KEF Q Meta is Coming

[kaspurr84]

Any word on how the Q Concertos perform at low output levels? This is an observation I've noticed with the Q350's is they just don't have a lot of liveliness unless pushed a bit.

 

[billou5767]

Any word on how the Q Concertos perform at low output levels? This is an observation I've noticed with the Q350's is they just don't have a lot of liveliness unless pushed a bit.

the demo showroom where they use new serie it was with rn2000 yamaha and rose , need watt

 

[Alexx]

Already available for order in Italy.

Interesting price, the finishes are only "Matte" surely to reduce the cost.

We hope to hear them play soon, they are certainly a valid alternative to the R3 Meta, I wonder between LS50 Meta and these new Q Meta (having the same price) which would be the best.

Link to the distributor with the characteristics: https://hifight.it/prodotto/kef-q-concerto-meta-coppia-di-diffusori-da-scaffale/

See you soon.

 

[billou5767]

Already available for order in Italy.

Interesting price, the finishes are only "Matte" surely to reduce the cost.

We hope to hear them play soon, they are certainly a valid alternative to the R3 Meta, I wonder between LS50 Meta and these new Q Meta (having the same price) which would be the best.

Link to the distributor with the characteristics: https://hifight.it/prodotto/kef-q-concerto-meta-coppia-di-diffusori-da-scaffale/

See you soon.

there is physic law , with same q gen 12 speeker the concerto will be better have 2 year to do better , at minima near the same as R3

 

[mrcstl]

Q Concerto and R3 Meta out for delivery today, curious how they compare. My expectations are a bit more tempered. I’m expecting that they are exactly what KEF says they are, a 3-way stand mount in an improved Q series. So not an R3-Lite. We’ll see. I also have Q150s here so can compare them all in-room.

 

[kaspurr84]

The new Q line has me interested, the Concerto for sure, but the new updated Q1 may really start to embarrass the 3x more expensive LS50 Meta now that it has an updated crossover, MAT technology and what appears to be better cabinet bracing on the Q1/Q3, as I've compared specs the Q1 is 1.1lbs heavier than the Q150, and the Q3 is almost 3lbs heavier than the Q350, which I can only think mostly equates to a beefier build.

 

[mrcstl]

So they are about the same size, I thought the R3 was a bit larger for some reason. Concerto is a bit shorter and wider. Same depth, R3 posts just stick out vs being recessed.

Just had a quick listen. Got a little fatigue from the Concerto so guessing there is both a midrange and high freq bump that needs some eq. But overall it sounds quite good. Plenty of mid bass support to integrate a subwoofer, some tolerable distortion in that range. They seem like a good value proposition. Need to touch them up with a little eq later and spend some time with them to form a real opinion.

 

[Alexx]

Thank you very much for this opinion.

Let's wait for you to do other tests more calmly, for me the high midrange performance is fundamental (for the bass I have a subwoofer) and if they are tiring I think I will focus on the LS50 as they have a very controlled high midrange.
See you soon.

 

[billou5767]

Q Concerto and R3 Meta out for delivery today, curious how they compare. My expectations are a bit more tempered. I’m expecting that they are exactly what KEF says they are, a 3-way stand mount in an improved Q series. So not an R3-Lite. We’ll see. I also have Q150s here so can compare them all in-room.

its will be a r3 little , only to respect the level class and 1000 buck , the real question will be the difference justify the 1000 dollars

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

View attachment 396212
So they are about the same size, I thought the R3 was a bit larger for some reason. Concerto is a bit shorter and wider. Same depth, R3 posts just stick out vs being recessed.

Just had a quick listen. Got a little fatigue from the Concerto so guessing there is both a midrange and high freq bump that needs some eq. But overall it sounds quite good. Plenty of mid bass support to integrate a subwoofer, some tolerable distortion in that range. They seem like a good value proposition. Need to touch them up with a little eq later and spend some time with them to form a real opinion.

its will be a r3 little , only to respect the level class and 1000 buck , the real question will be the difference justify the 1000 dollars

I consider the R3 meta a very high quality speaker; you possibly also pay for the luxury to have speakers that, without eq, deliver music, voices, very beautifully: very natural, detailed, uncoloured - just pleasant. For me they are 'keepers'. I know I repeat myself, having bought them recently but hope it's to he point here. Also very interesting to hear from you what eq does with the Concerto sound (and possibly the R3) and how close you can get the Concerto's to the R3's. Good luck!

