- Joined
- Sep 3, 2023
- Messages
- 1,287
- Likes
- 2,322
Yeah for your setup Q11 is ideal.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
KEF Q Meta is Coming
- Thread starter Heric
- Start date
-
- Tags
- kef new speaker
SynthesisCinema
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2019
- Messages
- 215
- Likes
- 317
Even though we already have Erin`s klippel measurements for Q11 Meta here is another set from Hifi News if interested.
www.hifinews.com
KEF Q11 Meta floorstanding loudspeaker Lab Report
Measured on its Uni-Q axis, the Q11’s three 165mm ‘hybrid alloy’ bass units make their presence felt in what is a generally down-tilted, bass-rich response [see Graph 1], albeit with a peak at 14kHz and strong main dome resonance at 45.7kHz (+7dB re. 1kHz). The latter is also seen on the CSD...
www.hifinews.com
Okay, the Q11 Meta's are in the house!
I have not listened yet; I have a Q11 sitting beside a ML Motion Foundation F2 and the F2 is definitely the nicer looking speaker. I like the individual driver covers of the F2, as opposed to the traditional grill of the Q11. With the F2, I can remove the mid-range driver grill and leave the woofer grills on.
The height is essentially the same. The tweeters are about the same height, but the Q11 mid-driver obviously is about 5 inches higher, being a concentric design. The Q11 woofers are about 10 inches higher than those of the F2, as the F2's woofers are mounted at the bottom. The cabinet sidewalls of both models sound about equally hollow with the knuckle rap test. And the front baffles of each are pretty inert sounding.
I'm now about to get the Q11's set up and start listening.
i kinda have to say, the motion f2 do look nicer as well, so its never as simple as measurements matter only.. go what feels right
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2023
- Messages
- 1,287
- Likes
- 2,322
I prefer the veneer style of the F2 which also seems to match your other furniture better, but I prefer the more balanced aesthetic of the driver layout if the Q11.
Very much looking forward to hearing your listening impressions.
After a couple hours of listening, I do have some impressions. Prior to placing the Q11's, I had my wife listen with me to a few familiar songs with the F2's and cranked it up a bit. I then placed the Q11's and listened to the same tracks, increasing the volume to match that of the F2's. The F2's do indeed seem to be more sensitive. My wife said pretty quickly that she preferred the Q11's, but didn't state any particular reason why.
I first played Dire Straits Money for Nothing, so as to listen to that increasing in volume drum solo at the beginning of the song. To me, the drums sounded bigger and fuller with the F2's, but more precisely located and defined with the Q11's. Somehow, the Q11's just seem "faster" or "snappier" than the F2's, overall.
I also listened to Malia's Convergence album, which showcases her sultry vocals and also has some really deep bass in it. Again, her voice sounded a bit "fuller" with the F2's, but the soundstage was better with the Q11's. I like the sound of her voice with the F2's but the placement of the instruments and accompanying vocalists is just better with the Q11's.
Another difference is that the bass notes, although not as "big" or "full" sounding, seem to have more tonality with the Q11's, allowing me to hear more of the bass "line". As to the treble, it seems that the F2's are a bit "hotter" with the highest frequency content. I can hear the highest high frequencies better with the F2's. But just below the highest frequencies, the Q11's seem to have more clarity and precision.
Soundstage -- I would say the ability to throw a believable soundstage is the biggest difference so far. With the Q11's, it seems like there is more delineation of instruments and voices. And the "micro dynamics", if that is a thing, seem "faster" and better with the Q11's, as if the drivers are just better. I was initially concerned about the small tweeter and mid-range driver of the Q11's, which may contribute to the drums sounding "smaller", but I think these drivers may offer advantages in terms of "speed" and soundstaging.
I will have to continue listening for some time in order to gain a more complete impression of the Q11's.
Jaxjax
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2022
- Messages
- 458
- Likes
- 362
Can I get the WHY of if ? They don't EQ well.?
