KEF Q350 Speaker Review

[panblue43]

Dry?

It depends where you listen to them when I listen to them in the pool they sound damp!

 

[panblue43]

In a pool only jbl plays

 

[crappypanther]

It's high time to understand that Q350 only sound good after equalization

 

[panblue43]

Yessir! ;-) I use my amp without tone,eq,loudness etc.A good combination not needs these..

 

[staticV3]

A good combination not needs these..

On the flip side, no combination on earth cannot be further improved with EQ and loudness.

 

[panblue43]

on mini-midi systems or on weak audio chains or with poor room acoustics maybe need the eq and other things.
My room boosts about 40 Hz,I changed my tower ls to bookshelves several years ago..
and sell my sub too.

 

[billou5767]

Q350 meta is arrive to remplace it

price 100 e more than the original , but with speaker protection

 

[Count Dacula]

How about some free replacement drivers that are not made from rice paper?

 

[lach1234]

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/develop/datas/eq/KEF%20Q350/iir-autoeq.txt

In case it’s useful to anyone, I used the above EQ (just the values above 500hz) in combination with an EQ from in-room measurements using REW (below 500hz) and have been really happy with the results. I can post the graphs later if anyone is interested. From what I can tell, the linked eq worked to correct the issues with the speakers (which then measured well in room) and the room-measured eq sorted out the lower frequencies.

 

[Jazigo]

It's mentioned here:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-speakers/710918-revel-owners-thread-399.html#post56105466

I assume it originally came from Toole.

I am a big fan of KEF and owns a pair of KEF Q1 Meta (which I love). The post from avsforum was very interesting for me, so I decided to check it out myself. My local dealer of KEF hardware, was so kind to let me borrow a listing room and test between the KEF LS 50 Meta and the KEF R3 Meta (stand-in for the Revel M106).

To my surprise, the IMD was very easy to notice when I went from the LS 50 Meta to the R3 Meta. I thought that it would be a academical difference at best, but it very cleary heard. So the test from Harman was right - the two-way coaxial speaker has some IMD issues.

With that said, I would also like to add that it was also very easy to notice the extra speaker in the R3 Meta. It is cleary two elements playing sounds, that are different from each other. This can't be heard on the LS 50 Meta.

So there is a compromise here; LS 50 Meta: single point of source, more IMD - R3 Meta: Less IMD, two point of source.

I guess this is going to an unpopular opinon, but after listing trough my regular songs, I must say that I prefer the LS 50 Meta over the R3 Meta. One single point of sound is a better trade off in my book.

 

[lddo133]

The reason there is a boost in the 100-200Hz range seems to be due to the 2.5 way network. In other words, it seems to have occurred because the subwoofer's sound pressure reduction was not sufficiently designed. Or, if it is a 3 way, it seems that the sound pressure reduction in the midrange's 100-200Hz range was not properly implemented. It seems to have occurred because, since it is a cheap speaker, some of the parts necessary to maintain sufficient performance were not installed.

 

[Jazigo]

Well, you can have both in a better speaker design. There are also several other areas an improved speaker design will perform better at. Welcome to Norway if you want to have a listen.

Which speaker design are we talking about then? (Hei fra Trondheim)