KEF LS50 Meta vs KEF R3 Meta. Which one?

[Good Vibes]

Really appreciate your response! I think I’m leaning towards the LS50s and integrate the KC62 In the mix. I think the KEF LS series does an incredible job with imaging. I just want to make the feel more whole when listening to music and not so much at the front. I think the LS50s can achieve that.

Unless there’s more opinions that think otherwise!

In near field listening, with my nose pressed up against the holographic imaging, I found them to be exceptional but the more I moved away from them, the less immersive the experience. As others have said, the further away you sit, the louder you will need them and they do have SPL limitations. I sat approx 6ft away from them and they were loud enough for me.

To complicate things further, the biggest determining factor of how you will experience sound is your room size, the speakers position and your listening position within the room. The same set of speakers can give you a different experience in a different room and a different listening position. Chances are that you are currently experiencing peaks and nulls along the frequency range caused by your room and another set of speakers will have similar issues.

What are the dimensions of your room, how close to the wall will the speakers be and how far will your listening position be from them?

If only this hobby was a simple as buying good equipment and setting it up. Good sound is really about placement. There are many lessons to learn and it’s easy for a lot of info to go over your head until you find out the hard way. You have a decent set of speakers and a sub already so take your time in choosing your next set.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Objective data tells, there is no relevant difference between R3 and LS50, except for a vastly differing output capability, especially if intermodulation is considered to be relevant. If one sees the LS50 a a jubilee product, in praise of the quite severely limited LS3/5 which was never intended for home use by any means, the picture gets new facets. High end buffs pay prices from the moon for the latter, only to get a „real“ specimen which is guaranteed to be degraded by time and decomposed plastics. Back in the day it was, presumably, the least costly path to a „reference“, approved system … while completely misunderstanding the thingy’s purpose.

Two problems: how is the benefit of LS50 described in less obscured terms—„imaging“, and how is the speakers’ contribution to that quality represented in the data?

I've owned LS 50's since 2014 and nothing has degraded. And plastic does not decompose in any case, That's why it's such a problem in landfills. Aside from its design limitation, the LS 50's are of a quality equal to anything in any of the Kef line. There's no cheap crap it them at all. As for the LS 3/5 a's, I owned those as well, for 20 years. Bought my pair in 1977. Whatever they were intended for, I can attest that they were among the best speakers available in that era for reproducing music in smaller rooms at moderate volumes, which is the way most people listen most of the time. Yes, they were built as monitors for mobile recording vans, and home audio was not their intended use, but then again discarded orange peels were intended to be used for composting piles not anti-microbial purposes until someone found they worked better than anything else for that purpose as well.

 

[Heinrich]

I've owned LS 50's since 2014 and nothing has degraded. And plastic does not decompose in any case, That's why it's such a problem in landfills. Aside from its design limitation, the LS 50's are of a quality equal to anything in any of the Kef line. There's no cheap crap it them at all. As for the LS 3/5 a's, I owned those as well, for 20 years. Bought my pair in 1977. Whatever they were intended for, I can attest that they were among the best speakers available in that era for reproducing music in smaller rooms at moderate volumes, which is the way most people listen most of the time. Yes, they were built as monitors for mobile recording vans, and home audio was not their intended use, but then again discarded orange peels were intended to be used for composting piles not anti-microbial purposes until someone found they worked better than anything else for that purpose as well.

when talking about decomposed plastics, it referred to LS5/3. Measurement will tell. Regarding their use case, fun wasn‘t the main target, to put it briefly. Even in a smaller motorcars‘s cabin the bass tuning won‘t win a dB drag competition.

Anyway, at some places you‘ll find quite heated debate on the merits of measurement (the pro measurement camp always needs to win), while here obscure wording (imaging) is used, and the objective data isn‘t even remotely considered as a guideline, but subjective, sighted ‚critical listening’ is under uncontrolled, unreported conditions.

If the LS50 makes it to the short list, recognize it‘s tight objective limitations, and the praise as a matter of taste, taking non-objective, basically ‚unknown’ criteria into account. That‘s all from my side.

 

[Good Vibes]

Anyway, at some places you‘ll find quite heated debate on the merits of measurement (the pro measurement camp always needs to win), while here obscure wording (imaging) is used, and the objective data isn‘t even remotely considered as a guideline, but subjective, sighted ‚critical listening’ is under uncontrolled, unreported conditions.

Are you saying that based on your understanding of the data, they will both produce sound in the same way?

