KEF LS50 META!

[Chromatischism]

I would bet @Descartes and @Chromatischism have larger listening rooms than me (and probably different wall materials).

11x17x8, drywall, but furnished.

 

[Chromatischism]

for example my LS50 Anniversary desktop setup has its -3dB point at the listening position around 33 Hz without any positive filters.

I just don't see how that is possible unless you have a lucky room boost right in the 30's.

My S400 MKII's (and the original) have a 33 Hz -3 dB point in-room confirmed by my measurements. They have more woofage area, more box volume, and a lower tuning point than the KEF LS50 (all versions).

 

[thewas]

I just don't see how that is possible unless you have a lucky room boost right in the 30's.

Mainly very close rear wall, here are the measurements before EQ:

My S400 MKII's (and the original) have a 33 Hz -3 dB point in-room confirmed by my measurements. They have more woofage area, more box volume, and a lower tuning point than the KEF LS50 (all versions).

As said this is my desktop system, on my other LS50 Meta (which has a very similar anechoic bass response to my LS50 Anniversary used at my desktop system) classic listening setup the bass falls much earlier and I have to use a sub.

 

[killdozzer]

11x17x8, drywall, but furnished.

So not even. That is the room you listened to LS50s in?
I do have impregnated concrete walls, but other than that... Very close in size.

 

[Ataraxia]

Very true, on the other hand I personally wouldn't use most Hifi loudpeakers at 12 feet listening distance even if they can go louder as due to their usually limited beaming the direct sound percentage at the listening position is usually too low for "immersive" listening as in nearfield like Ataraxia also writes:

The soundstage is still good and enjoyable, it's just that in my first place there was a lot more magic and surprises. Like tricks where you think some sound originated way outside the room and also the speakers disappearing more. It's so true how much room and speaker placement matters.

 

[Descartes]

The soundstage is still good and enjoyable, it's just that in my first place there was a lot more magic and surprises. Like tricks where you think some sound originated way outside the room and also the speakers disappearing more. It's so true how much room and speaker placement matters.

Yep the room is 50% of the sound, then speaker placement!

My room is 18 x 20 x 10 feet but I sit 9 feet from the speakers!.

 

[Ataraxia]

Yep the room is 50% of the sound, then speaker placement!

My room is 18 x 20 x 10 feet but I sit 9 feet from the speakers!.

Right, so good possibility R3's would be the better choice for that space and listening distance.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

My listening room is 12 x 12 x 8, and I sit 5 ft away and listen at around 75-80 db, so Metas and a single SB2000 seem more than adequate.

 

[Ataraxia]

My listening room is 12 x 12 x 8, and I sit 5 ft away and listen at around 75-80 db, so Metas and a single SB2000 seem more than adequate.

Sounds like you've got them set up nice near/midfield positioning. I think that to about 6' is great for clean center image and mid bass coupling, which I love about the Metas and R3's..

Enjoy.

 

[Descartes]

Right, so good possibility R3's would be the better choice for that space and listening distance.

Hum, will they play well with my 6 LS50 surround speakers that are 6” away from the listening positions!

 

[Ataraxia]

Hum, will they play well with my 6 LS50 surround speakers that are 6” away from the listening positions!

I think so. The R3's will have more mid to lower bass as front L/R than LS50 IMO.

And cross the R3's around 80Hz to the sub(s), plus the LS50 surrounds, will be excellent. They also really command a presence with great aesthetics as front L/R.

 

[Descartes]

I think so. The R3's will have more mid to lower bass as front L/R than LS50 IMO.

And cross the R3's around 80Hz to the sub(s), plus the LS50 surrounds, will be excellent. They also really command a presence with great aesthetics as front L/R.

The problem is buying three R3! Where as the LS50 Meta I can buy three of them for the front

 

[HARMAN]

Can you please indicate with which amplifier you match kef, I have a class d pioneer a50 amplifier and the midrange sounds thin

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Sounds like you've got them set up nice near/midfield positioning. I think that to about 6' is great for clean center image and mid bass coupling, which I love about the Metas and R3's..

Enjoy.

They're on 22" stands around 32 inches from side and rear walls while it sub sits inside the left speaker's footprint on the rear wall. Crossover is accomplished on the PC at 100 HZ, with 4th order L-R on the Dephonica crossover with Dirac Live 3 making everyone play nice together. DAC is the Octo 8 and the Purifi Eval 1 is the amp.

 

[Ataraxia]

The problem is buying three R3! Where as the LS50 Meta I can buy three of them for the front

Well all LS50 system is still great. Maybe rearrange/optimize the listening positions instead, possibly a little closer than if you had R3 fronts. I even consider, gasp, selling my R3's if I find myself in a very small condo. But I probably won't because they seem a little like family to me at this point.