 

[billou5767]

I consider the R3 meta a very high quality speaker; you possibly also pay for the luxury to have speakers that, without eq, deliver music, voices, very beautifully: very natural, detailed, uncoloured - just pleasant. For me they are 'keepers'. I know I repeat myself, having bought them recently but hope it's to he point here. Also very interesting to hear from you what eq does with the Concerto sound (and possibly the R3) and how close you can get the Concerto's to the R3's. Good luck!

with your ear , your experience , your home and source : like wine 99% see no difference for them between 20£ and 200£ bottle

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

with your ear , your experience , your home and source

Yes (among other things) and I would be very interested to hear what you know about that.

like wine 99% see no difference for them between 20£ and 200£ bottle

I know a few very nice wines for less than €7 (or$, £ probably) and there probably are plenty of very good speakers for around 1000 $,etc/pair, although not allways everywhere (very) easy to get (like Revel or Ascend Acoustics). And of course (studio) active monitors, with for example smaller Genelecs or Neumanns (w. sub.) I guess you can build a very good but not very expensive setup.

 

[mrcstl]

I'm really hesitant to share in-room response since there is a lot of room in the results, but since there isn't much data yet here's what I got. Midrange actually looks good, I just need to roll the high end off a bit vs the R3 and give them another listen. Ofc this doesn't show the difference in overall clarity, etc, which is quite dramatic. Just setting up this room so it's fairly untreated. 4" panel behind the listening position, and speakers pushed very close to the front wall with 4" bass traps behind them. Ports open here.

 

[mrcstl]

Ok, final update. So no fatigue with the Concertos after rolling off the highs, much better.

I’m keeping the R3s and returning the Concertos though. The R3 is enough of an upgrade for me to justify the $900. Better dynamics and clarity top to bottom. Big surprise there at a 70% higher price. The kicker for me is the mid bass, I listen to a lot of bass heavy music. Crossed over at 80hz I rarely pick up any bass distortion in the R3 at my listening levels, and it’s there quite often in the Concertos. Probably not an issue at lower volumes.

That being said, if the R3 was not in my budget right now I’d be a happy Concerto owner. My $.02, they seem like a good value for the price, and I enjoyed them after tamping down the highs.

Someone asked about the Concertos at low volume and they sounded good to me. The R3 gets a bit funky at low volume, but the Concerto scaled well to my ears.

 

[Matias]

Those highs can probably be reduced just by using less toe in.

 

[mrcstl]

Negative for me. That roll off for the R3 is from considerable toe out. Concertos were set up the same and still really hot.

Edit: now that I think about it I never tried going further out with the Concertos so it’s certainly possible.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

Those highs can probably be reduced just by using less toe in.

Negative for me. That roll off for the R3 is from considerable toe out. Concertos were set up the same and still really hot.

So maybe even 'toe outwards'. Anyhow, By toeing out you also get more sidewall reflections, which could be extra beneficial with narrow(er) directivity speakers, allthough, I guess, the 'sweet area' will suffer more at/beyond the point where one of the speakers points towards the listener, the other one pointing more away.

@mrcstl: Edit: I just refreshed the page and saw your edit.

 

[Beav1S]

I’m wondering how the new Q series would pair with LS50 meta to complete a 7.1 (5.1.2) home theatre. Where would you use the LS50s. Any thoughts?

 

[jacktracks707]

Ok, final update. So no fatigue with the Concertos after rolling off the highs, much better.

I’m keeping the R3s and returning the Concertos though. The R3 is enough of an upgrade for me to justify the $900. Better dynamics and clarity top to bottom. Big surprise there at a 70% higher price. The kicker for me is the mid bass, I listen to a lot of bass heavy music. Crossed over at 80hz I rarely pick up any bass distortion in the R3 at my listening levels, and it’s there quite often in the Concertos. Probably not an issue at lower volumes.

That being said, if the R3 was not in my budget right now I’d be a happy Concerto owner. My $.02, they seem like a good value for the price, and I enjoyed them after tamping down the highs.

Someone asked about the Concertos at low volume and they sounded good to me. The R3 gets a bit funky at low volume, but the Concerto scaled well to my ears.

Really appreciate your posts, pictures, and comparisons. I am trying to decide between R3 Metas + R6 Meta, R7 Metas + R6 Meta, or possibly Q7 Metas + Q6. Only thing swaying me is I listened to Q950s and I really liked how they sounded. They had R11s and R3 Metas. I would have chosen the Q950s in a blind test scenario. This was at Best Buy so who knows haha. Any thoughts on which way you would go if you were me? Music is #1 priority for me. I would like to save some money on Q Meta series, but I can extend the budget up to the R7s if it really is worth it. I know there are many many other factors. I have 4 subwoofers in each corner of this room. I prefer how towers look but bookshelfs on stands is ok with me too. tia

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

I have 4 subwoofers in each corner of this room. I prefer how towers look but bookshelfs on stands is ok with me too. tia

Hi and welcome here. For the objectively best sound, I think the R3 m or R7 m option would be best, and with 4 subs this probably won't make very much difference, so I would chose the R3 m. But maybe you would be happier saving money and having towers with the Q7 m.
For long-term satisfaction I consider the R3 m very suitable, I only have them for a month (About the 5th time I mention this, but in this thread I repeatedly find a reason) and am very happy.
Night has begun here. See you later!

Peace