David, thanks for the response. Do you have plans ro support owners of non-meta speakers in this regard? For some this issue is a no-go, really. I had a hard time with it myself, and only succeeded halfway.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
KEF R Series with MAT white paper
- Thread starter davidbosch
- Start date
diddley
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Quality all the way.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #43
Hi @sarumbear , that sounds like a serious setup. Both speakers of the CiXXXXREFM-THX type, 5160 and 3160 have just been released with a metamaterial absorber on the tweeter as you point out. The CiXXXXRL-THX speakers (also 5160 and 3160) have been in the market for a while now so don't have MAT, which we have been introducing into our line-up since LS50 Meta. Adding MAT does take some time as we take the opportunity to redesign the Uni-Q and crossovers (in some cases LF drivers too) and do a lot of system modifications.
Love the whitepaper. One thing I've been curious about - on the R5, R7 and R11 are there essentially 2 base enclosures separated by the diagonal brace? I've sort of assumed that the upper and lower ports can therefore be adjusted separately- or am I actually wasting my time? Wouldn't the first occurrence of the latter... Certainly the differences, if any, are rather subtle.
windwolf447
Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2021
- Messages
- 20
- Likes
- 61
Hi @davidbosch and many thanks for providing this white paper, fantastic.
I'm curious as to whether you have any more data you could provide on the Q series? My setup consists of Q750, Q650c, Q150 and 4xQ50a in a 5.1.4 setup, and I have seen data for the Q150, Q350 and Q650c, but would love to see data on the floorstanders in the range.
Obviously they're a little lower in the food chain, but I'm very happy with the setup.
I'm curious as to whether you have any more data you could provide on the Q series? My setup consists of Q750, Q650c, Q150 and 4xQ50a in a 5.1.4 setup, and I have seen data for the Q150, Q350 and Q650c, but would love to see data on the floorstanders in the range.
Obviously they're a little lower in the food chain, but I'm very happy with the setup.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #47
Hi @pjn that's right, on the floorstanding models the LF section is divided into two enclosures. The main reason is that you want the biggest dimension of the enclosure (the height in this case) to be shorter to move the first longitudinal acoustical resonance (standing wave) higher in frequency, since it's being excited by the asymmetrical position of the LF driver(s) along this dimension. So if say, you have a standing wave at around 400 Hz with two enclosures (happening in both), you'd have that standing wave at around 200 Hz with one enclosure. You want to move this frequency higher where the LF output is already attenuated as the crossover to the MF has begun and it will also likely be easier to damp with wadding, plus with two enclosures you'd be able to use twice the wadding on the velocity antinode of the resonance. The brace also adds stiffness to the cabinet walls, which being long, also want to resonate lower in frequency. The positions of the ports are determined so that the leakage of the standing waves is minimal. The upper and lower ports are the same, the enclosure volume is roughly the same, so the tuning of the two enclosures ends up being similar. However, you can certainly play with partially or totally closing up either or both of the ports (with the foam bungs provided) to tailor the response of the speaker in your room if the walls are more rigid and/or closer than usual. I find the lower port tends to have the biggest effect since it's loaded by the ground boundary more than the upper port.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #48
Hi @Joffy1780 , That's a really sweet setup. Q Series wasn't accompanied by a white paper when it was launched (in 2017 I think?) so I'm afraid I don't think I can share any info that's not published, plus it was before we started publishing Spinoramas. There's some good measurements done by reviewers in the public domain, particularly Q350. I really like what the Q series achieves for its price. The Uni-Q works really well and also reproduces bass in a sealed enclosure in the floorstanding models. The directivity is also particularly smooth.
No problem, thanks for replying. They are certainly great value and I'm very happy with them.
I can't see myself choosing another manufacturer if I ever do upgrade.
BrokenEnglishGuy
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
- Messages
- 2,110
- Likes
- 1,283
Sorry guys but i have to do this. Since you guys are very gentle answering the questions.
Since often there is some people with the impulse response graph and saying the woofers is lagging vs the uniq, any comments about this?
A member here posted a review and also the impulse response image from the review, but the reviewer say this interesting thing:
alpha-audio.net
Post from the member here:
www.audiosciencereview.com
--------------------------------
This was my question about the post from the member (same page):
www.audiosciencereview.com
Since often there is some people with the impulse response graph and saying the woofers is lagging vs the uniq, any comments about this?
A member here posted a review and also the impulse response image from the review, but the reviewer say this interesting thing:
Measurements and images from the reviewer are here:
Multitest bookshelf speakers - 2500 Euro - part 3
Intro Contents 1. Intro2. ATC SCM113. Elac Vela BS4034. KEF R3 Meta5. Monitor Audio Gold 1006. RoundingCommentsWe have already reached the final part of this triptych. Finally, we have heard fourteen bookshelf speakers pass by. That’s a lot of speakers. And we tested them not on one but on two...
alpha-audio.net
Post from the member here:
KEF R3 meta Measurements
No. Again, the difference is huge, at least with KEF's excellent coaxial driver. It is not that hard to do the test yourself, with the tweeter filter. One box and is compared to the other without altering. And two or more people (ears). A "cheap" bypass cap: CORNELL DUBILIER 940C Film Capacitor...
