Congratulations! Enjoy.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Kef Blade one Meta - How is the sound ?
- Thread starter Tangband
- Start date
Curious to see if you’re willing to adopt me.
I'm house trained.
That room looks really naked and tiny for such speakers to be honest.
this is me
Member
Agreed. But I can assure you he knows what he’s doing to be able to bring in all the gear he brings in.
this is me
Member
MAB
Major Contributor
Last edited:
Pearljam5000
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2020
- Messages
- 7,409
- Likes
- 9,099
How close would you get to to the blade
1or 2 with a Genelec 8361+ subs?
1or 2 with a Genelec 8361+ subs?
Pearljam5000
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2020
- Messages
- 7,409
- Likes
- 9,099
How's the sound so far?
Both companies share fundamentally the same design goals in that they target a flat anechoic response and smoothly dropping dispersion per the research. Of late, KEF speakers seem to prioritise a flatter predicted in-room response over ruler flat on-axis.
One can compare the ASR measure of the 8361A and the KEF data for the Blade 1 using @pierre’s fantastic site here. I’m not smart enough to draw conclusions from the minor differences the graphs show, though the KEF seem to have a steeper downward slope to the estimated in-room response FWIW, with a stronger response below 100Hz.
I would caveat this by saying that the KEF data generally undersells(!) their on-axis response. Comparing KEF’s data with Erin’s Klippel measure for the Reference 1 Meta on the same site here, shows a much smoother and less sloped on-axis response on the NFS. Erin stated that the Reference 1 Meta has the smoothest PIR of any speaker he’s measured to date. For another data point here’s Stereophile’s quasi-anechoic measure of the Blade Two (lacks resolution below 300Hz due to method)
In conclusion I have no idea, but maybe the data (if previously unseen) helps.
Tested out Two Metas at local demo for an hour. Rock, metal, bass and stuff around 100dBZ (avg, slow).
Sadly acoustics are always worse than at home, and of course no DSP is used, so bass was all over and imaging maybe a bit vague. So hard to say anything definite. But a big plus for not being fatiguing or harsh in any way.
Auditions like these make me appreciate my current damped and super clean bass setup much more... and keep me fantasizing about the awesome 1235A demo from before..
Sadly acoustics are always worse than at home, and of course no DSP is used, so bass was all over and imaging maybe a bit vague. So hard to say anything definite. But a big plus for not being fatiguing or harsh in any way.
Auditions like these make me appreciate my current damped and super clean bass setup much more... and keep me fantasizing about the awesome 1235A demo from before..
Last edited:
steve59
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2019
- Messages
- 1,118
- Likes
- 825
I usually find flat measuring speakers dull and lifeless. What will bring some life into them is superior resolution and there are speaker/amplifier combinations that pulls more out of a recording than we're used to. The Blades are this type of speaker as I expect the meta's are. Kef appears to have engineered every detail to maximize performance and now I just wish they(like every other manufacturer) would get more specific on placement to maximize performance.
steve59
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2019
- Messages
- 1,118
- Likes
- 825
I just went back and read the op which asks how the blade 1 sounds. Soundstage is large with more depth to image placement than i'm used to, but when I say depth I actually mean layers to image placement that is unique to these speakers. Bass is full and addicting without overpowering my 3500 cu/ft room. My previous pair was the persona 7f that had a very precise image for singers and instruments, miniature and intimate if not realistic it was impressive. The Blades present a large stable image that would more resemble an outdoor concert, Placement is important to getting the blades to show off everything they can do. As to the blade 2 being better? Kef states the blade 2 is identical to the blade 1 with a smaller cabinet and woofers for smaller rooms.
I just looked at the FR of the different drivers and looks like the woofers are mainly tuned for bass below 60Hz.
If you would set the usual 80 Hz 24dB/oct highpass filter, would the woofers even do anything?
Even a 60Hz HP filter would make those side woofers pretty useless or am I getting something wrong about this?
Edit: I misread that graph. Red is the port and not the woofers.
But in the case of the blade 2, would a highpass filter even be needed with that early bass roll off (if the ports are plugged)?
If you would set the usual 80 Hz 24dB/oct highpass filter, would the woofers even do anything?
Even a 60Hz HP filter would make those side woofers pretty useless or am I getting something wrong about this?
Edit: I misread that graph. Red is the port and not the woofers.
But in the case of the blade 2, would a highpass filter even be needed with that early bass roll off (if the ports are plugged)?
Last edited:
What is the source of this chart?I just looked at the FR of the different drivers and looks like the woofers are mainly tuned for bass below 60Hz.
If you would set the usual 80 Hz 24dB/oct highpass filter, would the woofers even do anything?
Even a 60Hz HP filter would make those side woofers pretty useless or am I getting something wrong about this?
stereophile. Just edited my question, I misinterpreted the graph
MAB
Major Contributor
Stereophile. And, the graph is Blade Two Meta, not Blade One.
KEF Blade Two Meta loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system, a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone, and an Earthworks microphone preamplifier to measure the KEF Blade Two Meta's frequency response in the farfield. I used an Earthworks QTC-40 mike for the nearfield measurements. Because I perform the...
The graph should be posted with the legend, and the link!
fpitas
Master Contributor
They are probably nice speakers. But putting the crossover at the baffle step is a pretty basic idea if you design speakers. In fact, that's where my lower crossover is.View attachment 225237
Kef Blade one Meta seems to be a loudspeaker where they have thought of everything .
The crossover frequency for the uni - Q driver seems to be set at 350 Hz . The baffle is about 36 cm wide .
Using the formula by Troelsgravesen for baffle stepcorrection 11600/36 = 322 Hz , this means they have thought of having a wide enough baffle to go down almost to the rooms transition frequency , without using any eq. This is only one of many factors Kef have thought about .
Maybe some of you have heard the Blade 1 ? How did it sound ?
View attachment 225238
Read more here :
KEF Blade One Meta Loudspeaker
KEF's flagship Blade cuts to the heart of the music, and with 'MAT' on board its edge has never been keener More than a decade after their launch, there's still nothing quite like the KEF Blade One speakers. Well, OK, there's the smaller Blade Two [HFN Jul '15], but the point still stands! The...www.hifinews.com