Having owned both simultaneously, A/B testing them with the press of a button, I can say 100% without any shadow of a doubt their sound characters are different. They have different cabinets with different driver configurations and produce sound differently. In every position I had them in regardless of whether it favoured the R3 or not, the LS50’s crystal clear, laser like imaging shone through. In direct A/B comparison, the R3’s had a noticeably narrower soundstage.

 

[meracus]

I would love to upgrade to the LS60 But it’s a little out of my price range. I think the R3 Metas are at the end of my budget tbh!

If that’s the case then fair point ….. however if you the sort of guy that upgrade let’s say 2/3 years then I urge you to wait until you get the funds … you will be out of the hamster wheel for good
Unless you move to double the space .,, it will be the end of the road for you … then you can think about getting yourself a convertible Porsche which is the next logical step in the toys amassing schedule of a human being

 

[MarkS]

Van Den Hul Clearwater Speaker wire

Save your money.

 

[Heinrich]

O/k, a last one.

Are you saying that based on your understanding of the data, they will both produce sound in the same way?

Not quite; the data tells that the R3 is superior or equal in every aspect. At least its output capability, limited by bass, is an order of magnitude (x10) greater. Form factor isn‘t that far off, compared to the smaller anniversary model.

Having owned both simultaneously, A/B testing them with the press of a button, I can say 100% without any shadow of a doubt their sound characters are different.

Sure, as I said.

They have different cabinets with different driver configurations and produce sound differently.

Same principle of dynamic drivers in coax config, while the R3 is a three-way exploiting all its benefits to the finest. And the anniversary model struggles with its two-way design especially as a coax.

In every position I had them in regardless of whether it favoured the R3 or not, the LS50’s crystal clear, laser like imaging shone through. In direct A/B comparison, the R3’s had a noticeably narrower soundstage.

You have to admit, presumably, that your comparison was sighted (at least knowing for sure which was which for whatever reason), sound level wasn‘t really (less of a dB or so) adjusted, program wasn‘t approved for this purpose, placing may have been different … . Finally, your discerning wording isn‘t standardized, such that there is a lot of wiggle room for loose interpretation. Not ‚scientific‘, in the sense that other are enabled to reproduce the result easily for a cross check.

After several jubilee threads on the Ls50 (each that touches it) I still miss a true communicatable verification of its wondrous qualities. What about this: equalize each, the 3 and the 50, for the very same direct on-axis frequency response, for fairness cut bass at like 60Hz, place them on the same stands, and we‘ll see if the hype is a hype. Then after ask for bass with today‘s common pop music down to 40Hz and repeat. May want to repeat again using a sub or two.

Or, alternatively show some measured data that supports your point.

Edit—as if ‚imaging‘ was everything.

 

[Good Vibes]

O/k, a last one.

Not quite; the data tells that the R3 is superior or equal in every aspect. At least its output capability, limited by bass, is an order of magnitude (x10) greater. Form factor isn‘t that far off, compared to the smaller anniversary model.

Sure, as I said.

Same principle of dynamic drivers in coax config, while the R3 is a three-way exploiting all its benefits to the finest. And the anniversary model struggles with its two-way design especially as a coax.

You have to admit, presumably, that your comparison was sighted (at least knowing for sure which was which for whatever reason), sound level wasn‘t really (less of a dB or so) adjusted, program wasn‘t approved for this purpose, placing may have been different … . Finally, your discerning wording isn‘t standardized, such that there is a lot of wiggle room for loose interpretation. Not ‚scientific‘, in the sense that other are enabled to reproduce the result easily for a cross check.

After several jubilee threads on the Ls50 (each that touches it) I still miss a true communicatable verification of its wondrous qualities. What about this: equalize each, the 3 and the 50, for the very same direct on-axis frequency response, for fairness cut bass at like 60Hz, place them on the same stands, and we‘ll see if the hype is a hype. Then after ask for bass with today‘s common pop music down to 40Hz and repeat. May want to repeat again using a sub or two.

Or, alternatively show some measured data that supports your point.

Speakers with different cabinets and different driver configurations disperse sound differently. It’s a simple as that.

 

[thewas]

Not quite; the data tells that the R3 is superior or equal in every aspect.

Nope, as it had been shown to you already in other threads the directivity of the LS50M is superior to the R3M one.

