KEF Q350 Speaker Review

[mhardy6647]

Kef had one too:

Yup, ca. 1979. Sound(ed) better than any Bowers and Wilkins loudspeakers to my ears, too (and FWIW).

 

[Hugo9000]

KEF Reference 105 was shown at the CES in Chicago in June of 1976. See Bert Whyte's show highlights in the September 1976 issue of Audio:
Audio-1976-09-OCR-Page-0024 CES show report KEF Reference 105 June of 1976.pdf

It was available for purchase from 1977 to 1979.

Here is the brochure:
Reference_Series_Model_105_r.pdf

Here is the installation manual:
Reference_Series_Model_105_Installation_Instructions.pdf

Here is the "KEF Topics" paper on the Reference 105, printed and available to dealers and customers when the speaker was current:
KEFTOPICS_vol3no1_model105.pdf



Revisions to the loudspeaker were made, yielding the Reference 105/2 (oops, they actually called it the 105.2, the / came later in some KEF designations, after BOSE claimed the decimal point haha!), which is the version that was introduced in 1979.

 

[thewas]

Here is the "KEF Topics" paper on the Reference 105, printed and available to dealers and customers when the speaker was current:
KEFTOPICS_vol3no1_model105.pdf

Interesting that they already mention and show FR measurements at the "listening window" in 70s.

 

[tecnogadget]

Interesting that they already mention and show FR measurements at the "listening window" in 70s.

Awesome isn’t it ?? KEF remains as pioneers through the years.

“Back in the late 1960s using a Hewlett-Packard Fourier Analyzer, KEF began a joint venture with Bradford University in the UK, centered

around two questions: How does sound reflect around a rectangular room and what EQ is required to design a speaker with the perfect shape for audio response? By 1975, KEF had integrated Fourier Analysis into its design efforts, with the Model 105 being the first mass-produced speaker in the world designed through the use of waveform analysis. In the early 1970s, there were few H-P Fourier analyzers in the commercial market, mainly due to their cost – around $60,000 each. We saw that the investment was a wise one.

It’s interesting to note that while in the process of doing the first Fourier analysis of a speaker, KEF was also one of the first engineering teams to do a digital audio recording – about 20 seconds, which in 1975 was quite the feat.

Laurie Fincham, the acclaimed audio engineer who started working at KEF in 1969, explains it this way: “We started doing the Model 105 and [using computer analysis] was all very approximate, but what it did do was give [the design] a very broad distribution pattern, which gave a sort of nice ‘airy’ sound, so that the stereo image seemed to float in space rather than appear to be coming from a couple of speakers.

We started to make the Model 105 and we thought we’d use the computer to make it very accurately because it was the beginning of computer matching [of left and right speakers in a pair]. But at the time our attempt at computer matching was simply to print the frequency responses of the first fifty or so and we would look at one another and say, ‘do you have one like this?’ We decided that wasn’t particularly effective so [one of our engineers] wrote us a matching program, and that was the beginning of computerized measuring in production.”

 

[georgeT]

I was taken aback by the distortion measurements, but I just remembered amirm doesn't use a high pass when testing speakers.
It's really unfair to bookshelf speakers, full range testing should be reserved for towers.

 

[mhardy6647]

KEF Reference 105 was shown at the CES in Chicago in June of 1976. See Bert Whyte's show highlights in the September 1976 issue of Audio:
Audio-1976-09-OCR-Page-0024 CES show report KEF Reference 105 June of 1976.pdf

It was available for purchase from 1977 to 1979.

Here is the brochure:
Reference_Series_Model_105_r.pdf

Here is the installation manual:
Reference_Series_Model_105_Installation_Instructions.pdf

Here is the "KEF Topics" paper on the Reference 105, printed and available to dealers and customers when the speaker was current:
KEFTOPICS_vol3no1_model105.pdf



Revisions to the loudspeaker were made, yielding the Reference 105/2 (oops, they actually called it the 105.2, the / came later in some KEF designations, after BOSE claimed the decimal point haha!), which is the version that was introduced in 1979.

I was guesstimating where I was in my collegiate arc the first time I saw and heard the original series 105s at Soundscape in Baltimore -- I was close!

They made quite an impression on me.

 

[MZKM]

I was taken aback by the distortion measurements, but I just remembered amirm doesn't use a high pass when testing speakers.
It's really unfair to bookshelf speakers, full range testing should be reserved for towers.

90% of people using these don’t have a subwoofer and run them full range.

 

[georgeT]

90% of people using these don’t have a subwoofer and run them full range.

Well, that's not very good practice. Even a cheap 10" sub would make a great difference.

 

[wwenze]

Directivity control due to coaxial driver seems to create a much more of a point source which many people think they like, but was not my cup of tea.

So @amirm , with quite a few coaxial speakers measured (multiple KEFs, 2 ELACs), can this statement apply to coax speakers in general?