www.audiosciencereview.com
--------------------------------
This was my question about the post from the member (same page):
KEF R3 meta Measurements
No. Again, the difference is huge, at least with KEF's excellent coaxial driver. It is not that hard to do the test yourself, with the tweeter filter. One box and is compared to the other without altering. And two or more people (ears). A "cheap" bypass cap: CORNELL DUBILIER 940C Film Capacitor...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Really? Were people having a hard time with this? When I first measured and presented this, ( https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-r3-speaker-review.12021/post-436095 ) , it was as literally as simple as using my thumbs to gently massage the ring back in, like 1mm. It was mind bogglingly easy and took very little force. At no point did I think any plastic was going to break or snap. Were people trying to mash the shadow flares and trim rings in with G-clamps or something and I missed it? Where people returning speakers to dealers? Like - wouldnt kef just notify dealers of the issue and advise them to check the rings and if not seated, give them a gentle press before selling? IDK some people...
p.s.
How dare a manufacturer listen to customer feedback and make improvements
jk kef - keep pushing the industry in the right direction.
Hi Broken English GuySorry guys but i have to do this. Since you guys are very gentle answering the questions.
Since often there is some people with the impulse response graph and saying the woofers is lagging vs the uniq, any comments about this?
A member here posted a review and also the impulse response image from the review, but the reviewer say this interesting thing:
Measurements and images from the reviewer are here:
Multitest bookshelf speakers - 2500 Euro - part 3
Intro Contents 1. Intro2. ATC SCM113. Elac Vela BS4034. KEF R3 Meta5. Monitor Audio Gold 1006. RoundingCommentsWe have already reached the final part of this triptych. Finally, we have heard fourteen bookshelf speakers pass by. That’s a lot of speakers. And we tested them not on one but on two...
Post from the member here:
KEF R3 meta Measurements
No. Again, the difference is huge, at least with KEF's excellent coaxial driver. It is not that hard to do the test yourself, with the tweeter filter. One box and is compared to the other without altering. And two or more people (ears). A "cheap" bypass cap: CORNELL DUBILIER 940C Film Capacitor...
--------------------------------
This was my question about the post from the member (same page):
KEF R3 meta Measurements
No. Again, the difference is huge, at least with KEF's excellent coaxial driver. It is not that hard to do the test yourself, with the tweeter filter. One box and is compared to the other without altering. And two or more people (ears). A "cheap" bypass cap: CORNELL DUBILIER 940C Film Capacitor...
This reviewer does not understand how passive crossovers work. In (almost) every 2 or 3 way passive speaker the woofers technically always lag mids which lag the tweeters. It is also imperceivable to humans.
I suggest you go and listen to a pair and decide for yourself
BrokenEnglishGuy
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
- Messages
- 2,110
- Likes
- 1,283
I have the KEF R7sI suggest you go and listen to a pair and decide for yourself
exm
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2021
- Messages
- 330
- Likes
- 289
Hi @exm , I know, it looks a bit odd to see the empty page, we pondered this, but R8 Meta is a bit of an outlier in that it has primarily been designed to comply with the Dolby Atmos guideline, so mainly a strict directivity window, which is narrower, and the grille is part of what makes this possible. So it's hard to see if it makes sense to evaluate it by showing its Spinorama, where for normal stereo forward-facing speakers we'd be chasing a wide and smooth directivity and power response.
PS. I like your profile icon, when are you upgrading it to the Reference Meta Uni-Q?
I own the non-Meta Reference 5 fronts and Reference 4 center, so I'm good for a while there (I think)
. I did upgrade my sides from the R3 to the R3 Meta and... My heights (6) from the Q50a to the R8 Meta. So I'm using the R8 Meta as height surround speakers, something Kef also advertises these as. I do understand that the (upfiring?) Atmos specification is very specific but I was under the impression these speakers are also fantastic as height (wall) mounted surround speakers?While I have your attention: the R8 Meta Uni-Q driver looks like it's a bit of an outlier comparted to the other R Meta Uni-Q drivers. It actually looks similar to the LS Meta drivers. Can you shed some light (if possible) on the driver used in the R8 Meta?
I much appreciated your (and Kef's) involvement here at ASR!
Thankyou for the detailed information on your products and development process
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,387
- Likes
- 5,670
Hi Broken English Guy
This reviewer does not understand how passive crossovers work. In (almost) every 2 or 3 way passive speaker the woofers technically always lag mids which lag the tweeters. It is also imperceivable to humans.
I suggest you go and listen to a pair and decide for yourself
I recently purchased the R3 Metas. Been listening to them quite frequently for the last few weeks. I have to say that I have never noticed any lag between highs, mids, and lows. I think they sound excellent and I would highly recommend them.
My subjective opinion, of course.
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
Agreed. It took about 1 minute of gently massaging the ring all around to fully seat it. No problem at all. Glad they seem to have solved it for others, though.
Is it just me or do the R Meta series have much narrower vertical axis dispersion than the Blade/Reference? It's oddly narrow for a coaxial driver, at least according to Kef's white paper measurements.
R3 dispersion:
R3 dispersion:
Similar threads
- Locked
