Kef R Meta Series Release

[Streamc]

Gave it to my Slovak partner. Piss poor review. The only sentence of substance he said that bass was more precise and it wasn’t throwing bass at him like old R7 which was something he didn’t like before. Then he talks about using different microphone for this comparison and hoping we will hear the difference even though it’s uploaded to YouTube blah blah blah.

Hope no.

 

[Mnyb]

With the current pricing . It’s more of should I get LS60 or R7/R11 + amplifiers

 

[Snoopy]

The blue R3 Meta is sweet! Saving my money for sure!

Saving up money as well for sure the Walnut ones look rather nice too. I wonder what other competition is there in that 2200€ range for a stereo pair.

 

[dogmamann]

Saving up money as well for sure the Walnut ones look rather nice too. I wonder what other competition is there in that 2200€ range for a stereo pair.

If you blindly believe, coaxials are superior to traditional two ways and low distortion matters a lot at sane loudness levels, then nothing. Otherwise there is an ocean of speakers with different strengths, some of which Kef cannot do. There is a high possibility that it would win some of the measurement awards, but no, not everyone who goes into a store with 2200 euros would go back with a KEF. Soundstage width on older R series was poor than some speakers costing half of it. For someone who values that, KEF is definitely an inferior product.

 

[Alexx]

@Dogmamann:I Agree, there are many other brands on the market.

I only like 3-way speakers and this makes choosing other brands too difficult for me, kef is one of the few that adopts this system.

In a way I like Kef because it has a balanced sound, the high frequencies are never sibilant its "S" "Z" "C" etc. some people find them a bit closed but they are too personal tastes...

They sure don't have competitive prices! that's for sure.

They will be available in Italy in a month, let's hope I'll have made a decision.
See you soon.

 

[Vacceo]

I think it is quite evident that this R series, just like the previous, are designed with home theatres in mind. In that regard, I wonder why KEF wanted a THX certification for the architectural speakers but not for this series. Is it just a cost thing and, just by performance but they could actually get THX certification if KEF sent them?

Looking at distortion, sensitivity and power requirements, they do not seem to be far from the Perlisen R series. That leads me to question the coments from Gene in Audioholics considering that coaxials are not a great option for HT due to dynamic range and SPL limitation. This speakers can sound quite loud with a very low distortion, so peaks in films should not be an issue.

Now I hope that the next step for KEF is a KS subwoofer update with XLR that can get significant output in the single digit frequencies.

 

[Daka]

With the current pricing . It’s more of should I get LS60 or R7/R11 + amplifiers

Ls60 will have higher drop in resale value - out of warranty it will crater. So as long as you happy to stay with them till they die. Otherwise active speaker can do things passive cannot. But then there is a matter of size and matter of looks.

 

[JRS]

One can only assume the difference in weight is a thinner cabinet or one with less bracing, possibly because resonances are less of an issue with the meta material. Interestingly it seems the entire line-up has higher sensitivity than the prior gen. That's probably going to be biggest audible upgrade

IIRC, many pages ago it was mentioned that the new cabs use some CLD and hence were able to shave some thickness off.

 

[JRS]

If you blindly believe, coaxials are superior to traditional two ways and low distortion matters a lot at sane loudness levels, then nothing. Otherwise there is an ocean of speakers with different strengths, some of which Kef cannot do. There is a high possibility that it would win some of the measurement awards, but no, not everyone who goes into a store with 2200 euros would go back with a KEF. Soundstage width on older R series was poor than some speakers costing half of it. For someone who values that, KEF is definitely an inferior product.

This has been discussed in depth during some reviews of the R3 and is far from the conclusion that a wider soundstage is better. Instead the consensus seems to be that a less directive speaker is able to benefit from the sidewall reflections giving the illusion of a soundstage extending laterally beyond the dimensions of the speakers. However, like almost all other engineergng parameters, this comes with costs, namely a loss of precision in lateral placement and loss of the info used to construe s sense of depth to the soundstage. In other words one picks their poison based on preference and perhaps the liveliness of ones room--a dead room benefitting from greater lateral dispersion.

