KEF Blade Two Meta Review

[kyuu]

View attachment 467943
The Blade One Meta is only $7K more
Why would you want the smaller model if you're already paying that much?

Size and weight are factors to consider regardless of price. If I could get 10-foot tall, 500-pound speakers for less than what I paid for mine, I wouldn't go for it. Particularly when the performance is quite similar.

 

[Hear Here]

As Kal notes below, if it’s good enough for Kal, it’s good enough………period!

Yes, because Kal actually listened to them - subjectively as well as taking a few measurements. The key to a good review is a good reviewer who has good ears, but more importantly can describe the pros and cons of a speaker's performance in such a way that potential buyers can get a pretty good idea of how they may sound.

As an example, I was using ATC50 Active speakers at the turn of the millenium and I didn't like them - far too "in yer face" for my liking and I wanted to push them 20 ft further away! At the time I was subscribing to Stereophile and read Robert Deutsch's review of the Avantgarde Uno speaker, I had never taken this type of speaker seriously because of their bizarre looks and passed them by at shows unheard. However his description of its sound was so well written and described exactly what I was looking for in a speaker, that by the end of this 9 page review, I was convinced this was the speaker for me. I arranged a 10 minute demo in a grotty London basement showroom and placed an order. I've been using Avantgarde speakers since 2002, thanks to Robert. There were another 5 pages of measurements but I never took a glance - partly as I don't understand them and was more than convinced by an exceptionally well-written review.

These speakers were chosen by the Stereophile staff as their Speaker of the Year, jointly with an $85K Dynaudio system. Robert was impressed enough with the Uons that he actually bought them for his own use.

 

[Postlan]

The reason I don’t want to buy a large and expensive consumer speaker is that new models like the KEF Blade Two Meta II keep coming out so quickly. Selling or trading them is just too much of a hassle. Especially with this model—given that its driver units are already in their 12th generation—it wouldn’t be surprising if they’re up to the 15th within a few years.

I think products like this need a system that lets the user swap out just the drivers or the crossover.

 

[kyuu]

I think products like this need a system that lets the user swap out just the drivers or the crossover.

When the performance is at this level (and you're spending this much in the first place), you should probably be satisfied with what you have rather than chasing endless minor revisions. I do realize that goes against the audiophile tradition of endless tweaking and swapping of parts.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Yes, but Kal actually listened to them - subjectively as well as taking a few measurements. The key to a good review is a good reviewer who has good ears, but more importantly can describe the pros and cons of a speaker's performance in such a way that potential buyers can get a pretty good idea of how they may sound.

As an example, I was using ATC50 Active speakers at the turn of the millenium and I didn't like them - far too "in yer face" for my liking and I wanted to push them 20 ft further away! At the time I was subscribing to Stereophile and read Robert Deutsch's review of the Avantgarde Uno speaker, I had never taken this type of speaker seriously because of their bizarre looks and passed them by at shows unheard. However his description of its sound was so well written and described exactly what I was looking for in a speaker, that by the end of this 9 page review, I was convinced this was the speaker for me. I arranged a 10 minute demo in a grotty London basement showroom and placed an order. I've been using Avantgarde speakers since 2002, thanks to Robert. There were another 5 pages of measurements but I never took a glance - partly as I don't understand them and was more than convinced by an exceptionally well-written review.

Stereophile! Ye gads!

Those Avantgarde Acoustic Uno Series Two loudspeakers do look pretty cool by the way!

Avantgarde Acoustic Uno Series Two loudspeaker | Stereophile.com

You've probably seen the ad in Stereophile: a very personal account by Avantgarde-USA president Jim Smith, describing how, during a 30-year career in high-end audio, he had become increasingly disappointed with conventional loudspeakers' ability to communicate the emotional impact of live music...

www.stereophile.com

I love talking about how speakers sound with friends and others over coffee, tea, drinks. It is a hobby after all. I think it is serendipity that you found the speakers you like via a Stereophile review. I'd enjoy that story in a certain context. I think that is the way good things happen in our lives... sometimes.

Most of the time Stereophile is just another marketing vehicle for the industry, more or less shilling VERY expensive, VERY over priced gear. It is a con, a con so deeply performed even many of the actors forgot they were in on it. Certain mags and rags were the OG influencers for pay before what we now have online.
Thankfully John Atkinson is involved and diligently does good measurements for most of speakers reviewed there, AND occasionally a verbal sanity check on the lovely influencers/reviewers employed there.

Not here to Hate on Stereophile, I check it out from time to time. But basically the whole reason for ASR, Erin's audio, Audioholics and others is to exist is as an answer to the 'actual' questions about audio. Sources like Stereophile are not great sources at all for those on a path of sincere inquiry, they are marketing arms of an industry very hungry for money, fame & fortune & grown way out of whack because of it.

