Kef R Meta Series Release

[Daka]

It would be indeed.
I have Tekton Impact Monitors (dual 6.5's per speaker)and they have about the same bass output as the Lintons. (to my ear the Tektons are a touch more articulate though and Lintons warmer)

So the above said I have several, inexpensive Dayton Audio 8" DIY 'not quite' subs that I use for various testing. Those are budget 8's https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton-Audio-DCS205-4-8-Classic-Subwoofer-4-Ohm-295-200?quantity=1

Just 2 of these each in .9cuft ported boxes tuned to 35hrz have better and more available bass than either the Tektons or the Lintons, they also beat the afformentioned JBL L82's but not by much and I did prefer the absolute bass quality of the L82's so I would reccomend those be paired with substantial subs to make good gains(I used dual high output 15's crossed to the L82's at 50hrz)

There is no replacement for dispacement - and it is even better if it is a larger driver so sensitivity can be high. You can make a 6.5" woofer with huge xmax and therefore higher output potential but then you give up loads of sensitivity as the cone has to be very ridgid(thick and weighty) to handle 13mm of xmax. In an active that works but not in a passive where the lowest sensitivity driver sets the baseline.

The R3's woofer cone is quite thin and flexible even. I think to keep sensitivty resonable in the design. That R3 woofer is not a highoutput low bass driver.


I hear yah. I do think the R3's are superb speakers. (if not excatly for me)
That said just to beat this drum one more post, I honestly think it is currently wishfull thinking in audiophiledome to have a pair of small woofer monitors that have size bellying bass (for farfield use in not small rooms). Decent, deep and extension bass sure -even very satisfying bass, but top tier 40-80hrz bass from a pair 6's. I have not found that pair yet. Probabily a marketing illusion with the possible exceptions of the Purifi and the Epique 6.5's - those DIY units might be close in the right hands.

My BMR monitors have just wonderful 40-80hrz bass at modest to mid loud SPL for example but paired with subs it is just better. Plus when some really heavy shhyt hits the subs will play music and not something else ---- and no port noise. (I ended up with 70hrz for the BMR HP with subs and they need a 32-35hrz/36dbo HP if running full range as ultra low bass hurts that 6.)

I mean if someone spends some real money on excellent speakers and great subs. Why try to work the R3's harder? There is no benefit of any kind. They can play reasonable sounds at 50hrz but honestly the sub will do much better there. There is no question unless the sub is of low quality. Sure untill you get a sub or if subs are not an option then go with letting the R3's handle the depths. Once the sub(s) are in play what is the point? Almost no 6.5" driver can fill a medium room with 50hrz bass that is clean, clear and dynamic and is also not producing IMD and compressing. I really think at 80-85db average SPL with peaking into the 90's the R3's need subs and 80hrz crossover unless the room is small. (in the high 80's avg SPl they def do) If you get time try setting up some similar sized monitors with subs and play around.

Well anyway, I am sorry for the tangent. Be cool to see what the full Rmeta story is.

Oh yeah there is a big question why go lower if your sub can do it at much lower distortion. Even more so if you have two. Some people even prefer slightly higher crossover like 90Hz for that reason. But some other people, with big floor-standers run it full range and claim it does make difference - directional bass. But same can be achieved on some processors with subs. And that’s why R3 is so popular in HT space

 

[VintageFlanker]

Need some research. I do not see them as bright speaker.

I personally do. As predicted in-room FR says it could.

I've heard much worse, tho. I would say: "north side of neutral"

 

[JRS]

I'm pretty sure the R3 titanium grey will be mine. I already want to be convinced !

(Had all my equipment and DYI gear ripped off). So starting from scratch.

I was vacillating between Elac Debut 6.2's and the R3: now I have a definite game plan--buy the Elacs now while saving $$ for future R3 buy. By then all should be sorted re extracting max performance from the 3's. The Elac's can then head to the bedroom or possibly back channels. Can't tell you what a relief it is to get this meta-anxiety shelved.

 

[SlothRock]

With anyone that has the current R series - are a pair of R3's or R7's & an R2C + Sub sufficient for a large, open room for home theater? Currently have Klipsch R600M's & a 504C center + sub and the volume levels are more than sufficient

 

[exm]

Like I said it will depend on your room size, SPL levels and of course the amount of bass in your media.

