Downgrade to KEF LS50 Meta from KEF R7 Meta

[Acapella]

Hello,

I'm currently running a pair of KEF R7 Meta speakers together with a KEF Kube 10 MIE subwoofer on my system.
The subwoofer was recently added after it (although only one) reproduced the bass range much better than both R7 Meta together without subwoofer.
The subwoofer is currently positioned to the right of the right speaker (near a corner of the room), crossover frequency is 90Hz.

I have also attached two screenshots, one showing just the two R7 Meta (2.0) and one showing the R7 Meta together with the Kube subwoofer (2.1).
In each case with and without Dirac activated. The Dirac profile currently used is relatively linear (+1 in the bass and -1 in the treble for the sliders).

Unfortunately, there is still a dip at around 100Hz, which I can't get rid of even with a high crossover frequency of 150Hz to the subwoofer.
The general increases from approx. 120Hz to approx. 900Hz are corrected quite well by Dirac.

But since I want to keep the subwoofer in the setup, the bass is simply better with a subwoofer, I'm wondering whether the R7 Meta still makes sense or whether smaller speakers would also work.
I might try a second subwoofer and position it diagonally opposite in the other corner of the room.
Perhaps the crossover frequency could then be a little higher.

I'm thinking of switching to the KEF LS50 Meta, as they should be crossed over to a subwoofer from approx. 100Hz, which would suit perfectly.
The smaller speaker might also improve the frequency response somewhat, but that would have to be tested.

I would be grateful for a few opinions on whether it would make sense to switch from R7 Meta to LS50 Meta with one or two subwoofers.

The room is approx. 26 square meters in size (approx. 6 x 4 meters), the speakers are on the long side of the room, the sofa on the opposite side behind the windows.
The speakers are about 2.50 meters apart and I am sitting about 3.40 meters away.

I usually listen at room volume, but occasionally a little louder. In general, however, I would assume that there are no peaks higher than 85dB when listening at higher volumes.

Thank you in advance.

Best regards

 

[Dako]

I previously had the KEF R11 but switched to the LS50 with two subwoofers. Subjectively, the LS50 setup delivered better sound quality. Since my room is about 25 square meters, I didn’t need the extra SPL that the R11s provided. Now, I have the LS60 with one subwoofer, and so far, this is the best sound I’ve experienced.

 

[ucmike11]

What does the subwoofer only response look like? It seems you are sitting in a null, and different speakers will not fix that unless you plan to change the seating arrangement, or add a second subwoofer in a location that cancels the null

 

[Acapella]

I plan to switch from one Kube 10 Subwoofer to two Kube 8 MIE Subwoofers and place them diagonally in two corners of the room. One in the corner near the right loudspeaker and the second one then diagonally on the other corner. I hope that will make the bass response more smoother and I can switch then to 120Hz of crossover frequency for the LS50 Meta.

Does somebody use such a subwoofer configuration (diagonally placed) with Dirac Live running on a NAD Device with two Sub Outputs?
I have a C399 with two sub outs and also (as Dirac offers me while measurement) it seems that this two outputs are independent from each other, so Dirac should be able to measure two subs separately.

Or do i need to use a MiniDSP 2x4 HD with two subs placed diagonally when one of the subs maybe is running with phase 180 and the other one with phase 0?

Some advice on this would be really nice, maybe I can use then the NAD C399 only and need no MiniDSP extra for handling two subwoofers placed diagonally.

 

[terryforsythe]

Unfortunately, there is still a dip at around 100Hz, which I can't get rid of even with a high crossover frequency of 150Hz to the subwoofer.

Dirac does not fill in all of the big dips. Here is how I handled it:

I increased the volume knob on the subwoofer so that the bottom of the worst dip is at the same SPL as the target speaker curve. Then I ran Dirac. That worked for me, but I have an 18" subwoofer with a 1250W amp.

In your case, you would need to run your subwoofer(s) to 120 Hz, or maybe a bit higher, for this to work, and your subwoofer would need to be able handle that high of SPL. Perhaps rather than switching to two 8" subwoofers, stick with your 10" and add another one.