Nothing is one size fits all, you may like something very odd or something that adheres exactly to cutting edge audio reproduction standards. Whatever the case may be Floyd Tools book is being updated and released again. While deep compared with no diving in, it is written (at least the last version was) for a typical advanced hobbyist to understand well. It is a great way to start to learn about the current state of most speaker measurements & why double blind testing is so important or most folks WILL fall for the sexy labels and exotic price tags.

Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers, Rooms and Headphones

This fourth edition of Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers, Rooms and Headphones explains the physical and perceptual processes that are involved in sound reproduction and demonstrates how to use these processes to create high-quality listening experiences in...

www.routledge.com

If you can speak the data language, the current full suite of measurements can tell you how a speaker is likely to sound with far more accuracy vs prose though it does take time to correlate the data to 'how it affects the sound' and that part makes this all tricky stuff.
Anyway all of this is not to say you won't stumble into your favorite gear some unknown way, there are so many ways people might end up with something they like.

These speakers were chosen by the Stereophile staff as their Speaker of the Year, jointly with an $85K Dynaudio system. Robert was impressed enough with the Uons that he actually bought them for his own use.

I wanted to touch on this separately.
People buy stuff all the time that I would never buy. I can think of 100 legal & 200 non-legal things in 30 seconds flat that others buy that I would never. Give me a day and the list would reach many thousands.
Talking about how 'I use it myself, EVERYDAY' is the number one influencer shtick. Now obviously someone who likes speakers IS going to actually buy some but I always take my looks at their gear stack with a grain of salt.
... and again I have found some cool gear in unexpected ways, it does not always have to be a science based review site but.... some golden eared silver guy?


Interesting side note there is no meaningful correlation between measured intelligence and income. Some of the highest earners in society have low IQs.

 

[ROOSKIE]

So, Nuyes didn't use any smoothing, that what you're saying?

Nope, I was asking which is why I phrased it as a question. It's possible he's using smoothing, I just wouldn't assume that's the case given the difference in measurement methods. Most measurements are not nearly as high resolution as what you get from the Klippel NFS which is why they might look smoothed when they're in fact just the result of the measurement method.

Nuyes is using smoothing.
The KNFS is using smoothing as well.
The amount is what is different and both methods have resolution limits and within that Nuyes has lower resolution data.

Nuyes works hard but those measurements are different from anything the KNFS is doing. They can not be compared 100% directly.

It is fun to have the conversations here and more data from Nuyes to extend our understanding of future reviews Nuyes posts but the speaker was measured via KNFS by Erin and links have been posted. KEF also published their anechoic data.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Wondered myself. This tells the tale, supposedly.
View attachment 467858

No this is the early reflections PREDICTION.
This tells you how the initial/1st sound will likely reflect in a 'typical' shaped and sized room.
Early reflections are strongest and come almost instantaneously with the direct sound, therefore deeply affecting perceived sound.

This particular speaker is very good in terms of the reflections likely sounding tonally similar to the direct sound. This is very important for many reasons but is also a reason NOT to use room absorbing treatments above bass with this speaker unless you know exactly what you are doing and even then maybe still don't do it. Simply use typical room furnishings and living space décor along with maybe some added sound dispersing items and few soft items if you have a minimal aesthetic going or just to much sound bouncing in a hard room.

 

[Postlan]

When the performance is at this level (and you're spending this much in the first place), you should probably be satisfied with what you have rather than chasing endless minor revisions. I do realize that goes against the audiophile tradition of endless tweaking and swapping of parts.

You probably say these idealistic things because you don’t buy expensive speakers like this yourself, but for someone who actually does, it’s really disheartening. Imagine thinking you’ve bought the best speakers out there, only to be told a few months later that a much more refined version has been released. That really hurts.

 

[kyuu]

You probably say these idealistic things because you don’t buy expensive speakers like this yourself, but for someone who actually does, it’s really disheartening. Imagine thinking you’ve bought the best speakers out there, only to be told a few months later that a much more refined version has been released. That really hurts.

Dunno, just seems a weird perspective to me. Does one expect the state of the art in speakers to be locked in place the minute they purchase an expensive set? Why?

 

[Pearljam5000]

You probably say these idealistic things because you don’t buy expensive speakers like this yourself, but for someone who actually does, it’s really disheartening. Imagine thinking you’ve bought the best speakers out there, only to be told a few months later that a much more refined version has been released. That really hurts.

Same thing also happens with cars
And they usually cost much more than speakers
So?

 

[Billy Budapest]

Just imagine if KEF were to put these in a conventional looking enclosure (ie, traditional size and shape, taking care to avoid any diffraction effects from the front baffle or edges) of the same volume (or a smaller volume containing fill material so that it approximates the Blade’s volume), made out of conventional (ie, cheaper) materials. I wonder how much lower they could get the price for identical, or almost identical, performance?

