• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

KEF LS50 Meta vs KEF R3

RiseFall

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
22
Likes
2
You don't deserve anything, because i won the internet discuss.
The Kef Reference is for me :facepalm::p

Traditional rooms do weird thing to normal speakers like the Reference or R.
They aren't the d&d 8c, for example.
This is the room EQ for my R7.
View attachment 173063

Could you share these EQ in values (freq, dB and Q), so I can try in my Lyngdorf Voice or in Roon EQ?
 

tifune

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
621
Likes
391
I think I'm seeing a projector and screen there. Could you use an acoustically transparent screen and place another R5 or R3 behind it? That seems ideal.

It's pretty unlikely. The reason I chose this particular screen is it was literally the only one that met all my room/space requirements:

Ambient light rejecting
Ultra short throw compatible
Floor rising (I would have been ok with manual pulldown wall mount, but no such UST ALR that icould find)
 

Fahzz

Active Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2020
Messages
135
Likes
136
Location
Outside Providence
Sure. Usually I keep the fireplace a little more tidy but been very sick this week - basically wake up, make a fire for ambiance, take meds, lay down and listen to Depeche Mode or Bjork surround mixes, get up to take meds and stoke fire, repeat. Just discovered Electric Ladyland in 5.1 this morning, so that's been nice. You know it's bad when you work from home and still had to take off the whole week. Tested negative for COVID, flu A/B plus I'm vaccinated+boosted and got my flu shot so no idea what's up...

I have a R2C as well but I can't decide what to do with it. Option 1 is right above the screen in a more traditional center arrangement. Problem there is I never seem to like centers with music whether it's native multichannel or upmixed. I'm also not sure how it would blend with what's already present - it's a hell of a lot of work for it to end up sounding bad. And I can't just undo it because I'd have holes in the wall.

Option 2 is put it way up high as a center height channel. Downside is I'd have to hire. I don't have the gall or the tools to lift 44lbs of speaker 10ft high. Also, not a whole lot of center height material out there. Atmos doesn't even recognize it.

What say you all?

Yes, those are LS50 Meta as rear Dolby. I can't find a means of mounting any sort of rear height that scores acceptably in the WAF unless I drill into that stone, which I prefer not to do. I originally bought them for front height, but they did not blend at all with the R3 or R5. I was taken aback how distracting it was - I now know exactly what people mean when they say multichannel needs to be timbre matched. With the R3/R5 combo it's like my whole wall is a speaker, it's the epitome of "speakers that disappear.". That's my hesitation around adding R2C, nervous I'll ruin that effect.

If I can ever find a screaming deal on R11 I plan on moving the R5's to surround but using these little KH80s for now because their cute stature got them just high enough on the WAF score to pass muster. I tried some LSX's there but the software is AWFUL. At that point, the only upgrade I would consider is Be or Ultima but even setting aside the exorbitant cost I'm not sure 70+ degrees of beamwidth will sound good in this room. As you can see, it's highly reverberant and we don't want to add any treatment unless we can find something that augments the aesthetic rather than detracts.

Finally, I'm sure someone will ask. The R3's have threaded holes in the bottom so I used eye bolts and 75lb carabineers to hang then upside down. Yes, this is a risk. No, I do not advocate that *you* do it - it's a calculated risk on my part and obviously they weren't intended to be used this way. I tested in my office by letting them hang in the closet for 2 weeks and saw no noticeable signs of stress, so I went for it. Because the R5's are almost directly under the R3's it's highly improbable anyone would ever be standing there should they fall. When I get around to adding the R2C I'm also going to add another layer of R3 support just in case, maybe some ratchet straps on another eye hook in the beam - not sure yet.
You do all this to watch Sanford and Son? I'm just joking LOL! Hope I gave you a laugh-feel better.
 

RiseFall

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
22
Likes
2
Do you wanna my In room EQ?
That EQ is for fixing the bass problem in my room, nothing more nothing less

Yes I am aware that that EQ correction is relative to your room but seeing your EQ graph I notice that your settings are similar to mine, that I apply even after the active correction of my amp, especially in case I listen to not "very good" recordings, so I was curious to understand your values.
 
OP
D

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
796
Likes
376
R3 is noticeably better. That coax design they use doesn't do so hot without a woofer.
LS50 at 86 and 96 dB %THD (0.5% is -50dB; 1% is -40dB; 3% is -30dB)
index.php


Vs Erin's measurements of the R3 (from www.erinsaudiocorner.com )
Kef%20R3%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%20%2886dB%20%40%201m%29.png


Kef%20R3%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%20%2896dB%20%40%201m%29.png



Notice that the R3s deal with higher levels better, especially at low frequencies - the LS50 falls apart around 100hz, where the R3 is fine down to about 60hz.
If I cross them over at 100Hz it becomes a non issue!
 

batazs

New Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
3
Likes
0
Hi,
my set: Hegel H95, Audiolab 6000 CDT, MA Gold 100 (5G), VIABLUE SC-4 Bi-Wire T6s
Idon't feel the synergy with MA Gold 100 (5G). I'm looking for the ideal speaker to the H95 Important for me tight, quick and clear bass. Maybe R3 or META?
Thanks for the recommendations.
 

alitomr1979

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
123
Likes
68
Hi,
my set: Hegel H95, Audiolab 6000 CDT, MA Gold 100 (5G), VIABLUE SC-4 Bi-Wire T6s
Idon't feel the synergy with MA Gold 100 (5G). I'm looking for the ideal speaker to the H95 Important for me tight, quick and clear bass. Maybe R3 or META?
Thanks for the recommendations.
My friend, everything you can possibly know about these speakers without actually listening to them, is said probably more than once in this thread. Do read it, and above all, try to listen to both, as you will read recommended in the thread.