Also, when running Dirac, experiment with running it only to 400Hz or 500 Hz. For context, read the first three posts in the following thread:

Some comments from Floyd Toole about room curve targets, room EQ and more

Room curve targets Every so often it is good to review what we know about room curves, targets, etc. Almost 50 years of double-blind listening tests have shown persuasively that listeners like loudspeakers with flat, smooth, anechoic on-axis and listening-window frequency responses. Those with...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[terryforsythe]

I'm thinking of switching to the KEF LS50 Meta, as they should be crossed over to a subwoofer from approx. 100Hz, which would suit perfectly.

I would review the objective test data on these speakers before making a decision. Below are links for the LS50 Meta and the R5 Meta. Note: Erin did not have test data for the R7 Meta, but the R7 Meta probably is close to the R5 Meta above the bass region, and better in the bass frequencies.

KEF LS50 Meta Bookshelf Speaker Review

Kef LS50 Meta

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

KEF R5 Meta Tower Speaker Review

KEF R5 Meta Tower Speaker Review

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

Personally, I like the baffle design and form factor of the LS50 Meta better than the R7 Meta; the LS50 Meta baffle should do a little bit better at mitigating diffraction.

But, the harmonic distortion and modulation distortion are quite a bit better with the R5 Meta. I suspect it will be at least as good with the R7 Meta. I also suspect the R7 Meta has better compression characteristics in the bass than the R5 Meta, which has an issue around 120Hz at 96dB.

Also, the estimated in-room response of the LS50 Meta has a dip between about 1.9kHz and 4kHz, but the directivity index is fairly good in that region, so EQ could be used to fill in the dip. The estimated in-room response of the R5 Meta is pretty linear.

 

[ucmike11]

I plan to switch from one Kube 10 Subwoofer to two Kube 8 MIE Subwoofers and place them diagonally in two corners of the room. One in the corner near the right loudspeaker and the second one then diagonally on the other corner. I hope that will make the bass response more smoother and I can switch then to 120Hz of crossover frequency for the LS50 Meta.

Does somebody use such a subwoofer configuration (diagonally placed) with Dirac Live running on a NAD Device with two Sub Outputs?
I have a C399 with two sub outs and also (as Dirac offers me while measurement) it seems that this two outputs are independent from each other, so Dirac should be able to measure two subs separately.

Or do i need to use a MiniDSP 2x4 HD with two subs placed diagonally when one of the subs maybe is running with phase 180 and the other one with phase 0?

Some advice on this would be really nice, maybe I can use then the NAD C399 only and need no MiniDSP extra for handling two subwoofers placed diagonally.

You should be able to use the NAD, as each subwoofer output is discrete. However, you may need Dirac Live Bass Control to be able to properly blend the two so they work together.

Also - you cannot assume that placing a subwoofer on the other corner will be smoother - it is possible the best location could be nearfield, same wall, it is hard to tell without measuring each. You will want to put the 2nd subwoofer in a spot that allows it to fill the null - so that when the two are combined, you get a more even response.

 

[Acapella]

As far as I can see my NAD C399 is not able to do DLBC so (if the placing diagonally in two room corners is possible and best possible position) one possible solution is to try to measure and integrate the two subs using normal Dirac Full Version with the two separate Sub Outs of the NAD C399 or I use some MiniDSP 2x4 HD from the first second and arrange with the MiniDSP the volume, phase and delay of the subs. Maybe that is better and then connect the MiniDSP to Sub Out 1 of the NAD and measure it then with Dirac.

 

[Acapella]

I did a lot of measurements and test in the last days and weeks.

Current Setup is:

NAD C399 --> Speaker Outs --> KEF LS50 Meta
--> Sub Out 1 --> MiniDSP 2x4 HD --> 2x KEF Kube 8 MIE

The Subs are placed diagonally (one on right side of the right LS50 and the other one diagonally on the other side of the room). Both have the same volume. Sub 2 is inverted with the MiniDSP and also has a delay of 10.67ms. Did try other delays also, but this calculated delay of 10.67ms fits best for the placement of the subs.

I think I am not at a point where I come to the limitations of the crossover from the NAD C399.
The null/dip at around 100Hz is still there, but when I measure the subwoofer array alone (with MiniDSP in the chain and the crossover on the NAD is set to 200Hz) then the dip is not that deep as it is when setting to 110Hz and then playing together with the LS50 Meta and Dirac enabled.

So maybe I can get better results if I get some other equipment for crossover handling as I am there more flexible.
The NAD C399 only lets set me the crossover frequency (which is currently at 110Hz) but no further changes on crossover type or slope is possible.

