P.S. I intentionally left the room out of the equation. IMHO very good sound can be had in conventional residential rooms, but some people prefer heavily treated spaces.

 

[YSC]

Yeah I mean in my brief experience there is a fine line between enjoyment and frustration in this hobby probably because there are so many variables, different approaches, preferences etc. recently I auditioned a pair of MA silver in the dealershop which I liked but then luckily i was able to audiotion them at home as well and i did not like them i thought they sounded too forward. Then theres also equipment matching and the controversial topics of expensive cables and break-in periods and power cables and what have you. At th end of the day what i am missing as a beginner is a percespective of how much each element in the chain is contributing to good sound percentage-wise, but that could be subjective as well

break in period for spiders past a few minutes at most and any break in or expensive cables are snake oil, practically the property change throughout the year contributs much more than all those, only your ears and brains get adapted to the new sound.. All you described are basically room issue coming from vendor audition to your own home, and then the rest of the chain, as long as it isn't broken or out of spec, it should have no effect on the sound you get. just like if you have a road wider than you need to go, any extra width of the road won't make you go quicker

 

[bodhi]

Yeah I mean in my brief experience there is a fine line between enjoyment and frustration in this hobby probably because there are so many variables, different approaches, preferences etc.

It's mostly self inflicted problem which you can choose not to have.

Get R3 with any remotely decent amplifier and you are just about done for music. If you watch movies/game you might get a decent subwoofer.

Give that setup to somebody who isn't into hifi and he'll be satisfied for life. Chances are he'll never just randomly start wondering if he would maybe like something different. And if you introduce him to something that is "better" it probably doesn't make him think he needs an upgrade.

The countless variables and preferences come into picture after you start learning more about sound reproduction. To put it simple: you decide you have something missing and then try find out what it could be and how that could be fixed.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yeah I mean in my brief experience there is a fine line between enjoyment and frustration in this hobby probably because there are so many variables, different approaches, preferences etc. recently I auditioned a pair of MA silver in the dealershop which I liked but then luckily i was able to audiotion them at home as well and i did not like them i thought they sounded too forward. Then theres also equipment matching and the controversial topics of expensive cables and break-in periods and power cables and what have you. At th end of the day what i am missing as a beginner is a percespective of how much each element in the chain is contributing to good sound percentage-wise, but that could be subjective as well

If you start from the precept that everything you read ( apart from here) is at best disingenuous and at worst an outright lie you won’t go far wrong.
Keith

 

[CK.]

I'd give the percentages as:

• 50% loudspeakers (ideally ones with flat on-axis and smooth directivity)
• 20% adding subwoofers
• 30% optimizing speaker/sub placement and integration, adding room EQ

Audio electronics are IMHO a commodity these days, and unless they are truly terribly designed/built (or used out of their operating area) they all sound fine.
When the above is sorted one quickly finds that recordings themselves are usually the bottleneck for good sound quality

P.S. I intentionally left the room out of the equation. IMHO very good sound can be had in conventional residential rooms, but some people prefer heavily treated spaces.

Thanks! What would you say is the difference between 1 and 2 subwoofers?

 

[CK.]

It's mostly self inflicted problem which you can choose not to have.

Get R3 with any remotely decent amplifier and you are just about done for music. If you watch movies/game you might get a decent subwoofer.

Give that setup to somebody who isn't into hifi and he'll be satisfied for life. Chances are he'll never just randomly start wondering if he would maybe like something different. And if you introduce him to something that is "better" it probably doesn't make him think he needs an upgrade.

The countless variables and preferences come into picture after you start learning more about sound reproduction. To put it simple: you decide you have something missing and then try find out what it could be and how that could be fixed.

Yeah agreed but unfortunately that urge to keep wondering how much better can it get is not a switch that you can flip but yeah it is mostly self inflicted

 

[CK.]

break in period for spiders past a few minutes at most and any break in or expensive cables are snake oil, practically the property change throughout the year contributs much more than all those, only your ears and brains get adapted to the new sound.. All you described are basically room issue coming from vendor audition to your own home, and then the rest of the chain, as long as it isn't broken or out of spec, it should have no effect on the sound you get. just like if you have a road wider than you need to go, any extra width of the road won't make you go quicker

Yeah unfortunately there is a significant percentage of reviewers, dealers and forums and people who insist that break in and epxensive cables are a real thing. Personally i agree with you but its easy to get distracted.

