KEF Q Series with MAT Whitepaper

[pthakkar24]

Hi everyone,

I’m happy to share the much-awaited Q Series with MAT whitepaper. Thank you all for your patience, and I hope you enjoy reading it!

Please note that due to the upload limit on ASR, I had to compress the document before attaching it. The high-resolution PDF should be available on all KEF regional websites shortly, and I will add a link once it becomes available.

Thanks,
Prathmesh

 

[Matias]

Great, thanks. Now let's wait to have the responses uploaded to Spinorama.org to compare them.

 

[thewas]

Thank you for the upload, it is always a joy to see the detail and passion in engineering and improving every generation from all perspectives. Also it is interesting to see how the sound power was prioritised to the on axis sound.

Was planning of getting the Q11 Meta but now I will order the Q7 as I like its vertical directivity more and its 110 dB max SPL vs 113 should suffice in my not large listening room.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

Hi everyone,

I am happy to share the much-awaited Q Series with MAT whitepaper.
Thanks everyone for your patience, and I hope that you will enjoy reading this!

Thanks,
Prathmesh.

Thanks, and congratulations too!

 

[MarcT]

Hi everyone,

I am happy to share the much-awaited Q Series with MAT whitepaper.
Thanks everyone for your patience, and I hope that you will enjoy reading this!

Thanks,
Prathmesh.

Wow, from Figure 9, looks like 1% THD at 30Hz at 90dB for the Q11? Is that not pretty good for a speaker of this price? Far superior to the Q950.

 

[amarsicola]

Can't think of any other large manufacturer providing such a comprehensive piece of objective information about their products, let alone for a budget series. And measurements get confirmed by independent reviewers, e.g. check Erin's spinoramas are identical. This is being miles ahead of competition. Kef is playing in another league.

 

[amarsicola]

Kind request for Kef: please send the Q meta towers to Erin or to Amir for measurements

 

[audiofan7464]

I’m considering purchasing a pair of Q Concerto Metas as well as a Q6 Meta for primarily home theater usage. In the absence of full reviews for the Q6, does the graph in the white paper show anything of concern?

 

[amarsicola]

I’m considering purchasing a pair of Q Concerto Metas as well as a Q6 Meta for primarily home theater usage. In the absence of full reviews for the Q6, does the graph in the white paper show anything of concern?

Not at all, you can see that frequency response on axis is very linear, listening window is almost identical, early reflection and sound power are similar to on axis with a downward slope as expected. So from judging this image it is a good speaker.
An independent "objective" review would give you more details, such as compression , distortion, precise equalization parameters, preference score etc.
How much you want to bet that performance is good all along the Q range even without the proof of independent reviews is up to you. So far, independent reviews were consistent with Kef brochure on spinoramas, and spinoramas of Q series look good (but somehow improvable on entry level bookshelves).
I would personally be optimistic, and even if it turns out that Q6 has some issues (which is quite unlikely) it is the cheapest purchase of your set so regrets will be low in comparison.
You can check on spinorama.org what the best in class center channels look like, there is a page which is ranking many speakers according to Olive's preference score.
And if your store has a return policy, you could buy it and send it to Erin or to Amir to have no more doubts

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

You can check on spinorama.org what the best in class center channels look like, there is a page which is ranking many speakers according to Olive's preference score.

For someone who is new to it, it's a good thing to first read this https://www.spinorama.org/help.html page, with short but very clear explanations, info and links. An example of what you can find there:

• 'Generally precision depends on the quality of the input data. If you want to compare 2 measurements, you should select them from the same category.
• Score computations
  • The score is not significant ±0.5. It means that 2 speakers which have a difference in score less than 1 are in the same broad bucket. No point to look at the decimals.'

(Also of particular interest for someone who thinks that his speakers should be ranked higher. Or lower. )

 

[No_hair_left]

For the q4 meta which one is vertical and horizontal dispersion?
One looks to be 60 degrees and one is 40degrees? would that be why the listening window is so close to the on axis measurement, because of the high dispersion.

seriously considering swapping my cinema m6 for these as I already have ar2 meta center.

 

[ucmike11]

For the q4 meta which one is vertical and horizontal dispersion?
One looks to be 60 degrees and one is 40degrees? would that be why the listening window is so close to the on axis measurement, because of the high dispersion.

seriously considering swapping my cinema m6 for these as I already have ar2 meta center.

There is a small note below the graphs, the horizontal dispersion is top, vertical is middle, and impedance on the bottom.

 

[No_hair_left]

There is a small note below the graphs, the horizontal dispersion is top, vertical is middle, and impedance on the bottom.

View attachment 401244

Interesting, the vertical looks better then the horizontal.

 

[amarsicola]

...Or lower. )

:-D this is a scenario i could never think about... This would be realistic for a manufacturer that is afraid of having launched a budget speaker series whose performance rivals with its own higher series...
To such manufacturer my advice would be to not fear of your own capabilities but rather be proud. Progress is real when it is for the masses, provided that masses understand it.
So put your marketing effort in making everyone understand the objective value of your products and... increase manufacturing capacity: you're about to conquer the market, at least the market of "objectivist" consumers, that are trendsetters as this forum testifies. Not a bad news.

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

:-D this is a scenario i could never think about... This would be realistic for a manufacturer that is afraid of having launched a budget speaker series whose performance rivals with its own higher series...
To such manufacturer my advice would be to not fear of your own capabilities but rather be proud. Progress is real when it is for the masses, provided that masses understand it.
So put your marketing effort in making everyone understand the objective value of your products and... increase manufacturing capacity: you're about to conquer the market, at least the market of "objectivist" consumers, that are trendsetters as this forum testifies. Not a bad news.

I guess when a manufacturer would compete with himself he would compete with other brands as well. I wouldn't know how these things work, but they also determine a price for every product, of course. And timing of when a product (series) is brought to the market could play a role.
I meant (proud) owners of speakers in the first place, then the 'or lower' variant could be aplied to someone who is overly modest or is seeking reasons to buy something new.

 

[sl1982]

Looking at the whitepaper it shows the LF drivers on the Q6 as 5.25" and the website shows them as 6.5". Can anyone clarify as to which is accurate?

 

[Rõlnnbacke]

Looking at the whitepaper it shows the LF drivers on the Q6 as 5.25" and the website shows them as 6.5". Can anyone clarify as to which is accurate?

I think it must be 6.5". You can compare pictures with the Q Concerto or the larger models: All 6.5" and the same cabinet width, the same distance to the cabinet edges, etc..

 

[pthakkar24]

Looking at the whitepaper it shows the LF drivers on the Q6 as 5.25" and the website shows them as 6.5". Can anyone clarify as to which is accurate?

The size of the new LF drivers is the same (6.5") throughout the range. Q6 Meta has 2 x 6.5" LF drivers.