Or did I just describe the Reference 5?

 

[Cool Runnings]

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.

Thanks for this review @Nuyes much appreciated. KEF nailed it.

Dare I say this looks like a winning high-end music fidelity value for money proposition. Sounds great, looks great and a fraction of the price of other $100k+ high end brands.

What more does one need in a decent sized space?

I hope someone someday will organize a complete system set-up blind test shoot-out. With total system budget range of $500, $1k, $5k, $10k, $50k and unlimited.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Just imagine if KEF were to put these in a conventional looking enclosure (ie, traditional size and shape, taking care to avoid any diffraction effects from the front baffle or edges) of the same volume (or a smaller volume containing fill material so that it approximates the Blade’s volume), made out of conventional (ie, cheaper) materials. I wonder how much lower they could get the price for identical, or almost identical, performance?

Or did I just describe the Reference 5?

In the USA that is
$28,000 for the Blade 2 Meta
$25,000 for the Reference 5

3 grand difference, about 10%

Not really a biggie at these prices. Just pick the style you prefer & hopefully negotiate some form of discount. I'd love to see the results of a double blind test conducted by expect handlers of a large collection of listeners.

 

[amper42]

You probably say these idealistic things because you don’t buy expensive speakers like this yourself, but for someone who actually does, it’s really disheartening. Imagine thinking you’ve bought the best speakers out there, only to be told a few months later that a much more refined version has been released. That really hurts.

That's why you get the RME ADI-2 DAC FS and configure the Loudness control just the way you want it while playing your favorite music. A good speaker can sound any way you want it with this setup and you no longer need to even consider changing speakers - no matter what new comes out. The power to tweak the sound just the way you want it - is magnificent. You can cancel the Loudness feature or engage it with the push of a remote button.

Once you have this capability three things happen.
1. There is never any reason to upgrade a decent speaker.
2. You have total control over the bass, treble, and it can be setup to automatically be just as exciting and impactful at 70dB as 90dB.
3. Once you fully understand the options available you have more control over how your system sounds than ever before.

 

[amirm]

The amount is what is different and both methods have resolution limits and within that Nuyes has lower resolution data.

CEA/CTA-2034 stipulates 1/20 Octave which is what I have set NFS to. Other people I think are using lower resolution as their graphs seem smoother than mine. Note that you can make the measurements be any resolution you want at the expense of more measurement time. So it is not a "limit" in NFS but rather, a setting by the person using it.

 

[Beave]

You probably say these idealistic things because you don’t buy expensive speakers like this yourself, but for someone who actually does, it’s really disheartening. Imagine thinking you’ve bought the best speakers out there, only to be told a few months later that a much more refined version has been released. That really hurts.

If you really did buy the "best speakers out there," it is quite unlikely that any new version will be "much more refined." Oh, sure, the marketing people will claim that, and some Youtube video reviewers might say the same, but odds are the new version is just slightly more refined, maybe in ways you can't even distinguish.

If the new version really is that much better, then either they made a big breakthrough, or else the predecessor model that you bought wasn't actually one of the best out there.

 

[Billy Budapest]

In the USA that is
$28,000 for the Blade 2 Meta
$25,000 for the Reference 5

3 grand difference, about 10%

Not really a biggie at these prices. Just pick the style you prefer & hopefully negotiate some form of discount. I'd love to see the results of a double blind test conducted by expect handlers of a large collection of listeners.

Agreed that the $3000 difference between the Blade 2 Meta and Reference 5 Meta is pretty negligible when you are talking those prices.

However, the $10,000 difference between the Blade Meta and Reference 5 Meta is substantial. If their performance is equivalent, the choice is a no-brainer.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Agreed that the $3000 difference between the Blade 2 Meta and Reference 5 Meta is pretty negligible when you are talking those prices.

However, the $10,000 difference between the Blade Meta and Reference 5 Meta is substantial. If their performance is equivalent, the choice is a no-brainer.

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.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Does the Reference 5 have the same drivers as Blade Two Meta?

 

[Taiga]

Here you go...

The KEF Blades deliver a sound that’s pure velvet—smooth, liquid, and effortlessly airy. The mids bloom with an organic richness that feels almost tactile, while the highs shimmer with a crystalline delicacy, never harsh, always ethereal. Bass flows with a grounded authority, yet dances with nimble grace. The soundscape isn’t just wide; it’s a three-dimensional canvas of sonic magic, where every note breathes with life. Listening becomes less about hearing and more about experiencing the music’s true essence.

Awesome. We need to save this subjective narrative for any and all occasions where the value of measurements is challenged. Especially for the speakers that measure poorly.