 

[Ataraxia]

They're on 22" stands around 32 inches from side and rear walls while it sub sits inside the left speaker's footprint on the rear wall. Crossover is accomplished on the PC at 100 HZ, with 4th order L-R on the Dephonica crossover with Dirac Live 3 making everyone play nice together. DAC is the Octo 8 and the Purifi Eval 1 is the amp.

Can you tell me more about your Purifi and how it compares to anything else you've heard? I wonder if there's a big difference between Eval 1 and Eigentakt.

My next step is upgrading amplification and getting Dirac. Although I believe I'd like to stick with class A/B/G/H and I'm also a sucker for aesthetics and thinking about McIntosh, Yamaha, or Hegel, Arcam which are not aesthetic IMO.

I was really thinking about just getting class D plus miniDSP SHD. But if I do decide class D I might go with a NAD M33 used...

 

[Ataraxia]

Can you please indicate with which amplifier you match kef, I have a class d pioneer a50 amplifier and the midrange sounds thin

I've been using a Yamaha A2080 AVR and currently Emotiva BasX A-100 fed by Schitt Modi 3+ and PC Tidal oi FLAC files.

The midrange is just about right IMO, not thin and not muddy/growly. Some say Yamaha boosts the mid range a bit.

I had a Denon X4400H for a bit a while back with my R3's and the midrange/vocals was were rich and growly. The mid bass pop in electronic was full and muddy with the Denon whereas with he Yamaha it was clean and precise and clear.

The Yamaha overall more clean and precise (can be interpreted as thinner) and the Denon more rich and muddy.

Caveat is I don't remember how I had everything set up on the Denon (settings Audyssey, etc.).

If you only want a streaming amplifier for two channel only I bet this improves the mid range and sounds good:

Yamaha R-N803

Network stereo receiver with Wi-Fi®, Bluetooth®, and MusicCast

www.crutchfield.com

Or just try a Denon X3700 model, If what I remember is true, it will be fuller but less detailed than the Yamaha's.

Denon AVR-X3700H

9.2-channel home theater receiver with Wi-Fi®, Bluetooth®, Apple AirPlay® 2, and Amazon Alexa compatibility

www.crutchfield.com

 

[Chromatischism]

I had a Denon X4400H for a bit a while back with my R3's and the midrange/vocals was were rich and growly. The mid bass pop in electronic was full and muddy with the Denon whereas with he Yamaha it was clean and precise and clear.

The Yamaha overall more clean and precise (can be interpreted as thinner) and the Denon more rich and muddy.

Caveat is I don't remember how I had everything set up on the Denon (settings Audyssey, etc.).

This isn't fair because you had full-range EQ affecting what you heard. If it doesn't give a good result, limit the correction frequency to 300-500 Hz. The Denon is neutral and won't sound any different on its own.

 

[Ataraxia]

This isn't fair because you had full-range EQ affecting what you heard. If it doesn't give a good result, limit the correction frequency to 300-500 Hz. The Denon is neutral and won't sound any different on its own.

That could have been it which is why I threw the caveat in there. I was brand new to great speakers and amplification, room correction.

"Caveat is I don't remember how I had everything set up on the Denon (settings Audyssey, etc.)."

I didn't fully understand Audyessey and may not have even had it on, plus other settings I may have missed.

But the difference was unmistakable. I listened to the following linked song and the surprise voice was deep, rich, and growly, and just slammed with so much force. "Where are you hiding."

https://tidal.com/browse/track/50329554

With my Yamaha the surprise voice is clear and I guess thinner but not "too thin." But I liked the sound for music more so I bought the A2080 instead of the X4400H.

Also other scenes the Denon hit a lot harder and with more rich tonal character. I can't remember what movie (I think Mad Max Fury Road) a pipe was hit with a big wrench and it just popped so much harder and fuller than the Yamaha.

Maybe the power supply? A2080 has 490 watt, Denon X4400H 625 watt I believe.

Edit: X4400H may have bigger power supply size. This specs page shows 710 watts "power consumption."

Denon AVR-X4400H Review and Specs

Read our detailed analysis and evaluation of Denon AVR-X4400H, find out its strengths and weaknesses, and how it compares to its predecessor and successor.

www.zkelectronics.com

I believe it could be precisely because I had Audyssey on (again, can't remember) and it does a better job at low frequencies.

You really have to listen for yourself. That is my experience.


(Edited so may have to re-read)

 

[Chromatischism]

It is. The differences you describe would absolutely have shown in the measurements.