I know it's a subjective thing, but I find myself preferring speakers shooting wide, sideways, even backwards towards the wall...

 

[ttimer]

Well, that's not very good practice. Even a cheap 10" sub would make a great difference.

I agree with @MZKM that subwoofer are rarely used in practice for stereo. Especially with inexpensive speakers like the Q350. Properly setting up and integrating a subwoofer requires a lot of time and effort. Not to mention that many people choose bookshelf speakers because they don't have a lot of space and subwoofers need space if you want to place them properly.

 

[s10sondek]

Great review (as all are on this site)! Could someone please add this speaker to the Speaker Review and Measurement Index? The KEF Q350 doesn't appear in the table for some reason, and I'm sure many folks would find its inclusion helpful!

 

[samsa]

Properly setting up and integrating a subwoofer requires a lot of time and effort.

But definitely worth it. And, with the addition of a little technology (say, by minidsp), it's not even that hard.

Not to mention that many people choose bookshelf speakers because they don't have a lot of space and subwoofers need space if you want to place them properly.

A good set of floor-standers take up considerably more space. And they offer less latitude in placement than a subwoofer.

I don't know what the statistics are on how many people pair a set of bookshelf speakers with a subwoofer for stereo listening. But more people should.

 

[georgeT]

Properly setting up and integrating a subwoofer requires a lot of time and effort.

Actually it's super easy, barely an inconvenience, adding a subwoofer also protects your mains from over excursion.

 

[_Bass]

let me cast another vote that bookshelves should be paired with subs. Matter of fact that may give you better results due to the fact that you can place the sub optimally vs Towers being placed non optimally for low frequencies reproduction. To me when I look at the reviews I am really examining how the spinoramas look down to about 80 Hz.

 

[ttimer]

Actually it's super easy, barely an inconvenience, adding a subwoofer also protects your mains from over excursion.

Let me quote you something written yesterday right here on this forum, by a member who is very practiced in setting up audio equipment and should be able to integrate a sub quickly with no effort whatsoever:

Blending a sub with a speaker is a lot of work. Even with an auto-eq I have to go through the hassle of their measurements, etc. Then I have to listen and write-up with and without sub impressions.

Again, expecting bookshelf speakers to always be paired with subwoofers is just not a reflection of reality and also doesn't align with how the manufacturers design these speakers. There is a different class of speakers to be used exclusively as part of sub+sat system, but we haven't seen amir measure one of those, yet.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Well, that's not very good practice. Even a cheap 10" sub would make a great difference.

Not everybody has space and unless you put a lot of effort in a sub is very hard to integrate well. It is only in recent years people have started recommending them at all, for most of my time as a hifi enthusiast the absence of some sort of DSP integration software meant they were almost always worse, quality wise, if perhaps more quantity!

 

[maty]

To facilitate integration, I always recommend, over and over, subwoofers that allow phase regulation and not only switch between 0º and 180º. In Europe, the largest manufacturer of loudspeakers is the German Canton, which has a multitude of different subwoofers, all of them with adjustable phase. At very affordable prices.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...nside-pics-subjective-review.4543/post-327709

Canton AS 85.3 SC

0º, 30º, 60º, 90º, 120º, 150º and 180º. Now € 245.99 at https://www.amazon.de/dp/B071NW3QJL/

Others Canton subwoofer: https://www.amazon.de/s?k=canton+su...E=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&qid=1591609542&ref=sr_st_review-rank

First one sub. Later, if you liked, a second same subwoofer.

 

[maty]

If I had a BIG room and I could enjoy it to listen to my music whenever I wanted, DIY Dual open baffle woofers with servo control by Danny Richie (GR-Research). Conditioning a room, spending enough money on electronics and loudspeakers so that later you can not enjoy it ... then you need a second audio system.

http://gr-research.com/diysubwooferkits.aspx
-> http://gr-research.com/servosubkit4.aspx

You can listen to this open subwoofer, with very good sound recording, here:

YouTube X-LS Review | Sound Clips with Commentary

Very impressive basssssssssss.

 

[Bds3151]

Wow. "...So, reasonably good objective measurements but doesn't do it for me.." But I thought measurements are the only thing that mattered? The group absolutely slaughters anyone who issues subjective listening reviews but the site owner now contradicts his testing with a listening review in conflict with the objective testing.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Wow. "...So, reasonably good objective measurements but doesn't do it for me.." But I thought measurements are the only thing that mattered? The group absolutely slaughters anyone who issues subjective listening reviews but the site owner now contradicts his testing with a listening review in conflict with the objective testing.

Did you just landed here? Speakers reviews often contain subjective impressions which sometimes are in contradiction with objective datas... And that is from the beginning.

Plus, the Q350 doesn't measure "stellar" either. No issue it didn't wow Amir.

Also, please avoid apples (speakers) and oranges (electronics) comparisons when it comes to subjective listening vs objective data.