 

[Daka]

This has been discussed in depth during some reviews of the R3 and is far from the conclusion that a wider soundstage is better. Instead the consensus seems to be that a less directive speaker is able to benefit from the sidewall reflections giving the illusion of a soundstage extending laterally beyond the dimensions of the speakers. However, like almost all other engineergng parameters, this comes with costs, namely a loss of precision in lateral placement and loss of the info used to construe s sense of depth to the soundstage. In other words one picks their poison based on preference and perhaps the liveliness of ones room--a dead room benefitting from greater lateral dispersion.

Still KEF managed with ls50 metas and reference meta to just do that. I’m quite confident new R meta will show wider dispersion also.

 

[dogmamann]

@Dogmamann:I Agree, there are many other brands on the market.

I only like 3-way speakers and this makes choosing other brands too difficult for me, kef is one of the few that adopts this system.

In a way I like Kef because it has a balanced sound, the high frequencies are never sibilant its "S" "Z" "C" etc. some people find them a bit closed but they are too personal tastes...

They sure don't have competitive prices! that's for sure.

They will be available in Italy in a month, let's hope I'll have made a decision.
See you soon.

Speakers with more energy on top end always doesn’t produce Sibilance.

 

[Daka]

I think it is quite evident that this R series, just like the previous, are designed with home theatres in mind. In that regard, I wonder why KEF wanted a THX certification for the architectural speakers but not for this series. Is it just a cost thing and, just by performance but they could actually get THX certification if KEF sent them?

Looking at distortion, sensitivity and power requirements, they do not seem to be far from the Perlisen R series. That leads me to question the coments from Gene in Audioholics considering that coaxials are not a great option for HT due to dynamic range and SPL limitation. This speakers can sound quite loud with a very low distortion, so peaks in films should not be an issue.

Now I hope that the next step for KEF is a KS subwoofer update with XLR that can get significant output in the single digit frequencies.

Well depends what HT application are we talking about. There are home theater rooms where speakers with 110db max spl just won’t cut it. Otherwise KEF architectural speakers have wide dispersion and being single point of sound source with Uniq have its own advantages over traditional layouts.

 

[Snoopy]

If you blindly believe, coaxials are superior to traditional two ways and low distortion matters a lot at sane loudness levels, then nothing. Otherwise there is an ocean of speakers with different strengths, some of which Kef cannot do. There is a high possibility that it would win some of the measurement awards, but no, not everyone who goes into a store with 2200 euros would go back with a KEF. Soundstage width on older R series was poor than some speakers costing half of it. For someone who values that, KEF is definitely an inferior product.

Well if I upgrade from Wharfedale Evo 4.2 to Kef R3 meta it would be roughly 3.5 times more money spend and I would expect a big leap in performance.

But at the same time it wouldn't be that much more than I paid for my Meze Liric headphones.

(But that's just a upgrade idea for the future)

 

[dogmamann]

Still KEF managed with ls50 metas and reference meta to just do that. I’m quite confident new R meta will show wider dispersion also.

Nope. Ls50 metas are better in that regard if only Kef speakers are considered. If you compare them to brands with really broader dispersion even below it’s price class, they still loose easily. Also, it’s a misconception that other speakers won’t image like Kef. They do, if placed right, but only downside is listening sweetspot with this imaging is smaller. But most audiophile people so at the same spot everyday for listening sessions, and therefore for many of them this advantage is overlooked.

For a listener who sits at the same spot, the benefits of other brands over kefs should also be taken into consideration before settling on them. I had demoed r7 and r3 and many other speakers in the same rooms many times, unless I had read all the lectures and has my bias about them, (that they had better engineering) I wouldn’t have felt them as anything special.

If anything it’s not easy to overlook the roll off on highs, and narrow soundstage in comparison in 30 minutes.

 

[Vacceo]

Well depends what HT application are we talking about. There are home theater rooms where speakers with 110db max spl just won’t cut it. Otherwise KEF architectural speakers have wide dispersion and being single point of sound source with Uniq have its own advantages over traditional layouts.

Large spaces eat SPL (and with it, watts) like a hungry bear, that is quite evident. What stroke my curiosity was the fact that, sensitivity wise and SPL wise, if I take the published data from the Perlisten R and the KEF R series, both are pretty much toe to toe. While Gene praises Perlisten (and for good reason), he has reservations with KEF.