 

[dominikz]

Thanks! What would you say is the difference between 1 and 2 subwoofers?

Personally I don't subscribe to the "stereo bass" idea (available research indicates that human capability to localize very low frequencies is basically non-existent), so I see multiple subwoofers as a way to:
a) Get a smoother bass response across a wider area in-room, ideally when tuned with something like Multi-Sub Optimizer (MSO) software
b) Get more bass SPL

Perhaps these links might be useful:

• Tuning multiple subwoofers with miniDSP
• Audioholics: Bass Optimization for Home Theater with Multi-Sub + mDSP

So far I have not played with multiple subwoofers, mainly because I have a small listening area and I do not need a lot of SPL.
IMHO a single subwoofer that is well integrated (and tuned with EQ) already provides a significant sound quality improvement at the main listening position (compared to no subwoofer).

 

[YSC]

Yeah unfortunately there is a significant percentage of reviewers, dealers and forums and people who insist that break in and epxensive cables are a real thing. Personally i agree with you but its easy to get distracted.

that's how snake oil works. Even in real medical treatment sometimes "comfort drugs" with no real effects can make ppl feel a lot better.
Personally I only trust logic, it's one thing some bad components made out of spec can perform worse than within spec components, above the spec don't make things better. I am sure you can find a ton of teardown of expensive speakers, the internal wiring is nothing remotely similar to the material or gauge of those exotic cables, so things perform at the level of the weakest part and here you go.

 

[Ellebob]

Dominikz hit it on the head. Stereo subs are useless and you will get a different bass response depending which sub or both are playing the bass. The reson for two or more subs is to get more consistent bass in the listening area. If you only care about one seat then one sub will work if the sub and seating are placed well. EQ ia almost always needed whether one or more subs.

 

[Ellebob]

Update on the customer we lent the R3 speakers. He brought them to a frineds house and compared them to the Focal Aria 906. Their set up was not ideal as the R3 was placed upside down on top the the Focals with a pad between them. They were using a Lyngdorf 1120 and turned off the room correction and did not use the subs (pair of Martin Logan, not sure model). I am pretty sure they didn't volume match so this is no way scientific. They both thought the Kef was a little better not night and day, blow me away better. The one that brought the R3s was surprised because from his memory he thought the Aria would be better. Of course none compared to his more expensive Ultras so his search will continue (might take years ). Again, don't shoot the messenger I am just passing on comments from average people doing their own type of comparison.

 

[CK.]

Personally I don't subscribe to the "stereo bass" idea (available research indicates that human capability to localize very low frequencies is basically non-existent), so I see multiple subwoofers as a way to:
a) Get a smoother bass response across a wider area in-room, ideally when tuned with something like Multi-Sub Optimizer (MSO) software
b) Get more bass SPL

Perhaps these links might be useful:

• Tuning multiple subwoofers with miniDSP
• Audioholics: Bass Optimization for Home Theater with Multi-Sub + mDSP

So far I have not played with multiple subwoofers, mainly because I have a small listening area and I do not need a lot of SPL.
IMHO a single subwoofer that is well integrated (and tuned with EQ) already provides a significant sound quality improvement at the main listening position (compared to no subwoofer).

Thanks i dont need a high spl either just to try and smooth the frequency responce. Would you say that its a good alternative to use 1 sub and also run your speakers full range (double bass) and eq the bass region for smoother response?

 

[dominikz]

Thanks i dont need a high spl either just to try and smooth the frequency responce. Would you say that its a good alternative to use 1 sub and also run your speakers full range (double bass) and eq the bass region for smoother response?

It is worth a shot. Personally I'd try various options: full-range mains vs various crossover points, various subwoofer positions, with and without port plugs.... and see what gives me the best foundation for EQ (i.e. the combination with the least bass suckout/dips).