The LS50 (original) are a tremendous speaker. Truly amazing. The Meta ups things quite a bit, above very impressive. The R3s in my opinion are better (it’s hard for me to even say because I adored the Metas) but for small spaces the Metas might be a safer recommendation.

Read the thread.
 
OP
D

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
796
Likes
376
My friend, everything you can possibly know about these speakers without actually listening to them, is said probably more than once in this thread. Do read it, and above all, try to listen to both, as you will read recommended in the thread.

The LS50 (original) are a tremendous speaker. Truly amazing. The Meta ups things quite a bit, above very impressive. The R3s in my opinion are better (it’s hard for me to even say because I adored the Metas) but for small spaces the Metas might be a safer recommendation.

Read the thread.
Even so the R3 use older drivers technology?
 

envydd

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
100
Likes
53
The LS50 metas are a little more bright compared to the R3. Compared with the same Jazz albums today. However the R3s can be equalized too. The R3s are definitely louder and fill a larger room. Hence for me, they sound similar. The B&W 805 series sound more airy than either, out of the box (way more expensive though!).

Hence either of the KEFs are the bang for the buck speakers even at their retail price.
 

alitomr1979

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
123
Likes
68
They don’t have the meta technology and all the modifications that they made for the LS50 meta

Who told you that? Is that insider knowledge not disclosed to the public? Seems unlikely. They use the same version of the UniQ driver. That’s what was made available to the public.
 

KMO

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
413
Likes
554
Who told you that? Is that insider knowledge not disclosed to the public? Seems unlikely. They use the same version of the UniQ driver. That’s what was made available to the public.
They're similar, yes, but they're not the same.

The white papers for the R series and LS50 Meta are available, and they've discussed the changes.

They're not huge fundamental changes - they call the Uni-Qs "12th generation" and "12th generation with MAT" respectively, and they're at roughly the same price point (unlike some other drivers of the same generation).

The LS50 Meta did start from the R series driver, incorporating stuff it introduced like the new higher-flux midrange magnet system, and the tweeter gap damper.

It's not super clear, cos the LS50 Meta paper is mainly making comparisons with the original LS50, so repeats some of the stuff seen in the R series paper.

But the main differences seem to be:

1) A bit bigger and with a Z-flex surround to assist 2-way operation (a fundamental design difference common with the LS50, rather than an update)
2) Wider tweeter duct to support the MAT, and the MAT itself.
3) Reimplemented tweeter gap damper because of wider duct. (It wasn't present at all in the original LS50, being new in R series). No information which version actually performs better.
4) Stiffened tangerine waveguide
5) Reworked tweeter magnet + coil system
6) Larger aluminium shorting rings doing whatever they do in the midrange magnets

But I wouldn't sweat it that much. People get hung up on the Uni-Q "versions", but the actual price levels - Q / R+LS / Reference / Blade - are more significant. R series and LS50 Meta are in the same price bracket, and not massively different in version.

And being 3-way rather than 2-way is a significant overall advantage for the R series. LS50 gives you more "point source" Uni-Q goodness, but it's at a low-end distortion cost.
 

alitomr1979

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
123
Likes
68
They're similar, yes, but they're not the same.

The white papers for the R series and LS50 Meta are available, and they've discussed the changes.

They're not huge fundamental changes - they call the Uni-Qs "12th generation" and "12th generation with MAT" respectively, and they're at roughly the same price point (unlike some other drivers of the same generation).

The LS50 Meta did start from the R series driver, incorporating stuff it introduced like the new higher-flux midrange magnet system, and the tweeter gap damper.

It's not super clear, cos the LS50 Meta paper is mainly making comparisons with the original LS50, so repeats some of the stuff seen in the R series paper.

But the main differences seem to be:

1) A bit bigger and with a Z-flex surround to assist 2-way operation (a fundamental design difference common with the LS50, rather than an update)
2) Wider tweeter duct to support the MAT, and the MAT itself.
3) Reimplemented tweeter gap damper because of wider duct. (It wasn't present at all in the original LS50, being new in R series). No information which version actually performs better.
4) Stiffened tangerine waveguide
5) Reworked tweeter magnet + coil system
6) Larger aluminium shorting rings doing whatever they do in the midrange magnets

But I wouldn't sweat it that much. People get hung up on the Uni-Q "versions", but the actual price levels - Q / R+LS / Reference / Blade - are more significant. R series and LS50 Meta are in the same price bracket, and not massively different in version.

And being 3-way rather than 2-way is a significant overall advantage for the R series. LS50 gives you more "point source" Uni-Q goodness, but it's at a low-end distortion cost.
My quoted post referred to the R3 vs LS50 Metas.
 
OP
D

Descartes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 27, 2020
Messages
796
Likes
376
In a few years maybe the R meta will be launched and then be superior to the LS50 meta for now they are a 4 year old design!
 

tecnogadget

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
542
Likes
886
Location
Madrid, Spain
In a few years maybe the R meta will be launched and then be superior to the LS50 meta for now they are a 4 year old design!
You are evaluating two very distinct speakers designs as if they were a cpu processor or a smartphones, as if single random numbers makes any sense. Latest R series was launched late in 2018, that’s almost 2019…they are closer to 3 years old design, which doesn’t really matter anything.
 
Top Bottom