In all honesty, I got the quote from Gene not pointing out at a specific KEF device and when he said it, the R Meta was not released. Even though he is not personally a great fan of KEF for HT duties, I also think he´s also honest enough to measure and compare if he has the chance as he did with Sigberg coaxials.

Perhaps the bottom line is that really, really good speakers are more similar than different in their final performance; just like really, really good electronics are more similar than different.

Nope. Ls50 metas are better in that regard if only Kef speakers are considered. If you compare them to brands with really broader dispersion even below it’s price class, they still loose easily. Also, it’s a misconception that other speakers won’t image like Kef. They do, if placed right, but only downside is listening sweetspot with this imaging is smaller. But most audiophile people so at the same spot everyday for listening sessions, and therefore for many of them this advantage is overlooked.

For a listener who sits at the same spot, the benefits of other brands over kefs should also be taken into consideration before settling on them. I had demoed r7 and r3 and many other speakers in the same rooms many times, unless I had read all the lectures and has my bias about them, (that they had better engineering) I wouldn’t have felt them as anything special.

If anything it’s not easy to overlook the roll off on highs, and narrow soundstage in comparison in 30 minutes.

The usual benefit of coaxials is that they are typically easier to set and more forgiving when you have to take placement compromises (slightly different altitude with booshelves, irregular areas for floorstanders...). Of course, you have to give something for that, and it typically is width, but in certain cases that is actually an advantage as you also get a bit less room interaction.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Which coaxial driver is better , Genelec Ones or KEF Uni-Q?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Which coaxial driver is better , Genelec Ones or KEF Uni-Q?

I think both brands solve the coaxial problems and can make awesome coaxial drivers, that being said KEF make a step forward with the meta thing.
-------------

Looks like more interesting buy some kf92 instead of upgrade the r7 to r7 meta.. the only pain is high pass the r7

 

[Alexx]

Indeed, with the money saved, you can invest in a good subwoofer.

This is also an interesting thing.

If metamaterial were so fundamental I wonder why Proac-Harbeth-Tannoy........ (important and expensive brands that know how to build loudspeakers) have not adopted something like this.

I repeat the same question once again, has anyone in the forum had the opportunity to listen to the new models? (in Italy everything always comes out last) and it doesn't count.
See you soon.

 

[dogmamann]

I think both brands solve the coaxial problems and can make awesome coaxial drivers, that being said KEF make a step forward with the meta thing.
-------------

Looks like more interesting buy some kf92 instead of upgrade the r7 to r7 meta.. the only pain is high pass the r7

already the treble response on the r7 was quite rolled off than most speakers in its price class, additionally the tweeter sits quite low below ear level to make it worse.

Now let’s add more bass to make it worse. Yeah if the type of sound someone likes is the kind of of a boombox, yes Two KF 92s will do it right !

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

already the treble response on the r7 was quite rolled off than most speakers in its price class, additionally the tweeter sits quite low below ear level to make it worse.

Now let’s add more bass to make it worse. Yeah if the type of sound someone likes is the kind of of a boombox, yes Two KF 92s will do it right !

Yeah but is not like all kind of music sounds good with neutral top-end FR treble..., can you imagine HipHop / Rap music sound more plesant with neutral treble? it might will sound kind of boring and very harsh.

I have EQ the treble and it's sound fine, but thats because i want a neutral treble not everyone want the same FR. Also because the UNIQ it's point source it's vertical dispersion performance is very good, so the '' height '' is not that important as it looks like.





That's being said, as far as i know/remember you didn't have any problem with the bass from ur 7k, and the r7 gives the same kind of bass until die. ( 105dB both towers ) the R11 by other hand can handle more sub bass than both of these at higher spl due to it's 4 woofers. But in my small room i got a bass like a ref5 can do in normal rooms (of course, much bigger room than mine), only because i got some nice bass reinforcement in my room..

But remember, not all rooms can give you bass-gain, most of the room do the opposite...


My plan is getting 2 KF92, because if i move into a bigger room i will not get anywhere near the bass performance of this room.., and the bass performance is very important to me. I find fun playing some games in my R7s too and listening music with lots of bass.

And i'm pretty sure if i let the r7 play 80hz-20khz it will sound better, the IMD in the woofer area should be better (like any speaker).