What speakers are you coming from in that set up?
The polk R200's sound better. I have a feeling this might be because the polk's have a narrow sweet spot, while th kef's have a wide dispersion, so in a somewhat cluttered room all the reflections make the kefs sound worse. The kef's still sound good. They just don't blow me away like the polks.
The disadvantage of the polks though is you have to turn them up quite a bit to get them to sound good, and the narrow sweet spot means you can't wander around a room while listening to music.
Reply
Report Edit Delete
The polk R200's sound better. I have a feeling this might be because the polk's have a narrow sweet spot, while th kef's have a wide dispersion, so in a somewhat cluttered room all the reflections make the kefs sound worse. The kef's still sound good. They just don't blow me away like the polks.
The disadvantage of the polks though is you have to turn them up quite a bit to get them to sound good, and the narrow sweet spot means you can't wander around a room while listening to music.
Yeah , I get it.... that's not much if any upgrade, almost a side grade....polk's are a good value from my knowledge...
KEF Concertos don't have a wider dispersion than the Polk R200s.
See Erin's measurements below:
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/kef_concerto_q_meta/
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/polk_r200/
Compare Horizontal Contour Plots (Normalized). KEF is more consistent but narrow. Polk is narrow, then widens in low to mid treble, then narrows considerably in upper treble.
The big difference when you compare the measurements is the R200 is a lot hotter in the treble which Polk are known for, I would think they are fatiguing to listen to after awhile? If the Concerto sound too laid back you could always experiment with a high shelf around 2k
Yeah, they seem to be getting better and better. I've had them set up since Saturday. Yeah, I know there's supposed to be no such thing as speaker break-in, but they didn't sound this good when I first played them.
Despite the Martin Logan's being prettier, I'm going to return them and keep the KEF's. The vocals are so good, placement of of vocalists and instruments is much better. Instruments sound more realistic to me. The leading edge of transients seems to be snappier and more clear than the ML's. The bass is more defined and articulated.
This KEF coaxial tweeter/mid is so good that now I'm having to hold myself back from picking up a R6 Meta for my center channel!
Oh, also, the KEF packaging is far better than that of the ML, and is quite impressive for being KEF's entry level speaker line. It's just all well done.
hmmm, Erin's audio corner review remarked that he can move around a room while not having the kef's performance fall off too much.
On the other hand, I find with the polk if I move out of the sweet spot, there is a strong effect on performance. I'm not the only one who has noticed this either - other online consumer reviews mention it.
So don't know if these subject impressions correspond with the Measurment's, or maybe there is an error in the measurements or the interpretation of them.
My recommendation: if you don't like them, return them, problem solved. The "why" is for knowledgable technicians who are not too many. Home stereo is not meant to convert everyone to an engineering problem cruncher. Trust your subjective impression, that is fair enough. (To be fair, the measurements are o/k, and the interpretation likewise.)
its not that Kef is so much wider in horizontal (they are more consistent), from memory: polk tweeter design is such that it narrows up ~10khz frequencies,
but biggest difference comes from vertical dispersion being consistent with kef due to coaxial design, so if you stand up...with polk: sound signature change is evident.
Also slope of estimated in-room response is less deep with polk, that will make it sount livelier. <- cant be sure thought, based from memory,
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2023
- Messages
- 1,287
- Likes
- 2,322
Glad to hear that!
I agree that the way KEFs image is simply amazing.
When I listened to the Q7 we also had the R3 in for comparison. The R is very different in tonal balance. Much more hyped which on certain material sounds jaw-droppingly good, but a times just a little too hot in the mid treble. The Q7 just handled whatever we threw at them without even trying and never over-emphesised anything.
I recommend you get a Q centre channel not an R to correctly match tonally.
If I had the money I would get an R floorstander as they are phenomenal. But as I don’t I would get Q7 as they are possibly even better value for money. I would go as far as saying that for a small room the Q7 could be end-game if your taste is for a linear response.
Similar threads