As I love the Bluesound Streaming Software (with smooth integration of Dirac inside the BluOS App and changing of the Dirac Profiles) I am a little bit stuck in the NAD universe. MiniDSP SHD would be a possible solution, but then I have much more single boxes (Phono Preamp, Bluesound Node, Conversion Box for using the AES Input) and also I loose the ability to manage Dirac without the needing of a USB Cable connected to my MAC (beside the fact that the SHD has to few digital inputs).

So my other plan was to get a NAD C658 (Preamplifier with Dirac Live) and build then a setup as the following:
(everything is then connected to C658: TV, BluRay Player (sometimes acting as a CD Player), Measurement Interface, Turntable (Phono In of C658), BluOS Streaming integrated to C658)

NAD C658 --> Pre-Out --> MiniDSP 2x4 HD --> Out 1&2 --> Audiophonics AP300-S250NC --> KEF LS50 Meta
--> Out 3&4 --> 2x KEF Kube 8 MIE

Yes, within this setup I have a double AD/DA conversion due to the additional DSP inside the MiniDSP 2x4 HD, but this double AD/DA conversion I have also in the current setup with the C399 and the MiniDSP 2x4 HD (only for subwoofers). But I hope with the setup of the C658 and MiniDSP that I am more flexible regarding the crossover thing and maybe get then a better response (without Dirac enabled) because I can use different crossover types and slopes for the LS50 and the Kube 8 Array.

Dirac also sees then only a 2.0 System and therefore can then only apply corrections to the complete system and not doing extra things on the subwoofer array only cause Dirac sees then no subwoofer which must be separate handled, as it now is with the current setup. For my this can maybe also some advantage of getting the response more better and maybe eliminating the dip/null at 100Hz.

Some captures out of REW:

Old Setup of R7 Meta (without Subwoofer use):

Old Setup of R7 Meta (with one single KEF Kube 10 MIE):

Current Setup with KEF LS50 (no subwoofers) 2.0:

Current Setup LS50 together with 2x Kube 8 MIE Subwoofer Array 2.2:

Current Setup with KEF LS50 (no subwoofers) 2.0 MMM measurement:

Current Setup LS50 together with 2x Kube 8 MIE Subwoofer Array 2.2 MMM measurement:

Measurements of the crossover that the C399 applies:
Only the LS50 active:

Only the Kube 8 MIE array active:

LS50 and Subwoofer array together, Dirac disabled:

LS50 and Subwoofer array together, Dirac enabled:

LS50 and Subwoofer array together, Dirac enabled (combined with full range response):

Just for testing:

LS50 without subwoofers and with subwoofers combined, Dirac disabled:

Kube 8 MIE Subwoofer array only, crossed at 200Hz so see the full possible result in the room, Dirac disabled:

When it is not noted specifically on the headline above the picture, then the measurements show the result with Dirac disabled and then Dirac enabled using a relative flat target curve. Only up to 1 or 2 dB on the sliders of the target curve creator.

For my point of view I would say that the current setup with the LS50 and the Kube 8 MIE array measures better in the bass region than the R7 Meta with or without single subwoofer use. So that I would prefer to go the route with the LS50 and the Kube Subwoofers and sell the R7 Meta.

Regarding the 100Hz dip/null, some advice would be very nice and strongly appreciated.
Maybe some other delay on the array can be helpful or the other setup of the chain (with C658 as mentioned) as I have then more options regarding crossover.

Also any other hints when have a look on the measurement and what setup looks better would be cool.

Thanks in advance

 

[Acapella]

Just to add to the other measurements.
I did lots of measurements and testing when playing with the Delay of the Kube 8 Array.

Maybe a delay of 16.50ms would be a better idea instead of 10.67ms.
The dip/null at 100Hz looks there a bit more better.

And the current preferred Dirac setting (+1dB on Bass and -1dB on Treble Slider).
Dirac is limited here to correct only up to 1000Hz, with Psychoacoustic smoothing.
LS50 and Kube Array:

 

[terryforsythe]

You are making good progress.

I see that you tried with one sub out of phase. Did you also try using different time delays between the two subs? That wasn't clear to me.

How does your Distortion look? It probably should be fine with a 100Hz crossover frequency.

 

[rynberg]

I'm very surprised you aren't hearing localization with a sub behind you with such a high crossover frequency.

