KEF Blade Two Meta Review

[kawauso]

So Refrence 1 Meta + subs should be somewhat close to the Blade assuming it's the same driver
A poor man's Blade is never a bad thing

I’m not sure if they use exactly the same drivers, but the Blade Meta and Reference Meta have different directivity.
Even if you EQ the FR to match, they’ll still sound a bit different.
How noticeable that difference is probably depends on the listener, though.

 

[kawauso]

The KEF LS60 Wireless feels closer in sound to the KEF Blade Meta than the KEF Reference  Meta does.

 

[Descartes]

View attachment 467404
KEF’s high-end flagship — the Blade Two Meta.
Due to its price, significant weight, and unusually shaped cabinet, I was unable to measure deviation between 2 samples and vertical directivity. I appreciate your understanding.





Impedance
View attachment 467405View attachment 467406




Frequency Response
View attachment 467407
Across the full audible range, the response is exceptionally flat.
The -6 dB low-end extension reaches down to about 33.6 Hz.
Although the low-frequency roll-off is fairly steep, the usable bandwidth is still more than sufficient.



Nearfield Measurements
View attachment 467408
Multiple components work in harmony to create something truly cohesive here.
The port shows no signs of pipe resonance, and the woofers exhibit an incredibly clean response.
This is engineering refinement at its finest.





Directivity
View attachment 467409View attachment 467410
Impressive.
As always, KEF’s mastery of directivity control shines through.
It’s simply beautiful.





Beamwidth
View attachment 467411
The beamwidth begins a smooth, graceful narrowing from around 800 Hz upward, showing excellent control across the range.





Polar Plot
View attachment 467412
Due to the speaker’s design and limitations of the time-window measurement method, a measurement artifact appears around 200 Hz on-axis (black line).




View attachment 467413
Once that’s excluded, the radiation pattern from 1 kHz up into the treble converges beautifully into near-perfect circles. It’s stunning.




THD
View attachment 467414View attachment 467415View attachment 467416
Even down to the 50 Hz region, total harmonic distortion remains around the 0.5% range.
Yes—50 Hz. That’s remarkable.





View attachment 467417View attachment 467418View attachment 467419
Even at 96 dB SPL@1m output, the performance in the sub-bass remains impressively clean.
Truly outstanding.




Multitone Test
View attachment 467420
View attachment 467421
This is what true scale and engineering prowess look like.
The speaker asserts its dominance with ease.





View attachment 467423View attachment 467424
The distortion was already so low to begin with that even at higher output levels, the increase in distortion is negligible.
Stellar performance.



Compression Test
View attachment 467425

Within the test bandwidth, the compression results are practically flat — almost error-level behavior.
Utterly powerful.




Final Thoughts
Blade Two Meta doesn’t compromise between stunning design and top-tier performance.
In any reasonably sized listening room, I believe it will deliver exceptional results — no matter where you place it.

Thank you sold my B&W Diamonds for these love them!

 

[Descartes]

That's more subjective than a Spinorama. We like how they look in our room precisely because they don't look like speakers.

So do I, I am so tired of speakers that look like boxes!

What kind of amplifiers would you recommend for them?

 

[Descartes]

Also here: KEF Blade Two Meta loudspeaker

They are already three years old

 

[Descartes]

Sure.
I'd suppose in certain conditions the Blade One Meta, Blade two Meta and Reference 5 are really similar.

I'd have to suspect in large spaces at high SPL the Blade one Meta has more output vs the Blade Two Meta and Reference 5.
Just comparing the 2 channel KEF systems in question as any number of subwoofer set-up can easily out do any of these.

In any case the Blade One Meta has 4, 9" woofers per speaker, the Blade Meta Two and Reference 5 each have the 4, 6.5" woofers per speaker so they are very similar speakers.

These are not in my price range, not any of them but I suspect if I did drop this kind of dough I would just go all in with the Blade One Meta, get the big dog and the very unusual looks which I think make them very interesting as a type of fine art. I do understand for many that makes them no go, but for me it does add interest to the spaces they are in. I have no problem with the looks of the Reference series, in fact they look very nice but for $25k+ I would actually want something statement oriented.

The Blade Metas can be ordered in any Pantone color. Kinda cool.

If you provide the paint and there is a surcharge!

 

[Descartes]

View attachment 468193
For the same price as Blade Two Meta you could get 8361+W371
Which would be better?

Try that in a living room!

 

[Kal Rubinson]

So do I, I am so tired of speakers that look like boxes!

What kind of amplifiers would you recommend for them?

I use Benchmark AHB2s.

 

[Pearljam5000]

The top 3 colors for me

 

[wgb113]

I’d like the silver with the blue drivers.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I'm surprised that there's no active version of the Blade
It seems perfect for it

 

[Vacceo]

So do I, I am so tired of speakers that look like boxes!

What kind of amplifiers would you recommend for them?

I like Brancusi, so I really like the design of the Blades. That said, it is a quite subjective point, even though in this case, form is also function.

 

[SoySalsaPicante]

I'm surprised that there's no active version of the Blade
It seems perfect for it

Just LS60.

 

[staticV3]

I'm surprised that there's no active version of the Blade
It seems perfect for it

It's still too early.

The target audience for the Blades is still sold on big external Amps, all separate components, and beefy cables.

The LS60 and Diva Utopia have laid the groundwork though and I'm sure we'll see an (equivalent of an) active Blade before long.

 

[madFloyd]

Does anyone know how much the Blades depend on side walls, given their side firing woofers?

 

[kyuu]

Does anyone know how much the Blades depend on side walls, given their side firing woofers?

Depend on side walls for what, exactly? The side-firing woofers are crossed over below the point where the sound is omnidirectional, so the direction they are facing is mostly irrelevant.

 

[tineared]

Depend on side walls for what, exactly? The side-firing woofers are crossed over below the point where the sound is omnidirectional, so the direction they are facing is mostly irrelevant.

My NHT 3.3s have side-firing 12" woofers. NHT advertised that the woofers "always see a corner". Not sure if that was marketing-speak or real, but you can't tell by listening where they are located

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Does anyone know how much the Blades depend on side walls, given their side firing woofers?

Depend on side walls for what, exactly? The side-firing woofers are crossed over below the point where the sound is omnidirectional, so the direction they are facing is mostly irrelevant.

Indeed. However, that omnidirectionality is in free-field. SBIR can affect performance when side or rear walls a close. KEF recommends >36" from side wall and >9" from rear wall. "Positioning the speaker in a corner or near to a side wall is not recommended as the significant bass boost caused by this position will affect the sound and cause the stereo image to deteriorate."

 

[SoySalsaPicante]

Does anyone know how much the Blades depend on side walls, given their side firing woofers?

With a 450Hz crossover to those woofers, side wall proximity will 100% have an effect!

 

[madFloyd]

Thanks for the responses, very helpful. I’m considering ordering a pair for a bit of a challenging space.