KEF/Coaxial 2 Ways vs 3 way point source qualities

No, the original hypothesis of constant directivity and even indirect sound response was developed by respected members of the audio engineering community (like Earl Geddes and Siegfried Linkwitz), and I just happened to find it confirmed by a number of controlled tests. Even power response is...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Rev]

If that’s the case then fair point ….. however if you the sort of guy that upgrade let’s say 2/3 years then I urge you to wait until you get the funds … you will be out of the hamster wheel for good
Unless you move to double the space .,, it will be the end of the road for you … then you can think about getting yourself a convertible Porsche which is the next logical step in the toys amassing schedule of a human being

Im definitely that guy, but not looking fwd to dropping 9k aud for them just yet. Also want to enjoy the hobby by jumping up the tiers.

 

[meracus]

Im definitely that guy, but not looking fwd to dropping 9k aud for them just yet. Also want to enjoy the hobby by jumping up the tiers.

There’s no tiers left after the ls60 , you will be in splitting spyder pubes territory for an additional 50k along the journey

 

[Heinrich]

Nope, as it had been shown to you already in other threads the directivity of the LS50M is superior to the R3M one.

KEF/Coaxial 2 Ways vs 3 way point source qualities

No, the original hypothesis of constant directivity and even indirect sound response was developed by respected members of the audio engineering community (like Earl Geddes and Siegfried Linkwitz), and I just happened to find it confirmed by a number of controlled tests. Even power response is...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I don‘t want to sound rude in any way. That particular thread triggered my tech/ minded second self.

Me thinks in all modesty, the o/p has to enjoy his own decision.

(My understanding of directivity of speakers is well aligned w/ established research, Toole‘s, and I think that forum debate won‘t help me, personally, too much further.)

 

[kawauso]

Nope, as it had been shown to you already in other threads the directivity of the LS50M is superior to the R3M one.

KEF/Coaxial 2 Ways vs 3 way point source qualities

No, the original hypothesis of constant directivity and even indirect sound response was developed by respected members of the audio engineering community (like Earl Geddes and Siegfried Linkwitz), and I just happened to find it confirmed by a number of controlled tests. Even power response is...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I haven’t directly compared the R3 Meta to the LS50 Meta, but when the LS50 Meta is EQ’d using Spinorama-based auto correction and paired with a subwoofer, it sounds really good.
Sometimes I even feel it’s not that far from the Reference 1 Meta in the next room — maybe that’s thanks to its excellent directivity.

 

[thewas]

My understanding of directivity of speakers is well aligned w/ established research, Toole‘s, and I think that forum debate won‘t help me, personally, too much further.

Hope it will help you in the future not post statements which are obviously untrue.

 

[Heinrich]

Hope it will help you in the future not post statements which are obviously untrue.

That‘s how it goes every time the LS50 is involved. Have fun!

 

[thewas]

That‘s how it goes every time the LS50 is involved. Have fun!

That's how it goes every time the same untrue generalisations are made, guess the LS50 triggers some.

 

[Rev]

There’s no tiers left after the ls60 , you will be in splitting spyder pubes territory for an additional 50k along the journey

I know but it’s double the cost for the setup. Not prepared just yet! I hear you. Im sure I’ll be wanting the ls60s in the future.

 

[Rev]

Thanks everyone for all your help.

I ended up going with the LS50 Wireless II as they had an amazing deal, 10% + free s2 stands. For my small room, they pair nicely with the KC62, playing levels max 65% volume. Gets really loud without distortions etc for the room size.

Plans in the future to upgrade to the big sister LS60 or equivalent when I’m ready. Enjoy the hobby!

 

[Good Vibes]

Congratulations on the new addition. New speakers are an exciting time. Happy listening!

You have an awesome set up now, hopefully you won’t want to upgrade for a good while now. A good next step in the hobby before upgrading speakers, is the means to measure your room and identify any issues with the frequency response. It really helps you to position your speakers in a way that gets the best out of them and tells you precisely where to apply EQ. I bought an Umik 1 microphone and used it with REW. The process is easier than I thought and made a great improvement to the sound I experience.

 

[Rev]

Congratulations on the new addition. New speakers are an exciting time. Happy listening!

You have an awesome set up now, hopefully you won’t want to upgrade for a good while now. A good next step in the hobby before upgrading speakers, is the means to measure your room and identify any issues with the frequency response. It really helps you to position your speakers in a way that gets the best out of them and tells you precisely where to apply EQ. I bought an Umik 1 microphone and used it with REW. The process is easier than I thought and made a great improvement to the sound I experience.

Thanks for the kind words!

I did use HouseCurve on iOS just to get a read. I was quite surprised the response was pretty good overall. Next up will be to get the Umik mic and REW. As it’s the wireless version, my only option is to apply a convolution via ROON.Conflicted if I should prioritise bitperfect v using a room correction.
I haven’t treated the room yet so that will be my next obsession.