 

[tw 2022]

I'm very surprised you aren't hearing localization with a sub behind you with such a high crossover frequency.

Probably true, but now he's gonna notice...as a caveat, for music I try to keep my subs near the speakers...

 

[ehabheikal]

The new kef concerto or r3 meta could be better than ls50 meta.

 

[Digital_Thor]

I had the LS50 Meta, but I prefer my friends R3 Meta. Dedicated midrange does it for me.

 

[tw 2022]

I had the LS50 Meta, but I prefer my friends R3 Meta. Dedicated midrange does it for me.

It's hard to beat a good 3 way with a 2 way.....

 

[ehabheikal]

Hello,

I'm currently running a pair of KEF R7 Meta speakers together with a KEF Kube 10 MIE subwoofer on my system.
The subwoofer was recently added after it (although only one) reproduced the bass range much better than both R7 Meta together without subwoofer.
The subwoofer is currently positioned to the right of the right speaker (near a corner of the room), crossover frequency is 90Hz.

I have also attached two screenshots, one showing just the two R7 Meta (2.0) and one showing the R7 Meta together with the Kube subwoofer (2.1).
In each case with and without Dirac activated. The Dirac profile currently used is relatively linear (+1 in the bass and -1 in the treble for the sliders).

Unfortunately, there is still a dip at around 100Hz, which I can't get rid of even with a high crossover frequency of 150Hz to the subwoofer.
The general increases from approx. 120Hz to approx. 900Hz are corrected quite well by Dirac.

But since I want to keep the subwoofer in the setup, the bass is simply better with a subwoofer, I'm wondering whether the R7 Meta still makes sense or whether smaller speakers would also work.
I might try a second subwoofer and position it diagonally opposite in the other corner of the room.
Perhaps the crossover frequency could then be a little higher.

I'm thinking of switching to the KEF LS50 Meta, as they should be crossed over to a subwoofer from approx. 100Hz, which would suit perfectly.
The smaller speaker might also improve the frequency response somewhat, but that would have to be tested.

I would be grateful for a few opinions on whether it would make sense to switch from R7 Meta to LS50 Meta with one or two subwoofers.

The room is approx. 26 square meters in size (approx. 6 x 4 meters), the speakers are on the long side of the room, the sofa on the opposite side behind the windows.
The speakers are about 2.50 meters apart and I am sitting about 3.40 meters away.

I usually listen at room volume, but occasionally a little louder. In general, however, I would assume that there are no peaks higher than 85dB when listening at higher volumes.

Thank you in advance.

Best regards

I have had the ls50m and r3m in the same room with svs sb 1000 pro subs. The r3 meta is hands down better than the ls50 meta.
Do not downgrade to ls50m if you really want smaller speakers go r3 meta and if you have change left add a 2nd sub.

 

[Punchy_Power_Cat]

There is LS50Meta and there is LS50Meta with a HF cut @100-120hz. I don't think the HF cut fifties can be beat by any bookshelf sized passive speaker out there, at least not from 200hz above. The really only thing keeping them from being perfect up to 106db is the strong base resonances that occur when you play them fullranged. For some reason I do not understand KEF has not implemented a cut off in their crossover. If you give them a 26hz tone they will try to play that even tho they can't. They will just vibrate. You cannot run the LS50Metas seriously without a high pass cut.

 

[tw 2022]

There is LS50Meta and there is LS50Meta with a HF cut @100-120hz. I don't think the HF cut fifties can be beat by any bookshelf sized passive speaker out there, at least not from 200hz above. The really only thing keeping them from being perfect up to 106db is the strong base resonances that occur when you play them fullranged. For some reason I do not understand KEF has not implemented a cut off in their crossover. If you give them a 26hz tone they will try to play that even tho they can't. They will just vibrate. You cannot run the LS50Metas seriously without a high pass cut.

I always like a 3 way vs a 2 way, but as far as mini monitors cut off at about 100 hz( or higher ) I'd think the is 50 meta is pretty decent....

 

[Punchy_Power_Cat]

I always like a 3 way vs a 2 way

If the Kef R3 Metas would be a unified coax design like the LS50 Metas, you could compare them, but there is a problem in comparing single point sound with multiple point sound. A lot of people seem to prefer the single point. I'm personally not sure about this. Read this post from Jazigo for example. He prefers the 50ies over the 3s for that reason: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/kef-q350-speaker-review.13484/post-2305909