The R3 uses 2 6.5" woofers in a pair. That is a bit less than 1 single 8" subwoofer is terms of SD and I guarantee you the XMAX of the R3 woofers is no where near what even a modest 8" sub would have.

So if I have a solid ported 8" sub with say 10mm Xmax and the R3 pair with 2, 6.5" drivers with say 5mm Xmax the 8" sub already can move twice as much air cleanly. 1 single 8".
This is just physics. You decide. IME there are almost no 6.5" driver based system that work well at 50hrz at higher SPL and certainly not as good as any decent sub or multiple subs.

Yah, if you have them in nearfield, a small room or play at modest SPL and or just don't do much bass conetnt they will be fine @50hrz or even full range.
Personally I only use monitors full range for testing, I always prefer them with subs for enjoyment listening and generally find they work best at a crossover point a bit higher than some folks would imagine.
Especially as the R3's can handle incredible SPL above 80-90hrz, but that same SPL down low will blow them out.
If you still have them try crossoing your R3's higher and spend some time getting a good blend and then switch back and forth. Tell me what you think/find.

Anecdotaly, IME you can't just look at the charts. In my room when using pink noise @83db avg SPL and setting PEQ the R3 appears to excite bass just as much as the JBL L82 did(each L82 uses a 8" woofer/not subwoofer). In reality when playing music back and doing so fairly loudly the L82 spank the R3's in bass output and bass extension from about 60-80hrz down. Like not even close. In the end do what you need to.

The quality of woofers matters. I have owned the R11 (4x6.5" per speaker), the R900 (2x8" per speaker) and now the Reference 5 (4x6.5" per speaker). In my opinion the R900 was better than the R11, and the Reference 5 is clearly the superior speaker. I was surprised how much tighter and deeper the Reference drivers were in comparison to the R900s. The R11s always lacked the deep bass I was used to in my 1990 Reference Fours.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

With anyone that has the current R series - are a pair of R3's or R7's & an R2C + Sub sufficient for a large, open room for home theater? Currently have Klipsch R600M's & a 504C center + sub and the volume levels are more than sufficient

You need to define large and your avg listening SPL.

My large would require the R7 plus 2 subs and the center.

 

[Jukebox]

I can't see KEF offering an upgrade for existing R users, but it would be cool if they did.

In my opinion 99.99% they will not offer an upgrade for older R series

 

[Jukebox]

Are you sure? What are your sources? They clearly name it “R6C” without the word “Meta”. Having the letter “C” itself doesn’t match R2 Meta name. If R6C has metamaterial why the different naming convention?

View attachment 261587

I’ll just wait for the official announcement from KEF.

Typo, mistake...who cares? it's with Meta of course...why is this even a discussion?
How in the world they could bring out the Meta series with a non Meta center speaker, are you joking or something? )

PS it's written on the speaker in your pictures, Below the Uniq: Meta Material Absorption

 

[VintageFlanker]

I can't see KEF offering an upgrade for existing R users, but it would be cool if they did.

Not gonna happen.

In my opinion 99.99% they will not offer an upgrade for older R series

To state the obvious: It is indeed 100%.

Absolutely no way that KEF comes with that in mind.

 

[dogmamann]

Seen a review on YouTube with Dirac rep and he mentioned few things:
- it will be limited to 150Hz for starter - it’s planned to go higher in the future
- he mentioned subwoofers as being most capable to perform this task provided you have few - this was most surprising and not surprising at the same time - it wasn't mentioned by anyone else but makes perfect sense as subs are capable to go flat through 150Hz (typically)
- StormAudio has exclusivity till Autumn
- rollout on other processors will depend on their manufacturers, apparently ART will require 20% extra processing power, which I recon shouldn’t be problem typically, but manufacturers, majority of which struggle in software department, to implement this… for free…
Btw Macintosh released new Dirac AV processor 7.2.4 - wonder if Amir will get hands on it.

Not to deviate from this too much - any guesses when KEF will update their page? Anyone knows how it was in 2014 or 2017 when they presented gear at ISE?

If m not wrong , the current r series came to market in 2018

 

[Streamc]

I personally do. As predicted in-room FR says it could.
View attachment 261633View attachment 261634
I've heard much worse, tho. I would say: "north side of neutral"

Word 'estimated'. Also there is no big deviation from curve in term of dB.

Sure, people are going to have different tastes and they also have different levels of expereinces with other speakers.
They may also be trying to get a little to much out of the charts posted here and elsewhere.

Whatever I definiety am onboard with trying various PEQ to get what one wants.

My opinion is not difinitive by any means and I realize others will take something else away when using them, after testing about 40 speakers sets in the last 3 years the R3 was not bright to me in my space. That said while I like a variety of presentations I do tend to prefer a speaker with a large and 'vivid' or 'vibrant' or 'real' sound that can sound rich when it needs to but allows for that attack and edge that some music just requires IMHO. The R3 while good was not really those things always sounding great but staying ever so slightly tame. I always say they sounded like great speakers, while my favorites sound more like great live sound.
Of course, who knows - love to redo many speaker I have tried blind to their identity... maybe next time.

In any case my in room measurements are more even that the 'predicted' set that ASR posts. In my space when the room energy reaches equilibrium I did not have much of the bump above 3k and I did have some bit of dip from 1-2.5k. Of course Amir could draw the line differently. In any case that doesn't really tell the whole story, but it is interesting.

Would be interested to read your R3 Meta review.

 

[Descartes]

So much speculation!

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Word 'estimated'. Also there is no big deviation from curve in term of dB.

Would be interested to read your R3 Meta review.

Do you know how in-room FR are calculated and how to read them?

 

[VintageFlanker]

Do you know how in-room FR are calculated and how to read them?

My guess is that he has no clue what it is.

 

[Streamc]

Do you know how in-room FR are calculated and how to read them?

I do not see big deviation of measurements from estimated curve. This is not explanation. In reality picture is different.
1-2dB is not catastrophic.

 

[JustJones]

Have no idea why you want to compare the R3 to these other 2 speakers but the treble hump is fairly obvious.

 

[Streamc]

View attachment 261685


View attachment 261686

View attachment 261687
Have no idea why you want to compare the R3 to these other 2 speakers but the treble hump is fairly obvious.

Relatively.
But agree.
Also even Neumann is not perfect.
And Genelec is not perfect from 100 to 500Hz. It's comparable to R3.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I do not see big deviation of measurements from estimated curve. This is not explanation. In reality picture is different.
1-2dB is not catastrophic.

No not catastrophic at all. R3 are excellent speakers. Many others don’t come even close. But in some rooms they might be perceived as a bit bright (as the data from @VintageFlanker showed). Only one way to find out - listen at home.

And that is exactly the reason why I think it is futile to describe individual listening impressions. Everyone has a different room plus on top certainly different preferences and biases and different associations with the adjectives describing perceptions.

I listened at home and partly owned R700, Reference 1, Reference 3 and 5 and also changed houses in between. The change in houses (rooms) had a much bigger influence then the difference of the speakers btw.

I stayed with the Reference 3 and two KF92 and me writing here about my subjective impressions (non level matched and sighted) would be a waste of my time and everyone else’s having to read it. ;-)

 

[Streamc]

No not catastrophic at all. R3 are excellent speakers. Many others don’t come even close. But in some rooms they might be perceived as a bit bright. Only one way to find out - listen at home.

And that is exactly the reason why I think it is futile to describe individual listening impressions. Everyone has a different room plus on top certainly different preferences and biases and different associations with the adjectives describing perceptions.

I listened at home and partly owned R700, Reference 1, Reference 3 and 5 and also changed houses in between. The change in houses (rooms) had a much bigger influence then the difference of the speakers btw.

I stayed with the Reference 3 and two KF92 and me writing here about my subjective impressions (non level matched and sighted) would be a waste of my time and everyone else’s having to read it. ;-)

Great choice.

 

[dogmamann]

View attachment 261685


View attachment 261686

View attachment 261687
Have no idea why you want to compare the R3 to these other 2 speakers but the treble hump is fairly obvious.

Also, that’s at a fatigue prone area. Now I think may be there is a reason why the floorstanders have rhe midrange bit below the ear level. When you measure it the measurement is done on the midrange axis. But in reality when you hear it, your ear is somewhere in between the top woofer and rhe midrage or directly facing the woofer. So, that bass slightly drowns the treble hotness.